At least an 8 easy!
- Member Since: January 16, 2011
- Posts: 340
- Member Since: March 28, 2010
- Posts: 231
Enjoying the MP but the single player has been awful. Apart from some good stealth kills the game is 5.5 so the MP brings to 7.5 in my view which is about right.
Shocking AI, awful boring shootouts, Auto aim cannot be turned off, game telling you where to move to every 30yards, cannot control your team to tell them to stay back so you can get kills. stealth kill from 10 yards away from your the guy. Awful shooting animations, death and hit animations just beyond boring. No online co op with any randoms, friends only, no split screen even though it says 2 player on the back.
Graphics in places are just awful and in most others just average, the lack of polish in the single player is just a joke in my view.
- Member Since: November 10, 2011
- Posts: 65
- Member Since: August 19, 2008
- Posts: 774
- Member Since: November 17, 2008
- Posts: 5683
- Member Since: May 13, 2003
- Posts: 380
- Member Since: January 1, 2011
- Posts: 1508
- Member Since: December 25, 2008
- Posts: 229
- Member Since: October 29, 2003
- Posts: 773
when i see modern day shooters get mediocre reviews or bad scores b/c its easy.... i trust that its a bad game.
In a world where BF and COD and MOH games dominate and no developer wants to make a thinker or an innovative or nonlineant military shooter, when players say its boring it must be boring.
Honestly some of the multiplayer videos look AWESOME!!! and i want to try it. But if its another boring yawwnnn FPS i guess ill pas.
I dont believe in the rating system anymore.
Just 3 categories.
Dont get it
Get it when its cheaper
Get it now.
- Member Since: May 14, 2005
- Posts: 1513
- Member Since: December 2, 2010
- Posts: 1097
- Member Since: February 16, 2005
- Posts: 2059
I'll give it my rating if and when I can ever get past the black screen at menu bug. I've tried every workaround I could find, no luck so far. From what I've experienced and read, if I were to rate it on QC so far though, it would get a 5/10 at best, because al lot of people can't even play it or get in a match, and even many of those that can are saying it's not all that great.
This has to be the worst example of QC on release day of any game so far this year, bar none.
- Member Since: December 24, 2003
- Posts: 533
Ratings can be harshed but that's one review, the user score will determine how we the players feel and not enough these days use it.
I think 7.5 is not bad, when going up to 8, 8.5 and 9 is basically saying, "I'm going to play this game everyday and for years to come".
As much as I hate to say it I'm looking forward to a sequel than playing this game 6 months from now.
- Member Since: January 16, 2009
- Posts: 5864
- Member Since: December 2, 2010
- Posts: 1097
- Member Since: August 17, 2011
- Posts: 7
- Member Since: April 21, 2008
- Posts: 14944
- Member Since: June 12, 2011
- Posts: 1250
- Member Since: March 30, 2007
- Posts: 787
I hear people complaining about the same things I did, so it sounds like it hasn't been tweaked much. Based on when I last played I'd give it an 8. Sounds good, graphics are a mixed bag. The campaign is solid though the story is pathetic - disappointing since previous Ghost Recon games have had a decent to good story attached. Multiplayer is addictive despite the lag and CoD moments (no Tom Clancy game should ever have someone charge you from the front and melee you after pouring bullets into them. Ever.) It's a solid game with much too like but given the delay, should've been way more polished.
I did like it better than Max Payne 3. MP3 had a better story and more polish, but GR has better gameplay imo
- Member Since: July 2, 2012
- Posts: 1
- Member Since: July 1, 2006
- Posts: 74
Maybe it would deserve a better rating if they patched all the bugs and glitches in MP. As of now, it's pretty frustrating spawning with invisible weapons that don't shoot, getting disconnected every other match and not gaining XP when it happens are just a few of the things.
- Member Since: June 1, 2004
- Posts: 3778
I bought this from Stream yesterday.
The game is ok. I think it got a fair score. It a console port with no effort gone into its PC incarnation. The graphics are awful. I have a new PC with some serous hardware in it (GTX 680). All the games I play are maxed. With this one I thought I had not saved the graphic options correctly. I have played 10 year old games with better graphics.
The story and narrative are quite good. You do feel like you are in a firefight, so they did that part right. Having played other GH games, they have embraced the path of least resistance and have been awarded accordingly.
- Member Since: March 31, 2007
- Posts: 233
i actually think 7.5 is a pretty accurate score. there's a lot to like and i do personally like the game but it does have more than a few noticeable flaws. and for a game that push back as many times and as long as this one was, some of those flaws should not be. the game also limits you. lack of matchmaking for guerrilla just wastes that game mode when it looks like it could be a lot of fun.