Quick Look: Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Future Soldier

@MrKlorox said:

Maybe don't give the quicklook to people who aren't into the type of game and have shit on it every time they come back from seeing it at a show.. Or is that an unreasonable suggestion?

has ANYONE expressed any interest in this?

might pick up on sale, doesn't seem offensively bad

Looks more interesting than Call of Duty of Battlefield campaigns.

That sandstorm sequence was pretty cool

@MrKlorox: How the hell did they shit on it? They seemed to quite like it, they barely said any negative things really.

@MrKlorox said:

Maybe don't give the quicklook to people who aren't into the type of game and have shit on it every time they come back from seeing it at a show.. Or is that an unreasonable suggestion?

has ANYONE expressed any interest in this?

@MrKlorox: How the hell did they shit on it? They seemed to quite like it, they barely said any negative things really.

@Stonyman65: The stoner has been in use all the way since vietnam, bro. Not the same model of course but his point was the name.

@MrKlorox: I meant the GB guys obviously

@MrKlorox: This isn't a bombcast, this is the quick look so how is that relevant then?

You totally shot a civilian, but you shot a bad guy to do it. Acceptable loss?

@MrKlorox: This isn't a bombcast, this is the quick look so how is that relevant then?

@MrKlorox: I meant the GB guys obviously

@MrKlorox said:

@simkas said:

@MrKlorox: This isn't a bombcast, this is the quick look so how is that relevant then?

You clearly didn't read my initial post before responding to it.

@Animasta said:

@MrKlorox: I meant the GB guys obviously

Then don't fucking do one if you're not going to do it maturely, obviously. Also, choosing someone who is abjectly against something isn't the same thing as choosing someone who is merely uninterested.

who cares? he showed off the game well enough.

@LikeaMetaphor said:

You totally shot a civilian, but you shot a bad guy to do it. Acceptable loss?

Kinda weird that the game just ignored the whole thing. Bugs?

Reminds me a lot of Splinter Cell: Conviction, and I loved that game. Colour me highly interested!

Ah, those sweet, sweet morality grenades. I always wanted those!

You guys are right about the significant 'style over substance' design philosophy of this game as far as the futuristic warfare theme is concerned. Since I often don't like military style shooters with true SciFi elements I'm personally happy about this and to me it sure does look fucking stylish and nice, pointless as it may be functionally. Generally the game seems to strike a nice balance between silly videogame stuff and tactical concepts to make you feel like you're actually part of an elite military force. I guess what I'm saying is it seems like a game that allows dumb people like me to feel like a badass tactical genius.

Downsides would be the moronic dudebro cutscenes that at least seem to be a relatively small part of the game and very uneven graphics. Great animations (I love when the soldier rushes towards the falling dead body after taking the stealth shot, presumably to prevent a 'thud' noise and raising attention) and beautiful settings but outdated textures, especially in close-up, and clipping issues.

Maybe it's an effect of little to no expectations but all in all the new Ghost Recon looks pretty good to me.

Regenerating health and not even a health bar?  That is fucking disappointing.  Just another shooter for dumb people. Love that they are dumbing down console franchises.

I really like Ghost Recon and Ghost Recon 2. Those two games were pretty rad

why the fuck did Jeff do this quick look? all I got from it was that he has some shit going on in his life that made him unable to even try and like this game (or even try to play it the way it is supposed to be played). He kept fixating on the most stupid shit. Don't get me wrong, I think it's funny when they make fun of tiny things in the games, most of the times.

Not caring about something is not a good enough reason to say it's bad or stupid. Sorry if the comment is too long, but this stuff has been bothering me for a while now.

Abraço

Ghost Recon: Shoot the Black Dudes

@groposo said:

why the fuck did Jeff do this quick look? all I got from it was that he has some shit going on in his life that made him unable to even try and like this game (or even try to play it the way it is supposed to be played). He kept fixating on the most stupid shit. Don't get me wrong, I think it's funny when they make fun of tiny things in the games, most of the times.

Not caring about something is not a good enough reason to say it's bad or stupid. Sorry if the comment is too long, but this stuff has been bothering me for a while now.

Abraço

Huh... I didn't even get that vibe at all. Between this quick look and what I've seen previously of the game, he was playing the game right. I don't really see where all the hate for this quick look is coming from. A lot of their complaints of the game came from that it was "style over substance" which is what I noticed from the what I've seen, such as the needless text in the sky that provided mostly useless intel. The main complaint is that this game just seems like a mediocre 3rd person shooter.

This game seems too easy.

When Ryan says, "This has some gnarly texture work..." Is that good or bad? Im not up on my Cali slang. Im from the east coast.

@groposo: Could I ask how you are supposed to play Ghost Recon?

I'll admit that sandstorm sequence looked pretty awesome, but none of it seems very fun to play. Yet another game where the emphasis is on style instead of gameplay. Not that I havent played and enjoyed games that put gameplay behind everything else but this alleged 'future' seems like the same bullshit weve seen in every Call of Duty in the last 5 years.

