-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Ghost Recon Breakpoint review thread
- Thread starter Saucycarpdog
- Start date
"Looting for better gear is a trend that's taken over gaming, but it's never seemed as unnecessary and as cynical as it does in Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Breakpoint. Turning the game into an amalgamation of Wildlands and The Division, Breakpoint's gear system ruins any immersion you may have felt in pretending to be an elite spec ops soldier. If that was the game's only issue, it might have still been salvageable, but its predictable story, graphical infidelity, and obnoxious open world make this a failed experiment at marrying two or three different properties from the same publisher. - EGM"
This really sounds like the culmination of the Ubifactory™ design philosophy.
But how does graphical infidelity work? :)
This really sounds like the culmination of the Ubifactory™ design philosophy.
But how does graphical infidelity work? :)
Because if you buy it you'll feel cheated out of your money 🤷♂️
I would say it ruined Assassins Creed as well by making Origins, and even more so in Odyssey, bloated boring grind fests.
Enjoyed the co-op in Wildlands, so it was disappointed to see the scores, but not all that surprising seeing the previews. I don't like how every Ubisoft game now has to have gear levels and other similar rpg elements. Maybe someday they'll make Ghost Recon like Advanced Warfighter again.
Those mtx are day one . They designed the game with mtx as part of the system. I can't understand that argument of "more optipns" they literally make the game whit the system in mind for me.the boosters ( the material ones mainly) are outrageous
At this point I'm glad there's no Splinter Cell. Just imagine having to grind for an epic knife just so you can slit throats of high level npcs.
Only if you play western developed games.
Exactly. This is some echo chamber, lazy level review work going on for this game. And I never class reviews in this way but this is one time where there's major disconnect with what's being written and what this title actually is.
"Slightly different mechanics" is an understatement, and the less than stellar review consensus indicates that.
The issue is it has no identity. The idea is interesting but it doesn't know what it wants to be- a tactical shooter (which it's supposed to be) a looter shooter, or a survival game. And the issue is when you try and mix all three it doesn't do any of it well.
Ubisoft seriously needs to reconsider their approach to AAA titles for next gen. What they're doing right now is neither sustainable nor appropriate for all their franchises.
According to a user on reddit there's just about $500 dollars worth of micro transactions in the game. That's pretty egregious.
Yeah, that would have been nice since the area is cut off. Being able to actually effect the world would have been great.
Total value of available MTX is really not a useful metric to gauge how harsh monetization is. You have to look at the effective value to the player.
A game like CS:GO has very high effective value items monetized because there's big social value and you can't earn most items through gameplay or without paying. Breakpoint's monetization is the direct opposite, where items have no social value and can almost all be earned easily through gameplay.
You can tell somebody hasn't played the game, just repeating what they read... lmao
are reviewers ever going to stop giving games better scores b/c "it's better/fun because of co-op/with friends" b/c that's most shit even bad games b/c the fun part is the friends not the game
I don't think anyone is giving this game better reviews on the average because of that
Wow i thought the game looked good back then as well
Man i really do not want gaming to head in a way to where we pay $60 up front for games to get better over time with features that they promised to be there day one. I cant stand these types of games. If they want to do that make the game free to play. Thats the only option that works for these types if games. I cant believe this game headed in such a wrong direction, from what the original trailer showed, wow.
Might be on my end, but controlling your character feels horrible. Seems to have a decent delay on climbing over obstacles. I've noticed I need to press space twice sometimes to even climb over an obstacle. Movement is just not smooth at all.
MGSV has really spoiled me on how 3rd person shooters should feel at this point.
MGSV has really spoiled me on how 3rd person shooters should feel at this point.
This is SOOOO right! Ive said this for so long, ANY game can be fun when you are playing with friends, in party chat. Even with the game being bad, you and your friends playing the game and making fun of how bad it is can be fun. That doesn't mean the game is fun.
This is one of the biggest issues with it. I really don't understand what they were thinking they're considering the last game wasn't exactly the most intuitive thing at first, but you got used to it. Here it's a nightmare.
