Ghost Recon: Future Soldier (Premiere Trailer Released)

[Amit]

Previously this thread was to express and discuss my outrage at Ubisoft for its insolent view on PC gaming. While they are now actively developing Ghost Recon: Future Soldier on the PC, this is still a big issue and you should read what is in the spoilers below the video if you did not read it a few months ago.

The premiere trailer for the game has been released:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=QNy0Ig4LISk

This is rather disappointing to me as the last Ghost Recon game on PC was GRAW 2 in 2007 and I was hoping to play a new one, even if it's a more action based shooter, rather than the uber tactical awesomeness that the PC versions have been.

Read these PC Gamer articles:
http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/11/24/ubisoft-i-am-alive-skipping-pc-because-its-not-worth-it/
http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/11/23/ghost-recon-online-being-free-to-play-is-a-counter-to-piracy-says-ubisoft-producer/ (http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/11/23/ghost-recon-online-being-free-to-play-is-a-counter-to-piracy-says-ubisoft-producer/)

Quotes

I Am Alive article (biggest thing to take away from this thread):





“We’ve heard loud and clear that PC gamers are bitching about there being no version for them,” creative director Stanislas Mettra told IncGamers (http://www.incgamers.com/News/29694/despite-the-bitching-piracy-means-i-am-alive-is-not-likely-on-pc). “But are these people just making noise just because there’s no version or because it’s a game they actually want to play? Would they buy it if we made it?”“It’s hard because there’s so much piracy and so few people are paying for PC games that we have to precisely weigh it up against the cost of making it. Perhaps it will only take 12 guys three months to port the game to PC. It’s not a massive cost but it’s still a cost. If only 50,000 people buy the game, then it’s not worth it.”

And yet somehow, Skyrim managed a record-breaking first day on Steam and Portal 2 sold the majority of its copies on PC. Oh, and you know that Steam sale going on right now? The one everybody’s flinging heaping gobs of Christmas cash at? Need I go on? You heard the man, though: No one’s buying anything on PC. Clearly, my facts must be wrong.




Ghost Recon article:


The perceived value of PC games is heavily affected by piracy, Arnoult says – both for players and publishers.


“When we started Ghost Recon Online we were thinking about Ghost Recon: Future Solider; having something ported in the classical way without any deep development, because we know that 95% of our consumers will pirate the game. So we said okay, we have to change our mind.“We have to adapt, we have to embrace this instead of pushing it away. That’s the main reflection behind Ghost Recon Online and the choice we’ve made to go in this direction."









Ghost Recon: Online is another excuse to not make a PC version. You guys want PC GR? Play the shitty online version.

This image goes perfectly with Ubisoft:

http://i.imgur.com/G1UPW.png

[ejburke]

Ubisoft isn't good at PC development and they've lost so much goodwill through their DRM attempts, buggy games that barely work, and perceived "consolification" of their franchises, that the platform really has become a lost cause for them.

[Mr Buckshot]

Ubisoft should just stop making PC games altogether and focus on consoles, like what MS did after the fail that was H2V.

Sure, we may miss out, but at least we aren't being insulted and taken for fools with shitty products.

Anyway, the latest Splinter Cell was a disappointment to me, DRM or no DRM. I'm not even supporting them on consoles until they start bringing such games back to their true roots.

[Amit]

I need the next REAL Brothers in Arms game. BiA has always been Ubisoft :(

Microsoft should just let Gearbox port all the Halo games.

[neuro]

this isn't just PC, ubisoft is a fucking epic cluster-fuck in developing ANYTHING.
trust me, i work there. (and everyone i've talked to, including managers and project managers and such agree)

it's just the typical "stupid suit-men behind a desk who are completely disconnected from everything"-effect.
it's what you get when your company becomes as big as ubisoft. everythign just becomes shit.

GRFS is also way behind schedule luls.
Also, Ghost recon online is pretty good, played it yesterday.
ALSO, expect a flood of f2p web-based games..

[ejburke]

Well, the Ubisoft press conferences at E3 are always great for a laugh, but they must be doing some things right. It was looking like EA was going to swallow them up just a few years ago and they managed to stave that off. Say what you want about Ubi, but that wouldn't have been a good outcome for anyone.

I know some people hate the direction they've taken with Splinter Cell and Rainbow Six, but Conviction and the first Vegas were great games on their own merits. The AC series is both a critical and commercial success and that new Rayman game is getting great reviews.

