ubisoft discussions

Quick Suggestions

  • Agent_Ares
    Original poster 152 posts

    One system that may help Breakpoint a lot is the - Operational Loadout system from MGS Phantom Pain.
    When deploying on missions you had to actually "Pay" for your gear.

    While it would be impossible for a 1:1 Recreation with the game is designed - using that idea to deal with the excess money and materials would go a long way.
    Such as Armor Weapon and Silencer Durability. Limited Equipment Capacity through UI changes ( Would require most work )

    You take bigger gear - you gain more protection and or more carrying capacity but your sneak detection gets worse and move slower and tire easier.
    You take lighter gear - you lose armor and or capacity but you are harder to detect and move signficantly faster with less durability loss.

    This also will determine how you deploy on missions with vehicles or through foot.
    Where each "base" has some sort of functional objective whether it be Intel - Supplies or Equipment or Hostages which can used as rewards to further mission progression.

    So you are constantly spending money - on gear and having loadouts for each operation you pick up from Town or Rebels.

  • Contrary to popular belief, Lorem Ipsum is not simply random text. It has roots in a piece of classical Latin literature from 45 BC, making it over 2000 years old. Richard McClintock, a Latin professor at Hampden-Sydney College in Virginia, looked up one of the more obscure Latin words, consectetur, from a Lorem Ipsum passage, and going through the cites of the word in classical literature, discovered the undoubtable source. Lorem Ipsum comes from sections 1.10.32 and 1.10.33 of "de Finibus Bonorum et Malorum" (The Extremes of Good and Evil) by Cicero, written in 45 BC. This book is a treatise on the theory of ethics, very popular during the Renaissance. The first line of Lorem Ipsum, "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet..", comes from a line in section 1.10.32.

    Contrary to popular belief, Lorem Ipsum is not simply random text. It has roots in a piece of classical Latin literature from 45 BC, making it over 2000 years old. Richard McClintock, a Latin professor at Hampden-Sydney College in Virginia, looked up one of the more obscure Latin words, consectetur, from a Lorem Ipsum passage, and going through the cites of the word in classical literature, discovered the undoubtable source. Lorem Ipsum comes from sections 1.10.32 and 1.10.33 of "de Finibus Bonorum et Malorum" (The Extremes of Good and Evil) by Cicero, written in 45 BC. This book is a treatise on the theory of ethics, very popular during the Renaissance. The first line of Lorem Ipsum, "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet..", comes from a line in section 1.10.32.

    Contrary to popular belief, Lorem Ipsum is not simply random text. It has roots in a piece of classical Latin literature from 45 BC, making it over 2000 years old. Richard McClintock, a Latin professor at Hampden-Sydney College in Virginia, looked up one of the more obscure Latin words, consectetur, from a Lorem Ipsum passage, and going through the cites of the word in classical literature, discovered the undoubtable source. Lorem Ipsum comes from sections 1.10.32 and 1.10.33 of "de Finibus Bonorum et Malorum" (The Extremes of Good and Evil) by Cicero, written in 45 BC. This book is a treatise on the theory of ethics, very popular during the Renaissance. The first line of Lorem Ipsum, "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet..", comes from a line in section 1.10.32.

  • Jagglenutts
    14 posts

    @agent_ares

    While I like the idea of gear affecting your stats like damage resistance, stamina, speed, capacity, stealthiness etc. I really dislike the idea of a loadout cost and having to "pay" for your equipment. Regarding MGSV, Konami really got carried away with the deployment costs on the higher level gear they added post-launch IMO as it was intended to be a grindy time-sink for PVP FOB infiltrations. As someone who really only played MGSV for the singleplayer mode, I didn't enjoy having to factor deployment costs into my choice of loadout or avoid using weapons or items I liked because the deployment cost was too high. Having your loadout affect your stats in various ways should provide enough balance without having to introduce a monetary penalty as well.

    Suppressors degrading over time was another design feature of MGSV that I never really liked. Having them reduce the damage and range of your weapon is a better tradeoff for the noise reduction IMO (I just imagine I'm using subsonic ammunition in my suppressed weapons).

    In short, loadouts and gear affecting stats is a great idea, each base having some sort of objective or viable intel which can then lead to something (a reward, another mission, whatever) is a great idea. But I would be strongly opposed to anything that adds a layer of micro-management or resource grind to the game.

  • ClemsonDriver
    24 posts

    My vote is "no" for paying for gear and loadouts...

  • Flanker1Six
    228 posts

    Not only NO! But **** NO!

  • Agent_Ares
    Original poster 152 posts

    @jagglenutts
    They did Suppressor Durability - so you just didn't just run around shooting everyone.
    It made you conserve your durability to only hit critical targets or risk calling in a supply drop.
    Decreasing weapon damage wouldn't have helped a lot you still would go rapidly shoot and knock out targets

    Farcry 5 - 6 and that problem where the game became insanely easy because of that.

    As for Loadout Cost in MGSV you generally made a ton of money based on your performance and diamond locations you can find from interrogations.
    I think one of the starting side quests alone I made nearly 100,000 just from Diamonds

    A breakpoint can easily manage Support costs by Letting you raid Military bases for Equipment like Armor to swap out durability.
    Games generally need a Money Trap - or one of the most common issues most games faces is players end up having infinite cash with nothing to spend it on.

