- Jan 13, 2009
- 2,331
- 16
- 81
So I just finished the game, my impressions. I stayed away from the console versions, this is my take on the PC version of it.
I wish I could describe the entire Ghost Recon series as an evolution but it's rather a mutation. GR:AW was the last good game of the series, on the right path to be true to the spirit of Ghost Recon and immune to Call of Duty. This one is not. The same thing that happened to R6 is happening here too.
Even the illusion of map size is gone. It's much more linear and more corridor-ish than ever. "Get back in the war Mitchell, you are leaving the mission area" That used to be the clue that you are going where you aren't "supposed" to go, this time it's aided by invisible walls as well, they are pretty much everywhere. Hard to grasp that a 18 month delay and a full feature 23 minute film ( it's good BTW) set you up for this.
There still are elements that are Ghost Recon but they are served only in the 2nd half of the game, lots of hand holding in the first 6-7 missions.
On veteran difficulty, I managed to get through the first 3 missions without dying even once. The visuals would have been much better if they were consistent. There is lots of disparity in texture and animations quality, certain things look great, spoiled by others that are off. The best missions come very late in the game, except for the final 5 minutes of gameplay that's just awful.
For a 3rd person cover based shooter, it thoroughly beats Specs Ops: The Line but lots of potential is wasted and leaves it in the ranks of Max Payne 3, a game that doesn't even try to compete with Ghost Recon. The few neat things and the later missions save the game for a 7/10.
I wish I could describe the entire Ghost Recon series as an evolution but it's rather a mutation. GR:AW was the last good game of the series, on the right path to be true to the spirit of Ghost Recon and immune to Call of Duty. This one is not. The same thing that happened to R6 is happening here too.
Even the illusion of map size is gone. It's much more linear and more corridor-ish than ever. "Get back in the war Mitchell, you are leaving the mission area" That used to be the clue that you are going where you aren't "supposed" to go, this time it's aided by invisible walls as well, they are pretty much everywhere. Hard to grasp that a 18 month delay and a full feature 23 minute film ( it's good BTW) set you up for this.
There still are elements that are Ghost Recon but they are served only in the 2nd half of the game, lots of hand holding in the first 6-7 missions.
On veteran difficulty, I managed to get through the first 3 missions without dying even once. The visuals would have been much better if they were consistent. There is lots of disparity in texture and animations quality, certain things look great, spoiled by others that are off. The best missions come very late in the game, except for the final 5 minutes of gameplay that's just awful.
For a 3rd person cover based shooter, it thoroughly beats Specs Ops: The Line but lots of potential is wasted and leaves it in the ranks of Max Payne 3, a game that doesn't even try to compete with Ghost Recon. The few neat things and the later missions save the game for a 7/10.