View Review

Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Future Soldier
3,173
(1,205)

Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Future Soldier

3.8 from 2612 votes
 

There are a maximum of 59 Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Future Soldier achievements (50 without DLC) worth 3,173 (1,205)

37,700 tracked gamers have this game, 515 have completed it (1.37%) | 282 want to boost

AuthorReview
R1DD3R5
106,034 (67,069)
R1DD3R5
TA Score for this game: 1,829
Posted on 31 May 12 at 01:14, Edited on 05 June 12 at 15:03
This review has 26 positive votes and 11 negative votes. Please log in to vote.
This is my first review, and i can honestly say i loved the previous two ghost recons when i got my xbox 360. So to me at least this game had a lot to live up to, after all it will easily now get compared to the many Call of Duty, Battlefield, and various other mainstream shooter titles that dominate this market.

The first thing to note is this game is entirely in 3rd person, and takes alot to get used to. So for those who delve straight to online play and are used to the first person perspectives of the other shooters, be prepared to not be as good as you may usually be.

The second thing to note is that one of the games most redeeming features, both in single player and multiplayer, is the ability to modify pretty much every aspect on the gun. So now you can custom your gun to your game style. This has to be a massive positive and gives this game the edge over other such shooters.

The third thing to note before specifically mentioning the campaign and multiplayer is the graphic quality. It is really well done, down to every last detail and are incredibly thought out well with the lighting being really well thought out.

Specifically the campaign is rewarding. Its enjoyable and makes you play the game at least twice. The Elite difficulty can be said to be a standard hard level. There are difficult moments, but nothing to testy especially to those who usually aim to complete the shooters on the hardest difficulty. The only major downside to this campaign, is whilst it is enjoyable, there are times where the plot seems to take the typical end of the world story line and you can almost predict what happens in the entire story. To those who played recent shooter Sniper; Ghost Warrior, the campaign to me at least seemed to take a similar approach with the whole stealth aspect ( an obviously major aspect to a Ghost Squad).

Multiplayer does have its positives, the significant amount of combinations of guns and attachments, good variety in weaponry, and the games are never massive in people so games tend to fill up quickly and start fast. Levelling up does take a while to get into it. The weapons you begin with are, i would say, reasonable, and unlocks do come at a steady rate, but you do have to persist with the game to get decent things. The maps are a good size, nothing to really complain although there is not really an emphasis on the different sizes of maps as they all tend to be on the Small to Medium Size. The only downside to the multiplayer that is not to do with typical server complaints and aspects is the pairing of the weapons for the default classes (At the time of writing this, i haven't unlocked the ability to unlock a 4th multiplayer character so i'm unsure as to custom classes). These to me at least seem odd pairings, however this may just be a personal opinion rather than a flaw in the game itself. *Edits from comments by Sgt Slithe and Minchy Munchkin* There are 4 types of main multiplayer games, Conflict, Sabotage, Siege and Decoy, All objective based games. Like all objective based game modes working as a team is incredibly beneficial, although i would have liked to have seen just a simple go out and kill deathmatch game mode and reach a limit. These game modes also cross over into a squad multiplayer mode, specifically designed for clan battles, which is a great addition for the hardcore gaming groups.

The final aspect of really multiplayer gaming is Guerrilla mode, which unfortuantly is either you on your own or with your mates. *Edit thanks to Elyoh and RedBlinky for reminding me laugh* This is similar to the Defense mode from the GRAW 2 where an onslaught of enemies constantly attack you. However this game mode reminds me more of Nazi zombies from Call of Duty, released much later, rather than what they had in GRAW2, and to me it seems as if Ubisoft instead of trying to just do their own thing (such as the Co-op missions they previously had, again like Battlefield but with less of a plot which seems better in a way). They have tried to mimic the dominant shooters and put a Ghost Recon spin on them.

Overall, i would say this is an enjoyable game and worth a buy. As there are many, many positives to playing this game and the hours of fun just from all the different adaptations to guns alone is enough to warrant a purchase and makes this superior to other shooters. But it is fair to say not the overall best shooter this year unfortunately.

Given 4 stars by R1DD3R5
Elyoh As a note to your Guerrilla (Which needs 2 r's xD) comments - If you were a fan of the previous games, shouldn't you be aware that there was a defence mode in GRAW 2 aswell? Over a year and a half before the first "Nazi Zombie" ever existed.
Posted by Elyoh on 31 May 12 01:30:09
R1DD3R5 Damn yeh i forgot about that, woops, Remebering about that, I do still think though this is one area they have tried to copy Call of Duty... in my opinion anyways. Thanks Elyoh for reminding me :P i'll put that into the review
Posted by R1DD3R5 on 31 May 12 01:42:35
RedBlinky yeah and defense mode-firefight coop missions etc. had online lobbies back then in graw -_- might want to mention how that is absent
Posted by RedBlinky on 31 May 12 02:05:12
R1DD3R5 Done, Thanks again for reminding me, man i really should go back onto the old GRAW to remind myself lol :)
Posted by R1DD3R5 on 31 May 12 02:12:04
Elyoh I do want to see some more co-op missions though, they were my favourite part of GRAW 1/2 :'( This game does all the big things right, but just sucks at lots of small things...
Posted by Elyoh on 31 May 12 02:39:59
R1DD3R5 if only you could 'like' comments on here. as that deserves a like :)
Posted by R1DD3R5 on 31 May 12 08:06:33
Minchy Munchkin Agree with Elyoh, the co-op was what my friends and I played most and there were always as many people in the co-op lobbies as any other. I really can't believe that the devs just ignored this aspect of the previous ghost recon games, as this was one of the things that made them both great online and different from others.

