PLEASE VOTE: REALISTIC TACTICAL SHOOTER or CASUAL SANDBOX PLAYGROUND?

I have played this game a ton (100% complete, all KS files, skill pts, weapons etc etc etc) and I secretly hope that a question/response, like the following, might gain enough traction to potentially inform the devs decisions moving forward. I also selfishly would like to know what people are thinking out there.

Okay:

As many of us have discovered, this game has a TON of potential. Personally, at first I was skeptical of the game's potential as a tactical shooter. That being said, I have come around to seeing the true potential this game has from a tactical shooter perspective. I understand this game is a faaaaaar way off from being a true tactical shooter of any kind, BUT in its current state I feel it is on its way toward becoming one.

Then something disappointing happened . . .

I come across this nonsense about racing? and hunting? and strange costumes? and weird uncustomizable guns? (not to mention nothing about more tacticAL opetions, breaching, fast roping, more hud options, navigational tools, etc etc yes yhere is the possibility of Fallen Ghosts dlc but that is a toss up right now)

So, naturally I begin to think, "oh no, they are totally taking this game in the sandbox playground, a la GTA, direction." (I would like to add that I am a GTA player and enjoy it for what it is. That being said, I personally do not feel that is the right direction for GRW, but

So, this begs the question: If they are taking the game in the casual sandbox direction, why are they doing this?

Well, I believe, and this is speculation of course, that they are trying to ride a fine line between sucking in casual gamer dollars (simple mechanis, small learning curve, lower skill demand, circus style goofiness) while also pleasing the smaller number of hardcore tactical shooter/ Ghost Recon people. Now, I can definitely understand this decision from a business model perspective, after all Ubisoft has like 500 people on the credits list (aka payroll) alone for his game. So, they have reason/obligation to suck in dollars in any way they can. Although, breaking ties with the Ghost Recon image could potentially KILL the IP's future (aka bad business decision), but who knows, maybe I am wrong.

TBH I just find it hard to believe that after all of the time and effort that has been put into shaping the style and image of the Ghost Recon IP over all these years the devs would logically choose to turn the IP into a casual sandbox playground without some kind of motivation which lies outside of reasonable thinking as it relates to the style, history, and expectations surrounding the Ghost Recon IP. And if that doesn't defy reason alone, what about all of their detailed explanations about super tactical, super stealth, super cooperative, super realistic, we are working with 5.11 and Oakley blah blah blah. I say blah blah blah because IMO if they think they are hitting the mark they promoted in the begining, then they are about half right or half wrong depending on your perspective . . . darn, what a shame . . .

You could probably guess by now that I would vote for the devs to pool as many resources as possible into shaping this game into a proper tactical shooter (like what one might expect from a Ghost Recon IP) and continue to have it take place in this amazingly detailed and gorgeous open sandbox world, instead of accepting the present level of tactical shooter mechanics/elements as satisfactory and going on to add more playground stunt gimmics.

So, I am asking you:

WHAT IS YOUR VOTE? REALISTIC TACTICAL SHOOTER or CASUAL SANDBOX PLAYGROUND

Do you want more developer effort toward shaping the game into a more realistic tactical shooter OR more resources toward a casual sandbox playground?

include your reasoning if you want.

TLDR: do you want more developer resources to go toward: Realistic Tactical Shooter or Casual Sandbox Playground?

thanks!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *