Ghost Recon Breakpoint - No More Squad Support For Solo Players
Ghost Recon Wildlands was my introduction to this long-standing Ubisoft franchise. I bought the game a year after launch so got a good deal on a comprehensive package of all the content. Broadly I like the game and really enjoyed the massive open world environment. Although there was a four-player co-op option, I tackled the game using A.I. teammates and didn’t find them as problematic as some player did. Perhaps their tactical deficiencies were more prevalent at higher difficulty levels. As for the characters’ cheesy dialogue, it really wasn’t a problem. Most banter between friends in real life is far from erudite. So it is unrealistic to expect witty ripostes and “puckish” epigrams from a squad of special forces soldiers. Overall, I found playing through the game this way, rather than with other players a far more enjoyable experience. I could take my time, plan my strategy and my AI team mainly did what I expected them to do. For a player of my skill level, this was a win, win situation.
Ghost Recon Wildlands was my introduction to this long-standing Ubisoft franchise. I bought the game a year after launch so got a good deal on a comprehensive package of all the content. Broadly I like the game and really enjoyed the massive open world environment. Although there was a four-player co-op option, I tackled the game using A.I. teammates and didn’t find them as problematic as some player did. Perhaps their tactical deficiencies were more prevalent at higher difficulty levels. As for the characters’ cheesy dialogue, it really wasn’t a problem. Most banter between friends in real life is far from erudite. So it is unrealistic to expect witty ripostes and “puckish” epigrams from a squad of special forces soldiers. Overall, I found playing through the game this way, rather than with other players a far more enjoyable experience. I could take my time, plan my strategy and my AI team mainly did what I expected them to do. For a player of my skill level, this was a win, win situation.
Hence, I was pleased to learn of a direct sequel to the 2017 game and watched the announcement trailer for Ghost Recon Breakpoint with interest. Frankly, these sorts of videos don’t really give you much information about the nuts and bolts of the game, so I then decided to see what a few websites had to say about what was on offer. It didn’t take long for me to read a short paragraph that effectively killed my interest in Ghost Recon Breakpoint dead. It would appear that Ubisoft have elected not to address the shortcomings of the squad A.I. in this iteration of the game. Rather than increase their functionality and give the player greater control over their actions, they’ve simply removed them from solo play. If you want the support of a full squad you will have to play with other players and endure the problems that are inherent with such a system. According to Emil Daubon, the lead writer on the game “the mission statement that we received was we want to create a fantasy that replicates being alone trapped behind enemy lines. Ultimately, if you choose to play a solo, you have the option to immerse yourself deeply in that aspect of the fantasy. The A.I. teammates would have taken away from that”. Yeah and if my Granny had wheels, she’d be a wagon.
I really dislike this ongoing mindset of primarily placing a player’s enjoyment and progress in a game, in the hands of other players. I don’t enjoy being reliant on random strangers, all of whom have different play styles, varying ability and personal notions of what is or isn’t “fun”. Perhaps the biggest problems for me is that such auto-grouping systems have zero impact over issues such as social skills and one’s ability to interact with others in a commensurate fashion. The alternative to this is to play with friends but most of the people I have on my various friends lists tend to play different genres of games. I doubt if I know anyone who will play Ghost Recon Breakpoint. If I do, then there’s the logistics of arranging a suitable play session that suits respective time zones. Another issue that stems from removing the A.I. squad is that solo players are now at a disadvantage when it comes to effectively using vehicles. There are apparently over 30 available to use in the game, but solo players will no longer have teammates that can utilise turrets and provide tactical support. And then there’s the issue of the famous sync shot mechanics. In previous games, you’d potion your squad and simultaneously take down multiple enemies. It would seem that Ubisoft have got around this by allowing the solo player to now use drones, but it lacks the panache of the original method.
So there you have it. Once again, a game studio has made a change to a long-standing game mechanic associated with a franchise and as a result lost a percentage of potential customers. I have no idea if that is a large or relatively small number of players, but I’m sure I’m not the only person who feels this way about the ubiquity of co-operative play. It one of the reasons I decided not to buy the new World War Z game. Again, there is no single player mode with an A.I. Squad. As for the reasons used to justify such decisions such as “immersion” and such like, I simply don’t believe them. Removing A.I. teammates means eliminating a problem. It is one less coding headache to address and it makes it easier for companies such as Ubisoft to assemble their cookie cutter games. That’s not to say that their games are bad, because they are not. But they all seem to share common components, systems and mechanics. Without straying into hyperbole, it is this approach to gaming and the continued stripping away of anything that doesn’t easily integrate into the “live serves” business model, that is driving the triple A video games industry towards an inevitable crash or major recalibration.
The Failings of Co-op Gameplay
It would appear that Anthem will have a campaign mode that can be played solo or co-op. This is hardly surprising because such a mechanic is pretty much de rigueur these day in gaming. On paper the ability to play through content collaboratively is a great idea. Small groups of four people or so are theoretically easier to manage and co-ordinate, unlike large unwieldy raids in the MMO genre. Discord (and such like) provides a quick and easy way for people to communicate. And despite ongoing improvements in AI technology, playing with other people often provides a superior experience. Mutually agreed tactics are more likely to succeed and if things take a turn for the worse, real players can improvise more effectively. Hence co-op play seems to be industry darling at present and is seriously putting a dent in the MMO market.
It would appear that Anthem will have a campaign mode that can be played solo or co-op. This is hardly surprising because such a mechanic is pretty much de rigueur these day in gaming. On paper the ability to play through content collaboratively is a great idea. Small groups of four people or so are theoretically easier to manage and co-ordinate, unlike large unwieldy raids in the MMO genre. Discord (and such like) provides a quick and easy way for people to communicate. And despite ongoing improvements in AI technology, playing with other people often provides a superior experience. Mutually agreed tactics are more likely to succeed and if things take a turn for the worse, real players can improvise more effectively. Hence co-op play seems to be industry darling at present and is seriously putting a dent in the MMO market.
However, the reality of co-op play is often quite different from its notional benefits. I have dabbled with this functionality via several games in the last twelve months and have had decidedly mixed results. First off, finding a group is very much dependent on the popularity of the game. If the game is a new release, then this is not an immediate problem. But if you’re playing the game of the year edition, twelve months after launch you may well find the player base has greatly diminished. Then there’s the age-old problem of player behaviour, that seems to have become exacerbated of late. I have encountered little or no communication from fellow players, as well as the ubiquitous malcontents who sound off at everyone and everything when things don’ go their way. Which leads to the other major problem that co-op regularly presents. Namely fellow group members leaving because things are not going the way they want. It is by far the most frequent failing of co-op play, in my experience.
Sadly, because online behaviour per se seems to be a race to the bottom nowadays, I cannot advocate the automated group finding tools that many games now have. Last year, I found that Sniper Elite 4 and For Honor could deliver an adequate co-op experience about two thirds of the time. One in every three games was impeded by another member of the group. Twelve months later I find that the opposite is true. Two out of three co-op games are either blighted by player behaviour or suffer due to team members abandoning the group. This is particularly true of Friday the 13th: The Game and as a result the developers are currently working on implementing a penalty system for habitual offenders. When I do find myself in a PUG I frequently find there is a distinct reticence towards communication. It’s as if there’s an assumption that everyone knows what to do and that the task in hand needs to be undertaken as quickly as possible. Sadly, the only people disposed towards talking are those who have little of worth to say.
Perhaps it’s a generational thing and I am unreasonable in expecting both courtesy and a willingness to work together when playing co-operatively. But I am now at an age where my tolerance for the socially dysfunctional, the trite shenanigans of youth and general ill manners are virtually non-existent. So auto grouping is fast becoming a waste of time for me. Which leads me neatly into the only alternative; playing with friends. Simply put, as you get older is common to find your social circle reduce in size. Jobs, relationships and family mainly account for this. Hence a lot of people that I would play with collaboratively a decade ago are not available anymore. From what I’ve seen from You Tube, those players who regularly play co-op games are often half my age. Of my friends who are available, there is the further complexity of time zones and the simple fact that not everyone has the same gaming tastes. More often than not I find that my Steam friends simply don’t play the same games as me. And as I’ve moved away from the MMO genre I find that I really miss the practical benefits of guilds.