And yeah, Future Soldier is waaaaaaay behind schedule. From what I understand, it just hasn't been coming together. It will be interesting to see if they've managed to salvage it given the extra time. It was originally supposed to come out last fall (2010). They included FS beta access with SC Conviction, which launched in April of 2010 (the beta has yet to happen).

[Cortexian]

this isn't just PC, ubisoft is a fucking epic cluster-fuck in developing ANYTHING.
trust me, i work there. (and everyone i've talked to, including managers and project managers and such agree)

it's just the typical "stupid suit-men behind a desk who are completely disconnected from everything"-effect.
it's what you get when your company becomes as big as ubisoft. everythign just becomes shit.

GRFS is also way behind schedule luls.
Also, Ghost recon online is pretty good, played it yesterday.
ALSO, expect a flood of f2p web-based games..
At least you guys haven't fucked up the AC series much yet.

Please don't fuck up the AC series.

[ejburke]

Let's pretend that AC wasn't a new IP when Assassin's Creed launched in 2007. Let's pretend there were AC games released in the 90's that were hardcore, punishing simulation-style experiences. Would the "new" modern console AC games have been as accepted as they have been, or would people label them as "fucked up" bastardizations of a storied franchise?

That's why I say that Conviction and Vegas are good on their own merits. If they didn't have the baggage of their obsolete predecessors to carry around, they would be held in much higher esteem than they already are.

[Mr Buckshot]

I agree that as games, Conviction and Vegas weren't bad, but they just didn't feel like they belonged to their respective IPs. If Conviction were a James Bond game, my opinion would probably be very different. I saw these changes as an attempt to cater to a larger audience in general - the type who hates hardcore stealth and tactical planning and just loves running in guns-a-blazin'.

As for GR:Online, I've never been much of a fan of F2P so I'll pass. My experiences with F2P are almost always filled with cheaters or just plain douches who never go for the objectives. TF2 and Alien Swarm are some of the few exceptions, only because Valve provides more support for them than many companies do for paid games.

[Amit]

I know some people hate the direction they've taken with Splinter Cell and Rainbow Six, but Conviction and the first Vegas were great games on their own merits. The AC series is both a critical and commercial success and that new Rayman game is getting great reviews.

By that logic Activision is doing something right since they make loads of cash and get rave reviews for CoD games. *shakes head*

[Kornman00]

SC: Conviction was great as an evolutionary change in SC. Sure, it may not be like the first three SC's, but the story wasn't either. The original SC mechanics wouldn't have worked in Conviction. Not saying I don't miss the old SC gameplay, I do, but complaining that Conviction isn't like the first three games is like complaining Halo Wars wasn't like the first three Halo games. Apples and oranges.

Ubisoft is releasing Rocksmith for PC, so vOv. I think they don't understand why people pirate games. Maybe if they did they would realize that they're part of the problem, not just people not wanting to pay.

[=sw=warlord]

By that logic Activision is doing something right since they make loads of cash and get rave reviews for CoD games. *shakes head*
As much as it pains me.
Activision are doing something right because you don't make money by making mistakes every where.

[Amit]

As much as it pains me.
Activision are doing something right because you don't make money by making mistakes every where.

Activision is really doing nothing. They push out the same game every year with new skins. It's the people who buy the game that are doing something wrong. They encourage Activision to sit there and bring nothing new to the table.

[=sw=warlord]

Activision know what their customers want, with that they will continue to push the same thing out until their customers decide they want something else.
At this point call of duty can be considered a form of crisps/potato chips just different flavours.

[Mr Buckshot]

Credit given where credit due:

Activision shows it doesn't care about PC gamers, in that it makes no attempt to utilize the obvious advantages of a PC, but at the same time it doesn't try to blatantly intrude on the customer's rights the way EA has with its Origin bans, and Ubisoft has with its DRM. Plus, I'm not sure how much of a factor it was for sales, but the fact that MW3 uses a recycled engine means it has much better system compatibility than say BF3. Heck, even the latest Intel IGPs can get away with some high settings.

Anyway, I wonder why Ubisoft is still making HOMM and World in Conflict PC-exclusive if they hate PC gamers so much? Hypocrites. Have they forgotten that it was PC gaming that started the Tom Clancy franchise?

[Amit]

I can see what you're saying about Heroes of Might and magic, but World in Conflict is way too complex for consoles. Ubisoft realized this and cancelled it for the same reason they don't push PC versions anymore: it's not worth it if only a handful of people buy it.

[Mr Buckshot]

Just did my research, turns out World In Conflict wasn't actually developed by Ubisoft - they just bought the company over from Activision.

