New Ghost Recon Causes Actual Diplomatic Incident

Ghost Recon Wildlands is, for most of us, a video game. For the governments of France (home to publishers Ubisoft) and Bolivia, though, it's now a cause of national beef.

Wildlands, which is set in a fictional version of Bolivia where the country is controlled by Mexican drug cartels, has upset the South American country's government so much that it has "filed a formal complaint with the French embassy" over its depiction in the game.

Reuters reports that Carlos Romero, Bolivia's interior minister, has "asked that the French government intervene, adding that Bolivia reserved the right to take legal action."

"We have the standing to do it (take legal action), but at first we prefer to go the route of diplomatic negotiation," he told reporters.

Ubisoft, in their defence, say that the fictional video game is indeed a work of fiction, issuing a statement to Reuters that says "While the game's premise imagines a different reality than the one that exists in Bolivia today, we do hope that the in-game world comes close to representing the country's beautiful topography."

Nobody tell them about Scarface.


Comments

    So, Bolivia doesn't want our help then?

    I'm not sure what it is that they expect the French government to do about it? It's not like they're the ones making the game.

    Also a bit odd that they'd wait until now to make an issue of it - the setting and premise of this game have been public knowledge for a while now, haven't they?

      So has this too actually, just getting some coverage here now

    Sounds like someone's Jimmies have been thoroughly rustled.

      Just like north Korea over their depiction in die another day.

      Although to be fair, I wouldn't want to be associated with that garbage fire of a film either.

    How cute ... Bolivia thinking that it has any diplomatic or foreign policy weight in the world ...

      You'll be laughing on the other side of your face next time you want an alpaca-wool garment.

    If the depiction is meant to be fictional, why set the game in Bolivia at all? Why not just set the game in some made-up South American country, like the Far Cry series?

    Ubisoft wanted it both ways, having the cred and notoriety of setting it in an actual 'drug-ridden' country, but change it just enough to prevent being sued. Is any one really surprised Bolivia objects to be known as a crime-filled hellhole?

      Why set the game in Bolivia at all? ... I think the more important question is, why(tf) not? They're complaining about a fictional computer game ffs.

      I am surprised.

      When you have a Wikipedia page dedicated to narcotics in Bolivia ... it's not really difficult to understand why a games studio might ... just might ... set their game about narco terrorism within it's borders.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcotics_in_Bolivia

      Bolivia needs a Captain Obvious.

    I understand there were some beta weekends for this game, did anyone who played those find the game any good? I have an open world itch that needs scratching but I somehow managed to ignore this game completely until now.

      I've read a lot of bad things but I loved it, I'm stuck in that shitty stage of not wanting to play another game because it isnt wildlands. It also has me planning a trip to bolivia. The one cravate is I have a weird taste in games, I hated the last of us, but mad max, arkham knight, mgs v and the technomancer were some of the best games i played last year

      I played a fair bit of the Open Beta, and it's okay.

      The world is vast and very nicely rendered, but a bit empty. Basic gameplay is alright, but is let down by poor AI and somewhat janky animations. Not to mention atrocious vehicle handling. I'm also unsure of what the missions will be like in the full game, but the two in the open beta were very samey.

      That being said, it's pretty fun to play with friends - regardless of whether you choose to play "properly" (i.e. syncing shots, remaining undetected) or just wreak havoc by planting C4 on helicopters and the like.

      Don't think of it like a normal Ghost Recon game. It's a more tacticool Tom Clancy's GTA V Online, mixed with a bit of Far Cry and The Division.

      I'll probably still get it, but I dig the setting and the tacticool barbie customisation, plus I have friends who will also be playing it regularly.

      Your mileage may vary, and in particular if you plan to play solo, it can be pretty "meh".

        Solo was what I had in mind. I might wait to see how release reviews go.

        Other people suck. I'm a solo player all the way.

        I'll pick it up when it inevitably goes on sale a month after launch.

          Depends who you play with I guess, the dudes I party up with are ones I've played RB6: Siege, every Battlefield since 3, Squad, Insurgency, GTA Online etc with. So we're generally alright.

          As much as I find the solo play a bit ehhhh in this, I'd agree with you that I'd probably rather do that than use the random matchmaking built into the game.

      I played it a bit, seemed alright. Of note from my time with it - don't get it if your system isn't up to spec, the graphics look pretty dated on the lower settings. Also don't draw any comparisons between this and the division, they are very different games, especially the damage model (more realistic in ghost recon cf. bullet sponges in the division)

        I have a GTX1080 so I assume my system can probably handle the higher settings. Also I've never played the Division so that shouldn't be a problem. How is it in terms of in-game activities though, are we talking Just Cause/Far Cry style, or something more sparse and tedious?

        Last edited 03/03/17 2:42 pm

          Yeah it'll look great on a 1080. I'm not really sure how much main/side content will be in the main game, there was only a couple of missions to go by and no non-mission content that I could find. It did feel a bit more sparse to me than farcry 4, but on the plus side the missions seemed to be more story driven/one-off as opposed to the 'attack north compound/attack east compound' kind of thing. Felt just a bit underwhelming overall tbh, but I didn't spend heaps of time with it either.

      There are 21 unique zones, sprawling across 9 unique biomes. Each zone is nearly 1/4 the size of the map in GTA V - the entire map of GRW equaling out to a little under 5x the size of GTA V. Hope this helps you decide. Definitely worth it just based on size of map

        Thanks. I suppose the other factor beyond just size is whether the world is well populated. GTA5 may have a smaller map but it's pretty densely packed with detail. Just Cause 3 is more sparse but still does a decent job of feeling populated.

    The closed beta wasn't optimised at all. Was getting terrible FPS on my 980ti. Controls felt a bit janky and outdated on PC.

Join the discussion!