Once again, we see something that on paper should be a major boon to the gaming community, being usurped by the lowest common denominator and rendered ineffective as a result. It seems to be the fate of all online social tools these days. Perhaps that’s why many game developers still include a solo mode with AI bots in their games, because they know in advance that a substantial element of their customer base is going to be “problematic”. May be the solution to the co-op play is to make the auto grouping tools more sophisticated and use them in a way to facilitate a good experience. This could be through incentivising acceptable behaviour and rewarding a team if they deem the experience to be positive. Conversely, providing a means to highlight and sanction poor behaviour would also be a positive step. However, such facilities require time and money to develop and policing a community requires human agency. All of which ultimately contribute to a games bottom line, so I won’t hold my breath that this issue is going to be solved any time soon. In the meantime, I’ll just continue to rely upon AI bots and come to terms with the fact the co-op play doesn’t appear to cater for my requirements.
Beta Testing Dauntless
Dauntless is a game based on reading the signs and reacting quickly. If you prefer to simply mash buttons then you’ll find yourself on a hiding to nothing. This co-operative fantasy-based RPG is set in a time when cataclysmic event has torn the world apart, releasing gigantic beasts that prey on the surviving humans. Players take on the role of Slayers who hunt these Behemoths, collecting loot that they use to craft and upgrade weapons. When hunting, the game plays as a third-person action game with players using a combo system to attack, while monitoring their own health and stamina gauge. Such hunts can take upwards of twenty minutes of in-game time to complete. The game can be played both as single player or co-operatively with up to four people. If your team works collaboratively, has the right gear and is au fait with reading the Behemoths body language, then Dauntless is an immensely enjoyable endeavour.
Dauntless is a game based on reading the signs and reacting quickly. If you prefer to simply mash buttons then you’ll find yourself on a hiding to nothing. This co-operative fantasy-based RPG is set in a time when cataclysmic event has torn the world apart, releasing gigantic beasts that prey on the surviving humans. Players take on the role of Slayers who hunt these Behemoths, collecting loot that they use to craft and upgrade weapons. When hunting, the game plays as a third-person action game with players using a combo system to attack, while monitoring their own health and stamina gauge. Such hunts can take upwards of twenty minutes of in-game time to complete. The game can be played both as single player or co-operatively with up to four people. If your team works collaboratively, has the right gear and is au fait with reading the Behemoths body language, then Dauntless is an immensely enjoyable endeavour.
Dauntless is currently in beta and is still a work in progress. However, it is regularly updated and the version that I played this afternoon is by far the most complete game experience I’ve had so far. It still lacks things like a mini map but the developers, Phoenix Labs, have certainly been busy focusing on the nuts and bolts of the game, such a weapon damage and the various combination moves. I also feel that there’s a more tangible difference between the various weapon types. They’re becoming more distinctive with their special second attacks, and making a choice now seems less arbitrary. The Chain Blades with their evasive grapple and teleport-dash are now a good choice for players who don’t favour such a full-on melee style of combat. There are potions and other boosts to craft which you can utilise to your tactical advantage. However, Dauntless does not have the excessive intricacies of other games of this genre.
Obviously, since it was announced Dauntless has been constantly compared to Monster Hunter: World. However as ever with games, this is was a classic apple versus orange scenario. Dauntless is easier to solo, for one thing, though the developer is still working on the best way to optimise the single player experience. I believe there was an experiment with bots in the closed alpha but it proved unpopular. As it stands in the current iteration of the game Dauntless scales according to group size. There are also certain weapons that are more effective against specific Behemoths. Yet conversely, there are no support only weapons and success in the game is no dependent solely on having a balanced team. Dauntless takes a flexible approach to consumables which are mainly focused on AOE heals, buffs and debuffs rather than the precise use of special ammunition or traps. There is also no risk of friendly fire.
At present Dauntless does not feature an enthralling storyline. What’s in place is functional and serves a purpose, guiding the player to the appropriate quests. The only major decision the story offers in this build is what faction to join. But I don’t see narrative being a primary selling point for Dauntless. This is a game about going head-to-head with beats with nasty sharp pointy teeth. The Behemoths are the stars of the game, particularly the Shrike, which conjures up the memory of Ori and the Blind Forest. The minimalist art style actually suits the needs of the game and the procedurally generate landscapes are also creative. Usually the fantasy genre is flamboyant in its use of colour but Dauntless favour a very organic use of pastel shades. There is one trade off when using procedurally generated environment and that is it negates any facility to explore, beyond simply doing so to gather.