I wonder if they'll be next on the bandwagon to remove split screen from console versions and slap on online passes. Because just like piracy, buying used or allowing a friend to share in on your fun is a huge blow to profits.

[Amit]

Turns out that Future Soldier is coming to PC after all:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=7XwevCwaz_c

[Warsaw]

Lol, backlash success. Teach them to make ignorant comments about a well-informed player base.

[Cortexian]

I have a feeling they didn't release in 2011 so they wouldn't have to directly compete with MW3 and BF3.

[neuro]

also, the game was nowhere near done :P

80% of the games maps were still in alpha 3 months ago.
they basically started over the entire developmetn process three times, because they failed.

[Cortexian]

Well that's good to know coming from an insider :)

[Phopojijo]

also, the game was nowhere near done :P

80% of the games maps were still in alpha 3 months ago.
they basically started over the entire developmetn process three times, because they failed.Wouldn't it be ironic if it flops on every platform except the PC?

[Amit]

I hope this late start gives the PC a separate version like the two previous versions of GRAW were, not some console port.

[Warsaw]

Was the PC version of GRAW different? I know the Xbox and Xbox 360 versions were different, but was the PC one really different from the 360 one?

[neuro]

as far as i know it's all the same, i've not seen much of it, but i can imagine some stuff being downressed and whatnot for consoles etc.
it's all developed and tested and such on PC, and doesn't have to be sent up to an xbox first (for what it's worth)

I've only gotten a few screenshares but i don't see why they wouldn't have a PC version, since it's all right there working fine.
if they don't want to pay for distributing and printing and such, make it a digitally distributed title.
doesnt ubisoft have it's own shitty online distribution platform thingy? (and steam)

then again i've not played the actual game and idk if it was made for consoles or for pc (though it did run fine on pc) guess we'll see when it's out.

[Mr Buckshot]

Was the PC version of GRAW different? I know the Xbox and Xbox 360 versions were different, but was the PC one really different from the 360 one?

Yes, the difference was like the difference between classic RB6 and the more arcadey vegas. It was both a good and a bad thing. You got the classic hardcore tactical gameplay on the PC, but the performance was poor and there were a lot of frustrating gameplay decisions.

Looking at previews, the gameplay of Future Soldier doesn't seem that promising tbh. I'm actually more intrigued by the upcoming F2P ghost recon online. Besides, the crowd for run-and-gun is much larger than the crowd for hardcore tactical or hardcore stealth, hence I'm guessing profits will motivate them to continue dumbing down gameplay for the masses.

and if they decide to tack on their DRM again, the only way I'm ever buying this is a used console copy. Legit version and not a cent goes to them.

[Amit]

Was the PC version of GRAW different? I know the Xbox and Xbox 360 versions were different, but was the PC one really different from the 360 one?


Man, GRAW 1 and 2 on the PC was drastically different than the console versions. They were basically a different game. The game's story is the same, but the events are very different. The PC versions are a lot more tactical and slow. We get a tactical map to control the UAV and squad members (for coordinated attacks/movements) and multiple insertion points to choose from. The console versions had heavy scripting and you didn't get to choose where you went in the level like you can on the PC version.

The weapon loadouts are also much more diverse and customizable. The areas where the GRAW games on PC fall short, especially GRAW 2, are the graphics and content. The graphics are dull and flat. It feels like there is less of the levels because a bunch of awesome shit you got to do in the console versions are no longer there. The missions have been altered on the PC to be quite different than what is on the console. This means objectives and shit are different, but still lead to the same outcome as on the console.

I understand console players don't have the patience to go all tactical and so that's the reason they made the action-oriented versions on the console, but I just don't see why they had to make the PC version such a snorefest. The environments are physically different than the console version. The SP maps are definitely loads larger than the console maps to account for the tactical gameplay, but goddamn some of the levels feel bland and empty in comparison to the console levels. I did a small write up on this issue last year. I'll see if I can find the thread and link you to the post.

[Amit]

New game trailer has been released. Check first post for details.

[TeeKup]

Looks neat, still won't be buying though.

[Cortexian]

Looks interesting, will pirate.

Sorry Ubisoft but your DRM makes it harder for me to actually purchase ur game.

[Amit]

Indeed. I went to play some HAWX 2 the other day and I couldn't. As a legitimate Ubisoft customer I couldn't play their game because DRM servers were being moved. Why not just disable DRM in a way that doesn't lock out your customers? Oh wait, we're talking about the people who will lock you out of a game permanently because you changed any three pieces of hardware in your computer. Nvm, then.

[Kornman00]

Yeah, unless they want to get their shit together and loose their fuckwit DRM, I'mma pirate.