Sad really, I remember enjoying GRAW and to a lesser extent GRAW2. But this doesnt look like it's headed in the right direction. I'd rather something along the lines of Full Spectrum Warrior but maby a little more streamlined. I dont wanna have to learn military jargon, and i'm not some wannabie jarhead who thinks any of these so called skills will translate into real life.

Game looks generic and boring as hell.

And yet more bitching in the comments from users who can't take someone elses opinion of a game as just that...an opinion

one little negative remark from any of the crew and everyone has to get all defensive of the game

and asking why Jeff did the quicklook? probably because no one else wanted to play it because everyone is tired of shooter after shooter after shooter

and sure, they could have an "unbiased" point of view...but then the videos would be really quiet because wtf would they talk about? We come to video game sites to get point of views and guess what, they don't seem to fond of it, big fuckin whoop

just go to youtube and search "future solider gameplay" if you want to see what this game is like without opinions...it's that easy folks....don't go to video game sites with people who review and cover games for a living and not expect them to say what they honestly think of a game in a video

I can get behind a more tactical shooter, but the problem I see in this Quick Look (not necessarily indicative of the whole game) is that they set up way too many scenarios of "hey, there's four dudes, we've got four dudes, so let's line up those shots." If a game is just a matter of painting a target, it sounds... well, more fun than turret sequences, but not by a whole lot.

Ghost Recon: Hax

@IronScimitar said:

When Ryan says, "This has some gnarly texture work..." Is that good or bad? Im not up on my Cali slang. Im from the east coast.

It's bad, the texture looked kind of grimy.

@MrKlorox said:

@simkas said:

@MrKlorox: This isn't a bombcast, this is the quick look so how is that relevant then?

You clearly didn't read my initial post before responding to it.

@Animasta said:

@MrKlorox: I meant the GB guys obviously

Then don't fucking do one if you're not going to do it maturely, obviously. Also, choosing someone who is abjectly against something isn't the same thing as choosing someone who is merely uninterested.

You think that if the GB crew think a game is bad/medicore from the previous times they have seen it then they just shouldn't do a QL at all? You are totally wrong. So many quick looks wouldn't have been made if only people with an interest were allowed to QL it. Duke Nukem Forever for example. You want them to just not make that? Such a fool.

Is the PC version of this game the same as the consoles? The GRAW titles for PC were first-person.

You think that if the GB crew think a game is bad/medicore from the previous times they have seen it then they just shouldn't do a QL at all? You are totally wrong. So many quick looks wouldn't have been made if only people with an interest were allowed to QL it. Duke Nukem Forever for example. You want them to just not make that? Such a fool.

@Animasta said:

@MrKlorox said:

Maybe don't give the quicklook to people who aren't into the type of game and have shit on it every time they come back from seeing it at a show.. Or is that an unreasonable suggestion?

has ANYONE expressed any interest in this?

It has more preorders than every recent game bar Diablo 3. It has twice the preorders of Max Payne 3. I'd say there's been plenty of interest.

@MrKlorox said:

Maybe don't give the quicklook to people who aren't into the type of game and have shit on it every time they come back from seeing it at a show.. Or is that an unreasonable suggestion?

Yeah! I can't believe their reviews of the Harry Potter Wii games. Couldn't they get someone on the staff with a deep love of Harry Potter based, or at least movie tie-in based, Wii games to review it? They don't do any justice to those games unless someone with a passion for Harry Potter games reviews them. Instead it's all snark, snark, snark. Bias!

Man, if I didn't know any better I would never guess that this is supposed to be a Ghost Recon game. This series has gone irredeemably down hill.

I'd love to see some more stealth based third person shooters like this, but this just seems way too easy. Something with Hidden and Dangerous 2 game play, combined with these graphics would be awesome..

Seems serviceable, but personally I'm not really keen on the TactiCool stuff and I think that everything with Tom Clancy on it is suuuuuper boring.

that active camo doesn't seem very realistic, it's all flickery and the eye notices movement and shit really easily, it would probably be better if it was like slower to change but not flickery or static.

I wish life was third person.

Even for all its future trappings this seemed pretty generic in terms of gameplay that sync shot stuff was cool though.

So wait .. oh MY GOD that part with the guy getting out of the truck and the the camera guys following him just made my realize in all those 3rd person shooters you just play as the camera guy not the dude you're controlling! no wonder why they look so cinematic.

Edit : Dude what the shit you guys killed a civilian and didn't loose that mission an no one said anything?

These soldiers kinda suck. I mean, one of them just shot that lady at 9:40.

I wish life was third person.

one of the funnier QLs in a while

Ok, that sandstorm with those magnetic goggles was pretty cool.

I really love the new gameplay additions. Loved all the ghost recon games and while this is different it is still close enough to the Advanced Warfighter games for me to give it a try

and of course I have to wait till June 12th to play the superior version, ugh...

This looks kind of offensively mediocre.

Tom Clancy's Chinny Recon more like.

Oh Jeff, you shot that civi lady without even knowing it...