Ghost Recon Wildlands trailer shows AI teamwork

My favourite part of Far Cry 4, a game I liked very much, was its co-operative mode in which you and a friend could take on the outposts and forts of the open world. I am therefore excited for Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon Wildlands [official site], which seems to be entirely about tackling larger fort-like compounds in Bolivia in up to four-player co-op. There’s a new walkthrough video below of the game being played solo, with AI teammates you can order about like I do with Adam.

This is the first Ghost Recon game to take place in a fully open world, which conjures fears in some people about the tactical series becoming just another example of the UbiGame. There are no capturable towers here though. Instead Ubisoft are talking more about creating a reactive world, where assaulting one village might prompt enemies to strike back somewhere else, and where you can change the relationships enemy factions happen with each other and you through which actions you decide to take.

That’s all pretty vague, and exactly the kind of claims which turn out to be flimsy when seen in action, but I like what’s present in the trailer above. Far Cry is an obvious point of comparison, but open world stealth also puts me in mind of Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain. There’s plenty of stealthing, as the player works those glutes by crouch-walking around town, tagging enemies with binoculars and a pilotable drone, and shooting a few of them through floorboards. I’m even interested in the briefly-shown weapon customisation, just for the seemingly absurd number of options. The potential for UbiGame conjures fear in some people, but not me; the idea of sinking into some new, meaty sandbox sounds appealing right now.

Wildlands is due for release about six weeks from now, on March 7, 2017.


  1. crummy says:

    am I hearing that line right? “Thanks to you, Los Santero’s world has been fucked raw.”

    • JB says:

      That’s what it sounded like to me too, yes.

      • DuncUK says:

        I heard that too. WTF.

        The article got me interested in this game, but boy did that video undo all that. Besides the quote above, the mission they decide to highlight to prove that this is a serious open world tactical shooter is one where you shoot your way into a church in order to steal a bible. Uh, OK.

    • P.Funk says:

      And the way it was said was pretty out of sync with the language, so much so that it made me think of when you were kids and you got the business like voice software to say swear words.

      I can only imagine what the voice actor was thinking. I guess they really just have 19 year olds writing these games today.

  2. Premium User Badge

    duquessheep says:

    Ubisoft UK’s upload is region locked. I’m assuming this is the freedom version of the same trailer?

  3. Jerkzilla says:

    The spirit of Ghost Recon died around the time of GRAW. I think they’ve just been trying to reimagine the thing ever since, for whatever reason. Probably for a wider audience, if I’m to be elitist about it.

    The open world thing is nice but what I can’t stand is the third person-ness of it. It’s still not as cerebral or visceral as the fist GR, or GRAW for that matter, and they evidently don’t want it to be.

    • fish99 says:

      The GRAW games on PC were pretty solid though.

    • nearly says:

      It struck me while watching this that they could have released it as Tom Clancy’s The Division: Wildlands or even just a new franchise entirely called Tom Clancy’s Wildlands. I guess they’re confident that Ghost Recon brand recognition is both a thing and significant enough to translate to better sales.

      Alternately, they already have the rights to it and there’s no reason not to use it (and/or maybe they have to keep creating games in certain franchises to retain rights, though I doubt that’s the case since wasn’t Ghost Recon an original Clancy game series before they tried to do some novel tie-ins). I’d think that the massive success of The Division as a new property (even as a Tom Clancy’s, for whatever reason) would encourage them that they don’t need to keep trying to re-invent the classics, but I guess this was probably announced / named before the bet on The Division paid off.

      All in all, I think the people that care the most are the ones who want a classic Ghost Recon and aren’t going to be interested in this regardless. The ones who are interested probably don’t care particularly that it’s called Ghost Recon.

      I imagine I’ll enjoy this, like The Division, but be personally a bit put-off by the politics whenever I let myself think about the casual imperialism or the jingoism and implicit fascism (like The Division).

      • CMaster says:

        Or maybe they’re after the people who recognise the name from Future Soldier and Phantoms, which are much more recent and much more arcadey any way.

        Or who knows, its Ubisoft. Their logic doesn’t work for mere mortals anyway.

    • Legion1183 says:

      I came here to same pretty much exactly this, so +1

  4. AyeBraine says:

    Deaf, blind and dumb enemy soldiers: yes
    Hollywood silencers: yes
    Magic holographic markers: yes
    Human arsenal: yes
    Console aiming and looking concessions: yes

    • Augh_lord says:

      There goes my hope for a Ghost Recon/SWAT 4/Rainbow 6/ game in this era graphics without the silliness of the FPS console gaming trends..

      Arma3 kind of supplies that, if it wasn’t for the outdated team management system (same as Flashpoint ’01) or the inconsistent AI.
      And mods prove it’s not a technical limitation, proper AI can be coded.

  5. Legion1183 says:

    While not really related, I just want another old-school Rainbox Six :( I hate these third-person games with spongey enemies.

    Oh well, I guess others will enjoy this, but from the looks of it I’ll be giving it a miss.