That's hardly surprising, but I believe this is the first time Ubisoft has expressly said this is another Ghost Recon game (they've been teasing an announcement but didn't say what it was). All the drone stuff from the mission I played on UPF on Friday is tied into a teaser website they also put out and some YT videos:

A lot of people were assuming the new game was going to be Splinter Cell due to that company being from that series, I think (and also they're totally working on Splinter Cell if the DLC for Wildlands is any indication) but it sure looks like this is going to be Wildlands 2 or something similar. I, for one, am looking forward to it, and I'm also looking forward to a trailer with some fake-ass co-op banter on the 9th.

Ghost Recon battle royale is about to be revealed.

Wildlands 2 is the likely outcome

"Tom Clancy's Legends" is the more interesting outcome. An open world game where each class is a different Siege/Overwatch style character. Get a few Siege operatives with cool mechanics. Get a few ghosts with cool drones?. Get a random Fourth Ecehlon operative because why not. Combine all of that with gun porn and have Jon Berenthal as mission command so he can easily be swapped out when his contract expires.

Regardless: We are totally going to have a lot of fake banter. Preferably with Aisha Tyler.

I’d much prefer a Wildlands sequel to another battle royale, that genre does nothing for me. Wildlands was a good framework brought down chiefly by poor writing. I’m already all in for a sequel, but if they really work on a story and make some characters that I don’t just want to mute, and make some adjustments to a few of the gameplay elements that were half baked, then they could have a pretty excellent game.

Interesting on how the word of mouth around the game has changed over the years. Most buzz I see around the game is fairly positive now, in contrast to prerelease and shortly after release.

Wildlands was a flawed game that was fun with friends, more so than Far Cry. (since you all actually get to keep your progress and arent tethered to each other) A sequel could be great. I was a bit put off by the number of microtranactions when I came back to play that Jon Berenthal DLC though. (which sucked)

I would rather have a new Splinter Cell game though, if I had to choose. Preferably not open world.

Since Ubi seems to hit its stride in its sequels, I’m curious if they do the same with Wildlands. Here’s hoping the UI is a bit more readable.

Partially it is that it basically Pulled an Anthem. The open beta was REALLY bad and the vehicles were a chore to use (so... Far Cry 2). I am not sure if the stealth and AI were tweaked but I also recall having a lot less fun clearing bases with AI during said beta.

Apparently over the course of a month or two post-release they fixed a lot of that. I remember trying a free weekend and still hating helicopters but... I still hate helicopters to the point that I would rather drive a minibus for twice as long than take a helicopter to a mission that is less than 3 kilometers from the nearest bus stop.

But I eventually grabbed it around the time the Sam Fisher mission was released and have had a blast since. It is really flawed and is pretty much the epitome of "okay", but sometimes you just want an "okay" game

@nasher27: I bought Wildlands day one and thought it was pretty meh. They went too big, the map was so huge and there were so many bosses it felt bland and repetitive. The story and voice work were sometimes laughingly bad. The versus addition was only fun for like a week or two for me. If the sequel is just more of the same in a different location then I don't care.

They need to get better at mission design, story, and add gameplay mechanics where you have to survive as in worry about food, tempature/weather, and stuff like that would be cool. On a technical level I'd probably rather see it next gen.

Those could be solid additions. I already sort of role played the weather thing during my time with the game, bundling up in the snowy mountains and going sleeveless in the warmer areas.

I'm so down for another Wildlands, though certainly not any time soon. In the last year and a half I've put 100+ hours into AC Origins, Wildlands, and AC Odyssey. Definitely need a big break from their open world games for a bit.

Count me in. I played the whole came through co-op with a buddy. We had a blast. It was the closest thing to playing the old Socom 1 and 2 campaigns on PS2.

The only issue we had is that Ubisoft's matchmaking. We kept getting tons of NAT type errors that have never happened with other games.

