Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Future Soldier

 PC
User Score
5.2

Mixed or average reviews- based on 409 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 117 out of 409
  2. Mixed: 140 out of 409
  3. Negative: 152 out of 409
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. Chowjust
    Dec 4, 2022
    3
    I remember enjoying this game when I was a kid, but Nostalgia can be a cruel mistress. The game really didn't age well. For a 2012 game the graphics can be alright at times, then also horrible but the sound was the worst. At times there is even just no audio where they obviously should be. Wouldn't buy it even on sale.
  2. The_D4RknesS
    Aug 8, 2022
    0
    Unlike 2, this one is beautiful, good animations and easy gameplay BUT the PC port is crap, this game's design is very bad even on a strong PC, there are heavier games that run on Maximum and this one is between low and medium I HIGHLY RECOMMEND PLAYING ON XBOX, YOUR EXPERIENCE WILL BE BETTER EVEN TO THIS DAY
  3. YessirKilla
    Apr 16, 2015
    2
    They released a broken, unfinished port for the people that play on the PC instead of consoles. Same problems that the console ports got, but this is buggy-as-hell. Don't buy this worthless garbage. Just don't. Only thang that keeps me from ratin' this lower is that the guns are kinda nice, Other than that, everything else is junk. Don't bother buying this. Ever.
  4. PcGamer1990
    May 26, 2014
    0
    My eyes hurted with this game...Really my pc specs were like double up from the recommended but yet the game ran at very low fps..Even on low settings..And the colours were so foggy...I dontk now but i couldnt play this game more than 2 minutes...And i had to return everytime to main menu to change the settings and reenter campaign then wait for the campaign story to end to recheck myMy eyes hurted with this game...Really my pc specs were like double up from the recommended but yet the game ran at very low fps..Even on low settings..And the colours were so foggy...I dontk now but i couldnt play this game more than 2 minutes...And i had to return everytime to main menu to change the settings and reenter campaign then wait for the campaign story to end to recheck my settings...Just the worst optimizing...I wont comment on gameplay since i couldnt play the game...This game's settings make it unplayable...… Expand
  5. VRH
    Mar 4, 2014
    0
    Horrible P2W...awesome game but P2W kills all the fun. Fanboys can talk about learning curve as much as they want but the fact is you don't need much skill when 2-3 headshots with sniper don't kill you...too bad
  6. khyoshi
    Jan 4, 2014
    0
    I have always loved the Ghost Recon Series.
    but...
    My first dissapointment was that it was a third person gameplay. Had I known this before I had the chance to buy it I would have refrained from doing so. I simply hate third person gameplay (it makes it all so much more arcade-ish) When I then tried to play it, my mouse was simply not accepted by the game. Simply put, I could    I have always loved the Ghost Recon Series.
    but...

    My first dissapointment was that it was a third person gameplay.
    Had I known this before I had the chance to buy it I would have refrained from doing so.
    I simply hate third person gameplay (it makes it all so much more arcade-ish)

    When I then tried to play it, my mouse was simply not accepted by the game.
    Simply put, I could not move my aim... (this was a real bug in the game)
    Then there was the problem with graphics (screen went black. resolution was all strange)
    And if that was not enough.... The whole gui (being ported from the consoles) is just terrible.
    A PC-Game should be a PC-Game, specially one that belongs to the Ghost recon series.
    Ghost Recon is not suited for arcade style gameplay!

    My advice is stay as far away as you can from this game, buying it will maje you regret it.
    Configuration possibilities are less than poor and the game is ful of bugs, many of which you will experience even before actually getting to the first gameplay.

    The game feels stale and monotome.

    Anyway. I contacted the support about it all and they could not help me or anyone else with the same problem I was shuffled between the steam support and the game developers support)

    After a few rounds and several hours of troubleshooting I decided that I had not recieved a working product and that there was no solution available so I wanted my funds returned and the game deleted from my list.

    4 times I asked but I was refused.

    So...
    After being so dissapointed with this malware of a game I asked steam to delete it from my games list without returning my money...
    I simply do not wish to see this game in my list to remind me of my wasted money.

    I hope the developers of this game take this review to their hearts and understands that games should have warranty with refunds or quality assurances made along with the games.    … Expand
  7. SX_Predator
    Sep 23, 2013
    0
    Most boring game I've ever played. Its fun until about the first mission then its just repeating whatever you did in the first 5 minutes for the rest of the 5 hours. Story is terrible. Didn't follow it at all. Gameplay is basically just hiding in a corner until your overpowered allies do all the work. Most of the time you get raped by enemies who automatically target you the second you getMost boring game I've ever played. Its fun until about the first mission then its just repeating whatever you did in the first 5 minutes for the rest of the 5 hours. Story is terrible. Didn't follow it at all. Gameplay is basically just hiding in a corner until your overpowered allies do all the work. Most of the time you get raped by enemies who automatically target you the second you get out of cover. It also uses uPlay, which makes it even worse. You can feel them stealing money from you every time you start it from the godawful uPlay client that comes up. Id recommend this like I'd recommend you to pet a wild starving lion while wearing a zebra costume.… Expand
  8. E71
    Jun 7, 2013
    4
    The single player campaign is full of action and great gun fights but the quality of the port is a huge let down.

