Ghost Recon: Breakpoint Reveal

Sooo, this seems pretty lefty to me? Which is a shocking statement to make about a Ghost Recon game…

Of course it has the super jingoistic MY BROTHER SOLIDER BROTHER, but the premise is that you’re sent into this weirdo biodiversity island to stop a mega-corporation from affecting U.S. politics through drone assassinations.

The issue is that Ubisoft has ALREADY shot themselves in the foot again:


Also, the robot stuff makes me think this is gonna be SUPER Metal Gear.


Ubisoft, you guys know you can just you know, not say anything. I can only assume at this point they are boldly riding the “not political!” As a controversy advertising thing.

As for Breakpoint itself, idk it looks like more Wildlands. Which always looked pretty mediocre from a gameplay perspective. Environments still look neat. And at least they’ve ditched the whole “mericans going into south America to shoot people and save the day” which is profoundly uncomfortable. It’s still going to be jingoistic, tacticool bullshit, but at the very least shooting other American soldiers is probably about as progressive as you can get with the entire ghost recon premise.


I honestly think Ubisoft is the most politically-themed games studio in the market right now, except they are usually bad politics, and they don’t seem to realize they do it with every fucking game.

Shit, even Assassin’s Creed is about a secret war between the powerful elite and the underclass.

And yeah, I’m glad it’s not, ‘overthrow this nation’ this time around.


Also, I looked up the writer of this game who was talking it up in the beginning and I think this guy might be Barry:

It continually boggles my mind that games like AC Origins and Odyssey come out of the same company as Far Cry and Ghost Recon and The Division.


and Watch Dogs 2, most bafflingly of all.

i really hope they don’t try to pull this shit with 3. 2 was so refreshing by contrast with, uh, all the rest of the ubisoft everything, even if it was still far from perfect. plus, the london setting is just so ripe for a story that actually engages with its themes and politics, instead of aggressively shrugging through them.


ubisoft has to know that pulling the “this isn’t political” card is literally just courting fascists, right? they can’t be that terrible at pr, right?


I mean corporations don’t care. They just probably saw that it got their game in the news cycle for a while, and want to do that again. Far right, fascist, whatever, they all buy product regardless. That’s probably the start and endpoint of any company tbh.

Sorry, but I can’t help imagining how far that marketing strategy could go. “Ubisoft Insists That Despite Controversial Themes, Upcoming ‘Rabbids’ Game Is Not Intended As Political Statement”


At the very least it seems everyone just caught on that this seems to be a very cynical marketing gimmick right away. Everyone I see is just like “oh they are doing this again, lol fuck off”. They probably should have introduced it more organically rather than like 30 minutes after announcing going “o btw no politics WINK WINK”

its going to be a bad video game hope this helps


Thank you for keeping us humble, hideokojima

1 Like

before anyone says “you havent even played it yet” yes i did my uncle works for ubisoft


We are talking about the same Watch Dogs 2 that opens with the characters acting shocked that Marcus has a gun license to then fast forward 15 minutes where they’re talking about their hackerspace having a 3d printer for printing guns right?

The same game where no one seems to care that Marcus/player just gunned down 4 civilians, stole a car, and then for funsises hacked a stop light to cause a fatal accident.

Fun game but honestly insulting to the hacker/maker culture.

hey, austin said it better than i could:

like, i get that the ludo-narrative dissonance of the ‘chaotic’ open world gameplay, and the fact that marcus can - tho doesn’t have to - just gun down people if you wanna play that way, is a real problem in how it clashes with the story they’re trying to tell, and who Dedsec are supposed to be as people. BUT, if you’re willing to engage with the game on its terms, it genuinely does have meaningful things to say about some of the ideas and themes it engages with, which is a lot more than can be said of most ubisoft games, or big budget open world action games in general for that matter.

i never said watch dogs 2 was perfect, by any means, but i was really pleasantly surprised by my time with it, and i’m genuinely excited for 3–which is a big step up from actively disliking the franchise, and its iconic hat, previously.


Part of which is this very strange flip of important characters being worried that Marcus might have a gun to them literally talking about using their 3d printers to make guns.

There’s an entire skill tree devoted to social engineering gangs and police to come kill people for you.

These are things that didn’t need to be in the game at all. You can get through the game without using a gun so why even offer them when narratively it makes 0 sense. Instead of social engineering the gang to come attack why not social engineer the target to leave.

There are parts of the plot that are good but a lot of it is this really dumb Hollywood romanticized version of hacker culture that feels gross and gameplay being added because Ubisoft has no faith people would engage with the game if you couldn’t just murder people.

I’m not really contesting any* of these points? I hope the next Watch Dogs moves further away from the obligatory guns and violence, as the various leaks have hinted it might. The guns, and the more violent hacking skills, felt genuinely out of place in Watch Dogs 2, to the point where you kinda got the impression they only included them because, well, as you say, it’s simply what was expected from this sort of game.

The hope is that, after seeing how people responded to Watch Dogs 2 - specifically asking for more non-lethal options, amongst other things - Ubisoft will realise that the series doesn’t need that GTA-aping crutch to work. It’s a testament to Watch Dogs 2’s strengths as a story - the affection people felt for its characters, and the investment they had their cause and ethos - that people came out of it asking for the mechanics to change to better reflect it.

*I do contest the idea that the Hollywood romanticised hacker culture stuff is all bad, but that’s 'cause I kinda came to the game hoping for a more contemporary Hackers. Which, to an extent at least, it is.


I enjoyed Wildlands, the basic game play loop of taking out outposts with your squad was a good time and any game with open world sniping interests me. However I don’t really enjoy fighting drones. They were super annoying in the Just Cause games and will probably be just as annoying in this one. We shall see I guess.

The gameplay of Wildlands was fun even if it did get repetitive pretty fast. It’s everything (pretty much literally everything) else about the game that I had trouble with.

I have a lot of problems with Ubisoft games both politically and game design wise. That said, they’re basically the video game equivalent of comfort food for me. So I’ll probably play this at some point.