So the reveal is out: https://www.polygon.com/2019/5/9/18538252/ghost-recon-breakpoint-preview-trailer-release-date

First off: YAY, more Wildlands. I am skeptical of the survival mechanics but... we'll see.

Sounds like they are amping up the tech and playing on the idea of Ghost vs Ghost which should be fun. This also may be one of the rare cases where I want a harder "survival" mode where you don't have that tech. Watching the trailer made me love the idea of being "just" a spec ops mega soldier taking on the ghosts from Wildlands with the octocamo of Future Soldier and all that fun. Maybe a few missions will do that

Regardless, the premise REALLY seems to riff on themes Linda Nagata approached in The Last Good Man. Staying vague because of spoilers, but it very heavily examines the impact of drones and technology on specail forces and the military and has a few sequences that were straight up that trailer.

More cynically: The fact that we had Berrenthal say "I'm a ghost too" in two trailers in two weeks makes me a bit concerned as to how much VO he actually did. But I ignored almost everything about the plot in Wildlands 1 (I kind of forgot why I was there by the time I got to go after the boss dude) I doubt that matters much

More optimistically: I dislike the lack of any remotely real conflict. But I do like that I won't feel anywhere near as uncomfortable when my squaddies are joking about rendition and sending people to get organ harvested by their own side and all the other awkward shit from Wildlands 1.

Anyone curious about the game should watch the full gameplay reveal, it has a lot of info.

The story seems way more ambitious than the last game, which is basically exactly what I wanted from a new game. They said there are way more cutscenes, and that there are actual dialogue choices in the game.

As far as gameplay goes, having the new Wolves enemies can be cool if they are actually threatening and have different AI/tactic than regular enemies. I'm still curious about friendly AI, since the demo gameplay was all MP. I hope they are useful for something besides the ridiculously OP sync shot. And I hope they can actually drive vehicles, that was such a bummer in Wildlands (they had companions driving in FC5, so hopefully they can get it working here).

I'm surprised they're doubling down on Cole D. Walker, he was a terrible character in that Oracle dlc they did. The drone stuff also seems kind of dumb. I'm sure it will be a better playing game in the same way that all Ubisoft sequels tend to be incremental improvements but i'm not sure what the big hook is with this game.

@boozak: The big hook (in their words) is that "you're no longer the hunter, but the hunted." Pretty much you're on a mission that has gone completely FUBAR, kind of the opposite of Wildlands. Bigger emphasis on survival mechanics (though they didn't explain this much), bigger sense of danger with the elite Wolves enemies hunting you, etc.

Wildlands was sorely lacking any sort of engaging story, which they're clearly attempting to rectify in Breakpoint, with an actual story about your squad getting pushed to their psychological limits. The backdrop seems pretty boring, but if they manage to make me care about characters in a Ghost Recon game that will seriously impress me.

Wildlands was also sorely lacking in any sense of place. Its setting felt like a big tech demo of different biomes with no life in them. You're supposed to be dismantling this cartel piece by piece but the world feels no different after 50 hours, it never reacts to anything you do. If they make the survival aspects more punishing (ie, you're in the arctic so you can't wear a stupid T-shirt like in the trailer) and make the environment factor into your planning for any situation, that would do a lot to give this title a better sense of place.

That whole trailer thing was not great, but I'm always in for another Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon, Splinter Cell, Rainbow Six (well, not Siege), and now The Division. What gameplay they showed definitely seemed like it could use some polish and had a whole lot of that 'this is what we're going for' feel, but it's definitely the biggest difference from other Tom Clancy third-person shooters in terms of animation and perhaps for it, immersion. I wouldn't say Tom Clancy games, even when they did single player storied games were great (to be clear, I mean the games were awesome, just not necessarily their stories in the majority of them; they were adequate), but I still love that direction.