Nice review though + from me.
Posted by Minchy Munchkin on 31 May 12 14:55:33
R1DD3R5 Cheers guys, i seem to recall Ubisofts name on it, but i am useless at remembering recently so im probably wrong as per usual :). but yeh, cheers for the positives :)
Posted by R1DD3R5 on 31 May 12 19:44:01
guitar2009 i definitely dislike the game, but great review, nonetheless
Posted by guitar2009 on 01 Jun 12 06:53:08
Sgt Slithe There have actually been 4 Ghost Recon games prior to Future Soldier. I also massively disagree with your MP review - if you play this game beyond the first few levels it gets very rewarding, and it has a complex 'co-ordination' system that is a great help in games that you haven't mentioned.
In my opinion the MP on this game is the best i've played since COD 4 revolutionised the shooter genre. I just can't put this game down!
Posted by Sgt Slithe on 03 Jun 12 10:18:09
Sgt Slithe You have also failed to mention the different game modes within the MP (siege, saboteur, conflict, decoy) and the fact that there is an in-game squad system that as part of a squad (clan), you can enter squad lobbies to play other squads. This is also a great feature that your so called 'dominant shooters' don't have.
I have down voted this review because it comes across as though you are a Call of Duty fanboy and anything else is not good enough!
COD 4 was the last decent one of the series in my opinion, and Future Soldier is a real breath of fresh air that the shooter genre needed
Posted by Sgt Slithe on 03 Jun 12 10:28:34
Minchy Munchkin @ Sgt Slithe I'm not trying to start an argument, but.... The way I read his review of multiplayer was that the developers have tried to copy COD style game modes, but not as good a job. That may just be because that is the way I see guerilla game mode as a zombies/survivor clone, but no where near as good. That being said, now I've played the main multiplayer modes a little more, I have to agree with you - it's a bit of a grind getting leveled up to begin with, but after a few gun upgrades, it makes the game a lot more fun to play and would like an edit to include all the different game modes.
Posted by Minchy Munchkin on 03 Jun 12 23:33:18
Pure Vapour 420 This is far superior to cod/bf, this my pedigree chumbs is up there with gears3 =>
Posted by Pure Vapour 420 on 04 Jun 12 16:24:19
R1DD3R5 Not trying to fuel an arguement, and i have edited the review in light of comments ( i must remember to do this in my next review), but i personally think all the shooters are as bad as one another ( i cant really comment on Gears3 as i haven't played so). I agree with Sgt Slithe, COD4 was the last decent game in that series, this latest release was purely awful. Future soldier is a breath of fresh air, yet i do think it mimics the others shooters a little too much. Battlefield takes a decade to level up and get decent stuff, and the maps are huge ( which is both good and bad). So to me each of these games are as bad as one another ( just all in different aspects). I dont know about you guys but i would just love for a game to have a really challenging campaign ( ive heard the gears 3 one is challenging, but my personal hardest was COD2 on veteren although i was a complete noob then) and a multiplayer which is always fun, with a decent balance between levelling up and weaponary settings, offers some achievements which arent unobtainable yet challenge gamers, and allows even the most noob players a chance, so even when im having an off day or a younger sibling takes the control we aren't wanting to go on a rampage against the game and break the disc. So to answer a question of which i feel should get the best shooter, so far i wouldn't choose any of the ones ive played so far this year. But on a lighter note thanks for reading and voting this review up and down, and in cases of down votes, thanks for saying why :) muchly appreciated
Posted by R1DD3R5 on 05 Jun 12 15:32:59
catbhoy good review, I'm disappointed that there was no co-op missions like GRAW 1 & 2
Posted by catbhoy on 06 Jun 12 11:29:35
Jimmyx24 Accurate review. the only thing anyone reading this who hasn't played the game should know is that even though online is extremely objective based, people think this is just another Call of Duty-esque shooter and try to run and gun which does not work. If you plan on buying this and playing online, be prepared for a ton of frustrating moments when people try to be the entire team and you end up losing because of it. For the record, that is not my opinion. I have seen it countless amounts of times where a person on my team thinks they can handle every enemy. Just giving a heads up. Other than that its freaking awesome
Posted by Jimmyx24 on 07 Jun 12 04:49:14