As a F2P game, Phoenix Labs has to find an appropriate means to monetise Dauntless. Since the Star Wars: Battlefront II debacle, the developers have decided to remove loot boxes from the game Phoenix Labs said that this isn’t “entirely reactive” to the recent turn against the free-to-play system but admit they’re “not deaf” to the backlash. Across the industry, developers and organisations like PEGI, the FTC, and the UK Gambling Commission, are being asked to take a stand for or against loot boxes. Phoenix Labs have indicated they wish to follow a model similar to Warframe and Path of Exiles “where you choose the things that you're purchasing.” The developers describe this approach as “a lot more player-first.” Obviously, it is prudent to reserve judgement until the final release of the game, which should be later this year. However, so far developers Phoenix Labs do seem to be responding to their players needs in an equitable manner.
Is Co-op Gaming King?
“Is the popularity of smaller-scale co-op (games) hurting MMORPGs?” This interesting question was posted on Massively Overpowered today as part of their regular Massively Overthinking feature. The subject was explored by members of the writing team then thrown over to reader comments, many of which were very thought provoking. The subject was similar to one we debated recently on the Contains Moderate Peril podcast. That focused on whether traditional MMO players were now outsiders within their own genre of choice. Both of these discussions are about change and a shift in player habits. And change is frequently unsettling and potentially comes at the expense of something else.
“Is the popularity of smaller-scale co-op (games) hurting MMORPGs?” This interesting question was posted on Massively Overpowered today as part of their regular Massively Overthinking feature. The subject was explored by members of the writing team then thrown over to reader comments, many of which were very thought provoking. The subject was similar to one we debated recently on the Contains Moderate Peril podcast. That focused on whether traditional MMO players were now outsiders within their own genre of choice. Both of these discussions are about change and a shift in player habits. And change is frequently unsettling and potentially comes at the expense of something else.
A good MMORPG offers a complex persistent world that can be explored and enjoyed both as a solo player and as part of a group. A decade ago, the genre was very much focused on group run content and I have spent many a rewarding evening running dungeons with my guild mates. These sorts of social activities foster close bonding with fellow players and can be extremely uplifting. Yet raiding culture is by its nature time consuming and requires a lot of organising and commitment. Co-op play in other genres of games can offer the same sort of fix but without half as much baggage.
Running The Rift in LOTRO a decade ago meant everyone turning up on time, with the right gear and consumables. Everyone needed to know their job. Even the most casual of raid groups would have to give up a lot of time and if someone fumbled the ball it meant you got nothing for all your work, bar the fun you had. Teaming with your friends in Overwatch is quick and simple. Within minutes you’re in the middle of the action. You can play as casually or as hardcore as you like. If you fail epically, you still get XP points that can unlock loot creates. Such co-op games may not have the immersive world trappings of an MMO but they offer all the fun without the grind. No wonder so many players gravitate towards them.
I enjoy MMOs but play them differently today than how I did ten years ago. I have written recently about how Sniper Elite 4, For Honor and Overwatch can be great fun when played co-operatively with friends and for me I think this is the future. Co-op scratches that social gaming itch but in a manner that allows you to filter out much of the less desirable elements you find in MMOs. The risk of toxic team mates is far less and you aren’t faced with complex barriers to entry. There’s no need to wait for players to change their gear or empty their bags. Where the MMO player is still martialling his team mates, fifteen minutes after the raid was due to begin, the co-op player is knee deep in action, making the most of their precious game time.
If you look back over the last fifty years of popular culture, you’ll find a long list of popular genres, formats and mediums that have bitten the dust. It is sad but ultimately how markets work. Musicals and Westerns came and went as the most popular movie genres. TV saw the rise and fall of the Variety show. The FPS genre moved beyond the confines of World War II and MMOs evolved from open virtual worlds to tightly scripted and managed theme parks. All of these things happened because the public wanted something else that offered them better value for their time and money. At present, co-op games appear to be king by offering what the MMO genre either can’t or won’t. Developers working with such titles should take note but I’m not sure if there’s time left to fix this.