  • Church367A
    147 posts

    @agent_ares For the time period, the use of a suppressor with wipes instead of baffles makes more sense for the technology commonly used in MGSV and wipes would degrade with each shot fired. That makes absolutely no sense in the case of a modern day or near future setting because baffles are now used more so than wipes and are not going to degrade for quite some time. The issue is not that a suppressor has unlimited durability, the issue is that the sound reduction has no variability to it like it did in Wildlands. The reduced damage again is a garbage stereotypical game logic method that needs to go away. Instead it should revolve around how much sound reduction a given suppressor gives versus the amount of degradation to handling. I want authenticity, not ridiculous game logic rules or game balancing decisions that go against reality.

    As for loadout cost, that is a definitive no.

    When it comes to gear, again, I want authenticity based on reality and not game logic rules and ridiculous game balancing decisions to drive players towards grinding hours on end for some ridiculous currency or material. I don't want RPG mechanics to infest what is supposed to be a squad based tactical shooter. Get rid of this notion that a tier one soldier must scavenge and build up currency to have what should be a simple available choice from the start.

  • Agent_Ares
    Original poster 152 posts

    @church367a Logic dictates a 1 man person can't take out an entire island filled with guys equally skilled lore wise ( wolves ) and giant robots using exact same weapons as them.
    So we can throw "Logic" out the window.

    This means Game balance there needs to be some sort of trade-off.

    Phantom pain did tradeoffs wonderfully.
    Not only did the game world evolve with tougher enemies being introduced as you progressed through storyline.
    Your army ( Mother Base ) improved as you gathered more specialists allowing you to research better fire arms and increase their effectiveness.

    All that world evolution and player evolution doesn't exist in WL or BP.
    Difficulty is questionable since you can 1 shot most things in the game pretty easily.
    There really is no sense of progression.

    To top it off BP has one of the worst written stories and cinematic direction of any AAA game.
    They tried to make it "Somber" and "Emotional" it came off as just bad since you didn't care about any of the characters so what's the point of trying to put some sad moment into it?
    In Mass Effect Mordin was just a side character - with his little catchphrase. When his final mission came up people were devastated - trying to find an alternative solution.
    That is how you build up an emotional storyline - something whoever did this game has no idea about.

    So it desperately needs good gameplay hooks and challenges that force players to change up gameplay style even if it is by artificial limitations.

  • Megalodon-26
    272 posts

    @agent_ares I enjoyed Phantom Pain, but it's far from what would consider a "logical" game. What is logical about stealing supplies and getting rid of bodies by attaching a balloon the disappears through a portal? Or recruiting soldiers by knocking them out, and then kidnapping them? Don't get me started on the whole hiding under a cardboard box schtick. And it also has giant robot that you have to fight, except it's large enough to step on the Behemoths

  • jmagnum50
    136 posts

    @agent_ares Game balancing doesn't really bother me, I don't think. I get that some things in games (especially the GR games) are going to be built in a way to bring things like challenge to them. About authenticity, it doesn't really bother me that nothing in the series will be entirely true to life, for example the AT4 in the first game.

    One thing I will say is that with the whole buying your loadout thing, I've never played MGSV but I will say that maybe it's best to make this whole buying our gear thing (like how BP does it) a one-off thing. I feel like setting up a loadout (at least in a future title) should be something you can manually do, like in previous TC games. Choose which weapon you take, what kind of miscellaneous equipment (grenades, sensors, etc.), whatever fits you best then roll out. As in the previous games before WL, you can't carry everything with you, but you take only what you think works best. If buying anything should be considered, let it be like Endwar or Splinter Cell: Blacklist, where you could earn money after a job well done (think of it as tax payer dollars) then purchase new equipment. Kinda like a means of progression. Think that might be something to consider?

  • jmagnum50
    136 posts

    @bigrexxx Don't forget, in the age of modern day spec ops and whatnot, cyborg swordsmen are a thing. Especially if one of them breakdances with giant robots tied to his legs, and can fight off commandos with his sword clutched with his teeth (Death Battle reminded me of this).

  • Church367A
    147 posts

    @agent_ares So instead of addressing another failed idea (the removal of an actual squad along with meaningful commands), we should just buy into the garbage game logic full sale? I don't think so. While I like MGSV and think quite a few things that it does could work great in a Ghost Recon game, the loadout cost, suppressor durability, and progression systems of same firearm bigger numbers are not among those things. Progression systems in general should not be in a grounded squad based tactical shooter. Lethality should be high for outgoing and incoming damage. A bullet piercing a human skull regardless of pistol or rifle caliber should be lethal. I'm not interested in placing more ideas along rpg progression games that helped Breakpoint be the spectacular failure into the next Ghost Recon. Why double down on failure?

    At least we can agree on Breakpoint having a terrible story, but I can't say I'm surprised seeing as its somewhat of a repetitive knockoff "this time its personal" garbage from R6 Vegas 2. I find it difficult to care for any of the characters in the game seeing as your teammates have no real personality and if they die oh well, respawn in a few minutes. Or if they don't quite make it to the helicopter, oh well, they'll respawn on an available seat in a matter of seconds. The entire idea of loss in regards to friendly personnel or even equipment (recon drone) is nonexistent. However, when it comes to Ghost Recon, I'm not really into it for story. Not a single Ghost Recon game I've ever played has had what I would consider a compelling story or characters. And I'm good with that, because I want Ghost Recon to be a good squad based tactical shooter that I can play co-op with up to 12 or 16 others in challenging missions and a decent variety of pvp modes such as what GR2 and GR2 Summit Strike provided.

  • ArgimonEd
    176 posts

    I find funny how some in the forums use mechanics that the community is adamant to see removed as an excuse to push more mechanics like the ones we are adamant to see removed.
    And I'm not talking about the deployment cost.
    As I suggested something like buying gear from CIA safehouses in future games
    But got shutdown really quickly.
    I mean the suppressor idea

Suggested Topics