Now, this isn't exactly single player as you can have online friends tag along, but it is a single player if you choose to go alone. There are no A.I. companions this time around, and I'm happy that they're going to try to push more story, though we'll see how that turns out. I hope we can still customize our characters. It's very easy to just expect the same stuff, like repetitive side tasks that take up a lot of the players time and just don't impress. I don't have as big of an issue with it in and of itself, but I wish they didn't market games as if it's not going to be there, but we'll see. I enjoyed Wildlands (I bought it twice!) but nothing about the DLC looked great to me so I never got into that stuff. It just seems to have a lot of throwaway missions.

I've already done everything in the game on the PS4 version, but after I got an Xbox One X I wanted to see how it was on there, and so I'll probably play through it all once again before the new one comes out. It's nothing new, but I guess I'm surprised they announced the game when it comes out the same year and not at any sort of big event. Lastly, I wonder if people are going to have a hard time with the name of the new setting: Auroa. I imagine a lot of people will say Aurora.

@nasher27: There are no friendly human A.I. What you have in place, from what I understand, are drones (which might actually give you the sync shot?) I think with the setting what it allows is for more variety than what Wildlands has which was a lot of (although not only) mountainous grasslands. Not only that but to add to the repetitiveness Wildlands had, there are buildings in the game that were used several times which made no sense and really took me out of the experience. In the new game, you have a volcano location, jungles, most likely high tech buildings, and a place with snow, etc.

@ntm: Yeah I heard about the lack of squadmates in Gamespot's coverage. That's a huge bummer, but if their goal is to make the game more about stealth and tension, then removing those idiots from running around and breaking my immersion isn't the worst way to go about it.

They should just have the plotline somehow evolve into that of the Predator.

I like Splinter Cell but I think they have to go where the sales take them, and I heard that the last Splinter Cell 'underperformed'. I hope they can improve on Wildlands. It was ok, but the characters were really lame. I found my AI squadmates annoying. I heard the phrase "and baby makes three" about 50 times. The enemy bosses in the game were forgettable.

I should probably stop waiting for this series to return to it's roots at this point

Yes, that seems unlikely.

I liked the old Ghost Recon games, they felt realistic, tactical and were as I remember them quite hard.
Wildlands (1) however, felt more like an arcade shooter with some efforts of making it tactical.
The result was quite "meh" and got inspiring very fast, it never felt like stuff mattered, or were interesting.
The only thing it really had was eyecandy.
This was in SP though, I can see it being more fun in Coop and a few drinks to dumb the senses down.

I would still like a Wildlands 2 that is slightly closer to Arma and perhaps some sneaking mechanics from MGS 5.

So lack of AI is a huge bummer.

Theoretically the sync shot drones will still let me have tactical funsies and will make more sense than some guy in a ghillie suit standing in the open waiting for me to let him shoot. And if the game is balanced more for "survival" I could see less of a need to have the extra lives for when three unidad squads roll up while I am trying to capture a flaming gas truck.

But I actually really enjoyed how funny driving with AI was. One enemy shoots at us and three guys pop out of the window and start death blossoming everything (including the one guy with a rapid fire sniper rifle).

I wish we had at least gotten one more Wildlands. But I am still willing to see what Breakpoint ends up being.

----

On a funnier note: I really wish I knew how to do a share-button equivalent on PC (I am sure there is something in shadowplay that I ignore), but when I was doing the Berenthal mission in Wildlands it glitched a bit. Ridiculously minor spoilers, but once we got done interrogating the engineer dude, Berenthal heroically busted a cap in that unarmed and tied up man's ass. But he missed the first shot. So he enters his awkward side pose and fires one bullet. Nothing happens. He fires again and the engineer falls down. It is now my permanent head canon that Walker was so incompetent he failed to kill an unarmed and tied up man from one meter away.

I am completely okay with more Wildlands! What little I played of the first seemed great. Due to some visual problems I had with the UI this won't be for me, but I enjoyed the hell out of watching other people play it and I look forward to the same here.