Even with the cover art... you can know what game is awesome and what game is a piece of shit.It used to be when a game had the Tom Clancy branding you knew it was going to be amazing. How did we go from amazing games like this:
To dumbed down and mediocre stuff like this:
To stuff that is most likely going to be trash-tier like this:
As well as a new Ghost Recon game that jumps on the battle royale bandwagon several years too late?
What happened? I used to associate the Tom Clancy brand with amazing, trendsetting gaming. Now I associated it with out of touch boardroom executives who push low-quality junk on their "fellow kids".
I just hope they don't revive the Splinter Cell franchise. The last thing they need to do is ruin Sam Fisher's legacy.
The actual hardcore/proper tactical shooters in the R6 and GR series (og R6/Rogue Spear/Raven Shield/GR 1 and expansions) was developed by Red Storm Entertainment with UBI only acting as publishers...so it all makes sense.Nothing has been as good as Rogue Spear.
Why though? You've called it shit twice in this threat without elaborating.First off, Pandora Tomorrow is just not a good game, I have to call it like I see it. I like The SP series and could never fucking recommend that shit.
Why though? You've called it shit twice in this threat without elaborating.
I like how they are like "decline" and those games probably moving more fucking units now, then 20 years ago.
Yup. Both Wildlands and Breakpoint were good.
R6 Siege is still very popular.
OP probably hasn’t touched a Clancy game in two gens.
Speaking of Splinter Cell, how does Blacklist fare? I got burned after realizing there were no real stealth options in Conviction. It seems like a “full package” game but every time I tried playing it, the mechanics never clicked with me like the previous titles.
I like how people say "it sells 20 million units so it's good".
Or COD is the best game ever, Drake, Billie Eilish & Justin Bieber are the best artist in the World and produce the best music ever created because they sell millions too?
Also comparing the gaming market of 2020 to 2005 (on your other comments) is absolutely stupid.
Now I'm gonna copy/paste my comment from the other thread:
MAYBE people expected something else when you talk about GHOST RECON. I MEAN IT'S IN THE NAME FFS.
Let a team develop a single player tactical FPS with squad command, not another BR. Ubi seems to release a BR game every 6 months. Just make it stop.
Also, R6Siege is the worst R6 game ever. It has just the name of R6.
It may be a good game (not for me though) but it's a shitty R6.
About this new Ghost Recon, you have a shit tons of BR you can try that are most likely the same as this GR Frontline. Some are even from Ubi, they just have a different name. In the meantime, tactical shooter are mostly dead.
I'm obviously not hoping for a "first person, invisible guns, reload wheels" type of game. More like a mix between Wildlands and Operation Flashpoint maybe? IDK, but not this BR bullshit for sure!
And for R6... we have a 5vs5 online PVP shooter vs the old formula, you can see where is the problem I guess. Just make a real single player experience true to the genre. Then we are all happy.
They are Tom Clancy games in name only. They may be fun titles in their own right but they aren’t TC games.
Finished it on the ngage seemed okNow tell us about the time you finished Chaos Theory on the 3DS.
Now tell us about the time you finished Chaos Theory on the 3DS.
I actually had it with my first 3ds then sold it.
To me, the core of Tom Clancy was naval warfare and tactics. Sure his books covered other stuff as the years went on, but navy shit was his bread and butter.
Why there hasn’t been a Tom Clancy naval combat game since 1988 is beyond me.
It used to be when a game had the Tom Clancy branding you knew it was going to be amazing. How did we go from amazing games like this:
To dumbed down and mediocre stuff like this:
To stuff that is most likely going to be trash-tier like this:
As well as a new Ghost Recon game that jumps on the battle royale bandwagon several years too late?
What happened? I used to associate the Tom Clancy brand with amazing, trendsetting gaming. Now I associated it with out of touch boardroom executives who push low-quality junk on their "fellow kids".
I just hope they don't revive the Splinter Cell franchise. The last thing they need to do is ruin Sam Fisher's legacy.
Tom Clancy's Boom Boom RoomSomeone needs to urgently buy the franchise rights from Ubisoft before they go all the way to the bottom of the barrel and make a party game or whatever.
How is wildcards good? They launched without pvp and no one played it after a few months. They had markers everywhere when you threw a grenade you could see the radius of the explosion that's a no no in a tactical shooter. They had infinite drones and pickups and it was only 4v4 it was terrible.xDefiant isn't even out. Breakpoint was a misfire, however Wildlands is good and The Division 1 and 2 are missing from your list for some reason.
Using your metric (game journalists reviews) it seems the only reliably critically acclaimed title is Splinter Cell. Quality is all over the place and all over the last two years so there's no set "golden age" of Tom Clancy games that were all just critical darlings. Tom Clancy games (again, using Metacritic) all seem to fall under the "Great if you're a fan, just OK otherwise. . ." category of games.
These are liesYup. Both Wildlands and Breakpoint were good.
R6 Siege is still very popular.
OP probably hasn’t touched a Clancy game in two gens.
Siege is one of the best multiplayer games ever and the Metacritic was way before the game received it's much needed content. If Siege would've been released content complete it would have gotten a average score of > 80 easily.Those games fall under the "decent at best if I ignore how flawed they are" category. Look at Metacritic. The big Tom Clancy games like Chaos Theory had a 94% average while Wildlands has a 70% average and Breakpoint has a 56% average. That's a steep decline in quality. Wildlands was a decent Ubisoft open world game at best (fun but basically junk gaming) and Breakpoint was absolutely terrible until everyone whined and they finally made it playable (but still pretty bad). Rainbow Six Siege also has a 73% average compared to Rainbow Six 3 which had an 86% average. So it's not just my opinion. The general consensus is that the quality of their games is declining.
Siege is one of the best multiplayer games ever and the Metacritic was way before the game received it's much needed content. If Siege would've been released content complete it would have gotten a average score of > 80 easily.
Why should he? OP came in pissing and moaning in what is really a poor stealth Ubisoft bitch post with no elaboration either.Why though? You've called it shit twice in this threat without elaborating.
reviews should be updated, especially in this day and age.Sir, you don't understand. People here don't play games. They play Metacritic score wars. Just look at any Sea of Thieves thread.
Hell I hated Breakpoint at launch, but after all of the updates I like it more than Wildlands.
Wildlands was pretty good actually. My complain was the game was simply tooo huge, like in typical Ubi fashion.
Then its successor reviewed to be way too short with features missing.
reviews should be updated, especially in this day and age.
Ubisoft needs to lose the rights to Tom Clancy and other devs need to take a chance in this franchise. I would like to see what Square Enix does to this game.
Fuck me hard --- I did not know this. I thought they were only licensing the IP like what Sony does with Marvel/Disney with Spiderman or what EA did with Star Wars. --- Well no wonderThey can't lose the rights when they own the name and IP.
Ubisoft buys Tom Clancy's name
French video game giant has bought the best-selling novelist's name for use in media products.www.cnet.com
Tom Clancy feels pressured by games like fortnight and apex, if you’re Tom Clancy go ahead and take on giants like those.
He’s not forced to, but I was curious because I’ve never heard anyone hold such hatred towards it. I wanted to know why. This has nothing to do with OP.Why should he? OP came in pissing and moaning in what is really a poor stealth Ubisoft bitch post with no elaboration either.
Siege is one of the best multiplayer games ever and the Metacritic was way before the game received it's much needed content. If Siege would've been released content complete it would have gotten a average score of > 80 easily.
I have the original Rainbow Six for N64...When they went to consoles.
I have the original Rainbow Six for N64...