Ubisoft Postpones Closed Beta For Ghost Recon Frontline, The Game Nobody Asked For

Ubisoft Postpones Closed Beta For Ghost Recon Frontline, The Game Nobody Asked For
Image: Ubisoft

It’s only been a matter of days since Ubisoft announced a new Ghost Recon game, Frontline, but public reception to its reveal has seemingly been strong enough to have already had an effect on the game’s planned closed beta testing.

Earlier today, the game’s official Twitter account posted a message saying “we have decided it is best to postpone the closed test for Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon Frontline”.

“The development team is dedicated to creating the best experience possible”, it adds. “We’ll share details on the new date for the Closed Test as soon as we can”.

“Thank you for your support”.

Reaction to Frontline’s reveal has been poor, and that’s me being kind. The battle royale game has almost nothing in common with the series’ legacy, and fans, fed up with not just Ubisoft’s recent history with Ghost Recon but with the publisher’s current creative rut in general, downvoted its first trailer to oblivion.

Even under this apologetic tweet, fans are leaving messages like:

How about cancel the battle royale and make a real Ghost Recon game? The fanbase gave the feedback to improve Breakpoint, you guys showed a glimpse that were trying to improve the game, and now we are on the total opposite direction.

…this game flies in the face of us GR fans. Since Breakpoint we the fans have been hammering Ubi with feedback on what makes a GR game and how to fix BP. This comes off as tone deaf.

Guys you have a plethora of past Ghost Recon games to use. You continuously say that you’re “listening to the community” Then LISTEN to your community. We want you to go back to your tactical roots. Back to the thing that made Ghost Recon a fantastic series in the first place

Now, angry fans of a video game series are nothing new, and I’m not here to start airing every grievance every fan has with a franchise’s direction. But in this case, I feel for these guys! I used to love Ghost Recon, but the further Ubisoft have moved away from what made the earlier games so much fun, the less interest I’ve had in it, and the less relevance there surely is in using the brand name for games that have nothing to do with what the public’s perception of them are.

Plus you’ve got to wonder just what a postponement can do here to appease anyone. People’s issue with the game are fundamental, so it’s not like tweaks to the battle royale formula are going to change fan’s minds when their main problem is…that the game’s showpiece mode is a battle royale game.

Comments

  • Postpone it forever and use the resources to make an actual Tom Clancy game instead. Stop fucking around Ubisoft

  • Breakpoint has a content update in mid November, postponment gives them breathing room.

    Make Breakpoint players happy so there are less angry fans coming into the battleroyal beta.

  • The big issue is how much they are promoting their value for community feedback, and than claiming frontline was developed with that feedback in mind. If you go checkout their own community forum you can easily see that the community has been largely vocally United against any addition of a battle royal for years, and that the general expectation of a ghost recon game is a mature tactical shooter that takes itself seriously.

    To add insult to injury the community and Delta members (Ubisoft’s ghost recon ambassador group) organised a large format charter to be printed at their own cost after the original controversies with Breakpoint. The Charter outlined the uniformed expectations of the series based on community discussion, and it was sent to Ubisoft Paris where it was hung and displayed proudly by the Dev team… The management team responsible for Frontline are super tone deaf to the years of unified community feedback. What a waste of time, money, a great IP and a deceased authors legacy.

  • Gamers: Ubisoft never change their games.
    Ubsoft: (mixes up the formula of a series)
    Gamers: Ewww not like that.

    • Tell me you dont understand what people are asking for without telling me you dont understand what people are asking for.

      People want a proper Tom Clancy game like the older ones. Not a shallow cash grab. Youd know that if you actually paid attention to things like reddit or social media, But then again you are deathly afraid of reddit.

  • Ubisoft wants its own Fortnite, and it knows it can’t do it with a new IP, so someone has to draw the short straw and lose their franchise’s next title to the format.
    Looks like Ghost Recon drew the short straw, but they’re possibly realizing it’s not going to give them the outcome they want, which is to draw in fans of the IP to the new title.

    Given the way that Ghost Recon has been developed for the last few years, I also imagine it’s what many of the devs in that studio are secretly keen to work on, and are frustrated at the fact that they’re ‘held back’ in ‘boringly serious tactical shooter’ class by their players’ expectations thanks to the franchise’s historical baggage… instead of being free to go wild with all the loot crates, skins, gear rarity systems and multiverse cross-overs they clearly would rather have been working on.

    • Even sillier is their Tom Clancy stuff is the least appropriate out of all their franchises to make a Fortnite knockoff – this was only ever going to be a copy of a copy of a copy by way of Call of Duty. Meanwhile…

      Assassins Creed:
      – literally has an assortment of cross-cultural murderers trapped inside simulations with clear boundaries.
      – has worked with compelling and distinctive PvP mechanics involving leveraging the environment for either stealth or APEX-style mobility.

      Far Cry:
      – stories about colourful island murder parties
      – has dabbled with goofier spinoff concepts like Blood Dragon

      Even Watch Dogs could have tried to do something nifty with NPC support in a BR game, but what would any of their generic military stuff bring that hasn’t already been done well enough elsewhere?

      Heck if they really wanted to chase the kid-friendly Fortnite bandwagon why couldn’t they try to reboot any of the stuff that worked in Rayman M? Or go all in with a large scale Rabbids battle and a bazillion microtransactioned costume options from their IP backlog?

      This is like if EA decided that, instead of Need for Speed, Burnout, or anything inherited from Codemasters, they wanted to make a racing game based off either FIFA or Dead Space. Facepalms all around.

    • Well the ‘boringly serious tactical shooter’ already has a precedent of having cross over events, and I think it might be the only one of their IP to do so beyond cosmetic skins.

      Sam Fisher for one, which is sort of an easy one given Splinter Cell is both Ubisoft and Tom Clancy, but Breakpoint has also had Terminator and Predator crossover events/missions.

      That combined with the nature of the game itself, it’s really just the most obvious choice to go the BR route to begin with… And I say this even while knowing The Division actually had a BR-type gamemode at one point that really wasn’t half bad.

      • The predator and terminator stuff is partly what I was pointing at when I said they want to be in the silly Fortnite crossover/lootbox/gear-rarity/outrageous cosmetics business, not the Ghost Recon business.

  • Tone deaf indeed. I can’t understand the logic of having this announcement on the same video that explained how much Ubisoft is listening to what the players want out of Ghost Recon, Breakpoint. They explained players didn’t like the drones, preferred stealth approaches and enjoyed the realism modes. Then they do a complete 180 and announce this ridiculous Battle Royale.

    Not to mention there’s already be this “X Defiant” thing coming out if they really want to cater for that crowd, this ain’t it.

    Cancel it, call it a lesson learnt and bring back the Ghost Recon from back in the day.

Show more comments

Log in to comment on this story!