When gear like hats have an entire seperate menue, you know you're focusing time on the wrong part of game developing....
Are you trying to say 1/5 was too high of a score? I could understand this post better if this game got decent scores
That's disappointing because years later, like you said, MGSV is still the best playing TPS this gen. Wildlands was also pretty poor to control so if this is worse then damn.
There are more reviews
Gameblog.fr 6/10
Jeuxvideo.com 8.5
Millenium 65/100
COGconnected 81/100
Xbox Achievements 6/10
That makes me feel good about Anthem and me being the curious person I am I got the game through EA Access.
Chances are, Ubisoft knew fully well how the state of the game was and sent it out to salvage it. Its been 2 years since Wildlands, thats not nearly enough time to make a gigantic open world game like this fun. They probably cut their losses from a failing project, put some MTX to try and recoup costs, and pushed it out of the door.
One year ago we got AC Odyssey, one of the best games this gen. An incredible amount of content, huge open world with fidelity to the old greek world, and fun and diverse systems.
One year ago we got AC Odyssey, one of the best games this gen. An incredible amount of content, huge open world with fidelity to the old greek world, and fun and diverse systems.
Gamespot 4/10 review in progress
Yep, it's one of the reasons why I despise Ubisoft and it's game. They make everything open world and grindfest.
Hmm, for me everything about this game is beautiful and such but the game is too repetitive.
I fully expected this game to get wrecked by reviewers, but there's no way it's a 1/5 game, or on par with the absolute disaster that is Anthem.
I've put about 15 hours into it by now, it's a solid 6/10 game. There are TONS of flaws, but there's certainly some good things in there as well.
Overall it's just a super cynical game without any proper vision that wants to be 4 different things and ends up being almost nothing. Hopefully Ubi learns a lesson here, because I honestly don't know what they were thinking when creating this game.
For me the biggest reason to keep playing is that I just love walking around. The game is visually very impressive, and has some proper astonashing architectural designs. The fun for me is in creating my own spec ops missions, and the game is very okay in that regard. You know, select a facility to infiltrate, parachute down far behind "enemy lines", make my way to the objective unseen, that sort of stuff. Also - Jon Bernthal is awesome in this. I usually don't care much for celebrities in my videogames, but Bernthal knocks it out of the park here.
I just hate how the once legendary brand of Ghost Recon is being dragged through the mud because of corporate greed and/or utter lack of vision or commitment.
I've put about 15 hours into it by now, it's a solid 6/10 game. There are TONS of flaws, but there's certainly some good things in there as well.
Overall it's just a super cynical game without any proper vision that wants to be 4 different things and ends up being almost nothing. Hopefully Ubi learns a lesson here, because I honestly don't know what they were thinking when creating this game.
For me the biggest reason to keep playing is that I just love walking around. The game is visually very impressive, and has some proper astonashing architectural designs. The fun for me is in creating my own spec ops missions, and the game is very okay in that regard. You know, select a facility to infiltrate, parachute down far behind "enemy lines", make my way to the objective unseen, that sort of stuff. Also - Jon Bernthal is awesome in this. I usually don't care much for celebrities in my videogames, but Bernthal knocks it out of the park here.
I just hate how the once legendary brand of Ghost Recon is being dragged through the mud because of corporate greed and/or utter lack of vision or commitment.
I look forward to picking up this game for 10 bucks in December once all the kinks have been worked out
Me + Ubisoft game = 1/5 is too high of a score (til the end of space time)
This is an impressively reductive and ridiculous post given a Ubisoft game can be anything from Assassin's Creed, to Far Cry, Grow Home, Just Dance, Mario and Rabbids, Steep, The Division, Rainbow Six, For Honor, Trials, South Park, Valiant Hearts and so on.
Nope, I wasn't blown away by most of that list. Outside of RE2, Sekiro, Shadowbringers, Borderlands and Control, I played almost every game on that list and immediately forgot they existed after the credits rolled, bounced off them out of boredom, or thought they desperately needed more time in the oven.
I still need to play Iceborne and a couple others. I guess I'd say 2019 was more fine than bad but it's been mostly forgettable for me.