[Warsaw]

I'm just not going to buy anything from them, console or PC.

See, Ubisoft? This is what happens when your DRM is crap as well as your games. Not only do you lose a [supposedly] marginal PC customer, you also lose out on console sales because even some of us console players/platform agnostic players know a crap deal when we smell one.

E: Korn, you should totally pirate the console version, just to troll.

[Cortexian]

Pirate all the versions, burn them to disk, send them anonymously to Ubisoft with a clever note.

[Warsaw]

Nah, just everyone download the console version. Don't even play it, just do it to boost piracy stats for console games.

[Kornman00]

E: Korn, you should totally pirate the console version, just to troll.
That's the plan. Means I don't have worry about hidden warez too.

Sadly, I really like Ubisoft's Rocksmith, so I'll continue to invest in the (good) DLC for that :\. They released two Pearl Jam songs yesterday in fact...

[Mr Buckshot]

Nah, just everyone download the console version. Don't even play it, just do it to boost piracy stats for console games.

trust me, they're already pretty damned high, it just takes the form of people buying burned discs (for the equivalent of a few dimes apiece) in asia/eastern europe because they don't have fast internet at home to torrent (which also means they're probably not too interested in online play). In some countries it's impossible to find a 360 or Wii that isn't modded. And the amount you'd spend to get a sizable collection of games probably can't pay for a mcdonalds happy meal stateside.

I wouldn't be surprised if a Ubisoft exec visited a game store in such a country and immediately concluded that consoles need draconian DRM too.

as for the trailer, the explosions galore just doesn't seem to fit the Tom Clancy character anymore. Tom Clancy games are supposed to be structured such that you need perfect strategy and/or stealth, and one wrong move is a recipe for loading your previous save. Then again, after playing splinter cell conviction (which was a big disappointment for these reasons), I'm not surprised. It's obvious they view the hardcore tactical/stealth audience as being too small to profit from, and thus they try to appeal to the COD-minded audience by advertising a run-and-gun with very superficial stealth/tactical elements.

[Warsaw]

"Tom Clancy" is supposed to imply strategic depth, complex plots, and back-stabbing. Well, the only strategic depth is Ubisoft trying to figure out how to milk gamers, the only complexity comes from us being puzzled by their lack of vision, and the only back-stabbing is happening to gamers.


Yup.

[Kornman00]

Also, when I read Game Informer, it says the PC release is still up in the air as far as release date...so yeah

[Amit]

Oh, without a doubt the PC release date is one month after the console games. They need the extra time to DRMify the game like they have with every single other Ubisoft PC game that is also on consoles.

[Mr Buckshot]

Oh, I thought they would already have the DRM loaded by then, my theory was that they want multi-platform owners to go for the console versions instead due to the "inability to wait". That was partly why I chose to play Batman Arkham City on a console (gfwl was a bigger reason) - I didn't want to wait a whole month to play on PC, especially since exams would be around the corner by then.

[Amit]

If anybody wants unlimited Future Soldier X360 and PS3 beta codes, exploit this key system (remember hawken lol?) here: http://bellmont.eu/ghostrecon/

(http://bellmont.eu/ghostrecon/)I've tested the XBOX codes. They work.

[ThePlague]

I have 4 ps3 and 4 xbox codes. I wish I had a PC one though :C

[Amit]

There are no PC codes. Likely won't even be a beta for PC because Ubisoft thinks we're evil.

[ThePlague]

Then what the fuck is derplancer playing?

[Cortexian]

Ghost Recon Online...

Completely seperate game from Ghost Recon Future Soldier.

I figured the two completely different names would give it away. Actually, don't feel bad. Half the threads in the GRO forums for beta keys "not working" are nublets trying to use beta keys from GRO on Future Soldier and such. People can't read.

[Champ]

Anyone willing to part with a 360 code? My friend would like one and apparently that site is out of codes.

[Amit]

Anyone willing to part with a 360 code? My friend would like one and apparently that site is out of codes.

You clearly didn't read my previous post. Go here (http://bellmont.eu/ghostrecon/) and put in a bullshit email and get the key.

[Champ]

You clearly didn't read my previous post. Go here (http://bellmont.eu/ghostrecon/) and put in a bullshit email and get the key.
You clearly didn't understand my post. That was the "site" I was referring to. "Sorry, no more keys for Xbox 360", it no longer works.

[Amit]

Oops, I thought you said PS3 code. Don't know how I saw that from 360.

[Champ]

It's no big deal. I told him to use the site in case something happened to it, but he decided to put it off..oh well