Give us one last proper Splinter Cell send-off while Michael Ironside is still alive, you cowards. A “final job” with a retiring Sam Fisher would be an amazing setup for a game. Not that I trust Ubisoft to pull it off, mind. But we can dream.
I thought he beat cancer and was back to acting? He couldn’t do Sam Fisher in his prime anymore, but maybe an old Sam on his last legs? Though I guess the clock is ticking even for that.
Eh. I am a huge fan of “one last gunfight” stories but video games rarely ever pull those off and I triply don’t expect Ubi to do it. It is inherently a subversion of the power fantasy and it says a lot that the most famous example (MGS4) turned into a full on macho power fantasy by the end. Off the top of my head, the only one that even tried was LAD: Infinite Wealth and that still screwed it up with the post credits.
So it basically just leaves you with a sad and depressing reminder of aging.
Nah. I already don’t think the Wildlands mission was good, but let’s remember Sam with the VERY underrated Conviction.
What if they want to use the branding again in the future? They will do a gatcha mobile game with a never ending story. Don’t forget to try your luck on getting the Assassin’s Creed collab!
Its was similar in some way, but it was also very different in others.
With the exception of Ghost Recon 1, which was first person, the series was always a third person shooter genre, but it occasionally was first person depending on the platform and the game (Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 1 is in first person only for PS2, Xbox, and PC, but is optionally third person on Xbox 360. GRAW 2 is in third person for all platforms). Most Ghost Recon games are third person, and this was likely an intentional choice to make a game that does not directly compete with Rainbow Six, another Ubisoft series.
Ghost Recon had some semblance of realism, but not on the level of Rainbow Six and definitely not on the level of Ready or Not. Rainbow Six in its later years also began to lose its realistic style and became more and more fanciful, culminating in Siege having crossovers that don’t make sense for the game or genre (I love NieR, but 2B does not belong in Rainbow Six, and her model in the game looks awful anyway).
Ghost Recons biggest difference is that Ghost Recon has a military focus, whereas Rainbow Six is more focused on SWAT or counterterrorism efforts. To this end, Rainbow Six often featured levels with enclosed spaces such as the inside of buildings or airplanes and a lot of close quarters combat, while Ghost Recon favors more open maps and long range encounters. Ghost Recon also featured vehicles and vehicular combat sections while Rainbow Six generally did not. For example, Ghost Recon would sometimes have a helicopter or tank appear to assist your squad in combat, perhaps against another enemy vehicle. If Rainbow Six ever featured a vehicle, it definitely wasnt a tank assisting your squad, and at most was a helicopter shooting through building glass or something similar.
I remember playing Ghost Recon (no tagline) back on the Gamecube, probably not the appropriate game for my age.
It was definitely a slower and more grounded game back then, or at least as much as a mainstream game could be back in the early 2000s. And first-person.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Rules
1. Submissions have to be related to games
Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.
This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.
2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil
No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.
We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.
3. No excessive self-promotion
Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.
This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.
4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you’re submitting before posting to see if it’s already been posted.
We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.
5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW
Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.
No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.
6. No linking to piracy
Don’t share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.
We don’t want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.
Wasn’t Ghost Recon third person?
That scared of rainbow six was fucking first person but thats now esports hero shooter swill
You can lease it for at least a year before we shut it down…
It’s really hard to be excited because of Ubi.
They’ll market it as some hardcore, gritty milsim but yet still feels so arcadey to appeal to the masses.
I get it, more mass appeal = more money =soul lost.
Ooooh, you lost me at Ubisoft.
Why would we be excited or happy about this? They can still cancel it at any moment. It’s not real until it’s released.
Even then it’s only real while you’re continuing to pay for the privilege to play
Give us one last proper Splinter Cell send-off while Michael Ironside is still alive, you cowards. A “final job” with a retiring Sam Fisher would be an amazing setup for a game. Not that I trust Ubisoft to pull it off, mind. But we can dream.
Michael has had a hard decade or so and a lot of indications are that he already can’t be “Sam”.
At which point you basically just have the GR Wildlands (?) mission where he talks to you for like 30 seconds.
I thought he beat cancer and was back to acting? He couldn’t do Sam Fisher in his prime anymore, but maybe an old Sam on his last legs? Though I guess the clock is ticking even for that.
Eh. I am a huge fan of “one last gunfight” stories but video games rarely ever pull those off and I triply don’t expect Ubi to do it. It is inherently a subversion of the power fantasy and it says a lot that the most famous example (MGS4) turned into a full on macho power fantasy by the end. Off the top of my head, the only one that even tried was LAD: Infinite Wealth and that still screwed it up with the post credits.
So it basically just leaves you with a sad and depressing reminder of aging.
Nah. I already don’t think the Wildlands mission was good, but let’s remember Sam with the VERY underrated Conviction.
What if they want to use the branding again in the future? They will do a gatcha mobile game with a never ending story. Don’t forget to try your luck on getting the Assassin’s Creed collab!
Oh, Ubisoft? The big famous sex crimes company?
Yes, ubisoft, the one game over and over and over and over and over again company
They saw how popular Ready or Not was and thought to themselves “didn’t we used to make a game like that?”
Yeah, it was Rainbow Six, not Ghost Recon lol.
I seem to recall Ghost recon being adjacent. At least in the early days.
Its was similar in some way, but it was also very different in others.
With the exception of Ghost Recon 1, which was first person, the series was always a third person shooter genre, but it occasionally was first person depending on the platform and the game (Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 1 is in first person only for PS2, Xbox, and PC, but is optionally third person on Xbox 360. GRAW 2 is in third person for all platforms). Most Ghost Recon games are third person, and this was likely an intentional choice to make a game that does not directly compete with Rainbow Six, another Ubisoft series.
Ghost Recon had some semblance of realism, but not on the level of Rainbow Six and definitely not on the level of Ready or Not. Rainbow Six in its later years also began to lose its realistic style and became more and more fanciful, culminating in Siege having crossovers that don’t make sense for the game or genre (I love NieR, but 2B does not belong in Rainbow Six, and her model in the game looks awful anyway).
Ghost Recons biggest difference is that Ghost Recon has a military focus, whereas Rainbow Six is more focused on SWAT or counterterrorism efforts. To this end, Rainbow Six often featured levels with enclosed spaces such as the inside of buildings or airplanes and a lot of close quarters combat, while Ghost Recon favors more open maps and long range encounters. Ghost Recon also featured vehicles and vehicular combat sections while Rainbow Six generally did not. For example, Ghost Recon would sometimes have a helicopter or tank appear to assist your squad in combat, perhaps against another enemy vehicle. If Rainbow Six ever featured a vehicle, it definitely wasnt a tank assisting your squad, and at most was a helicopter shooting through building glass or something similar.
I remember playing Ghost Recon (no tagline) back on the Gamecube, probably not the appropriate game for my age.
It was definitely a slower and more grounded game back then, or at least as much as a mainstream game could be back in the early 2000s. And first-person.
How is Ready or Not popular? It’s such a potato SWAT ripoff.
It’s the only swat style game (with Ground Branch) at the moment. And it’s quite fun.
SWAT 4 came out 20 years ago
Yeah, exactly.