    Under medium-quality graphics settings and res turned down from 1920x1200 to 1280x800, it runs somewhat sluggishly on my i7-3770k/32GB DDR3/HD5850 OC 2GB... This game's not a bar-setter when it comes to graphics and yet it's disproportionately resource-demanding. Some    The single player campaign is full of action and great gun fights but the quality of the port is a huge let down.

    Under medium-quality graphics settings and res turned down from 1920x1200 to 1280x800, it runs somewhat sluggishly on my i7-3770k/32GB DDR3/HD5850 OC 2GB...

    This game's not a bar-setter when it comes to graphics and yet it's disproportionately resource-demanding.

    Some people say the multiplayer feature is where the game shines but I wouldn't know since I'm not a fan of repetitive online play.    … Expand
  9. DaKrazeeDude
    Mar 17, 2013
    1
    The game itself isn't too bad, and worth it if you can get it on sale. But for the PC, it is the poorest port I've ever seen. I pre-purchased the game and I was NEVER able to finish the campaign (it crashes) or even GO ONLINE. it's been about two years and I am STILL trying to get help from Ubisoft but they just start repeating answers at some point. The graphics are low and very demandingThe game itself isn't too bad, and worth it if you can get it on sale. But for the PC, it is the poorest port I've ever seen. I pre-purchased the game and I was NEVER able to finish the campaign (it crashes) or even GO ONLINE. it's been about two years and I am STILL trying to get help from Ubisoft but they just start repeating answers at some point. The graphics are low and very demanding and the game often crashes when in a party. Don't even think about it. With no doubt the worst purchase i've ever made. It is a shame people still buy it. I gave it 1 because it could have been nice if it wasn't for all the trouble I've been going through just trying to play it.… Expand
  10. Sneetches
    Mar 6, 2013
    4
    TL;DR The future of warfare is apparently a very generic TPS.

    This game has a lot of promise, well it did anyways. I have to wonder if the first lines out of the dev team were "we want the CoD audience", because thats what this game reeks of. I bought it on the premise that it would be a good, third-person, cover based shooter. What I got however, was an incredibly generic version of    TL;DR The future of warfare is apparently a very generic TPS.

    This game has a lot of promise, well it did anyways. I have to wonder if the first lines out of the dev team were "we want the CoD audience", because thats what this game reeks of. I bought it on the premise that it would be a good, third-person, cover based shooter. What I got however, was an incredibly generic version of CoD with cover, a very lackluster story (seriously, what a terrible ending), and broken multiplayer. There are some glaring problems; so many that i'll just list them.
    1) Gunsmith is a great idea but poorly executed, the guns aren't different at all (You could run through the game with the first 2 weapons). 2) Stealth elements are bad, enemies apparently can't see distorted looking humans walking 2 feet around them.
    3) Campaign is very much "on rails" to the point where they actually put your character into forced walking segments where you do nothing but aim. Also, the very last mission does this and it is BAD.
    4) Regarding campaign, there are no more than 2 ways you can ever approach something, you always only get one or two routes and that's it. Invisible walls are everywhere.
    5) Continuing with the terrible campaign are the "map hacks" you get the entire time, AKA sensor grenades and Magnetic vision. These wouldn't be so bad if planning for stealth wasn't so simple, because it doesn't take either to show you that you need to wipe out the 4 guys standing on the road.
    6) The game tries to hold your hand so many times its almost rage worthy. No matter what point you're at, you'll be told to "shoot those enemies, use the drone, get a sensor in there" to the point where you have to wonder if the play testers were 5 year olds.
    7) Bad graphics that stink like a bad port, along with bad menu navigation. Some buttons can't be clicked, only moved to with the arrow keys. Also, one item in the game, the "Match Trigger", is entirely useless if you play on PC. These seem like more signs of "meh, screw it, toss it in there".

    There are more problems I could list, but i'm tired of talking about wasted development. Overall, the game HAD potential, but otherwise, it all went right down the drain. Wasn't even worth the $20 I spent on it while it was discounted, i'd have been better off buying Republic Commando for $5 off an OfficeMax shelf.    … Expand
  11. azmogadlobyk
    Mar 3, 2013
    1
    i loved the old ghost recon games but this arcade shooter is really just crap. i would never have thought it could get so bad. it's a great example for what happens if games like this are designed for the console and then get a quick and dirty port to the pc.
  12. code38
    Jan 4, 2013
    0
    This is the stupidest game I've seen since the 1980's! I had more fun typing DOS commands. On PC the program is extremely ungainly and the controls are ineffective. I couldn't get past the first level even with help from tech support. Simplicity is elegance whereas this "game" is about as elegant as a crack whore. I trust all the poor reviews here, don't be fooled into buying this game!
  13. Potitoman
    Nov 28, 2012
    0
    Broken game. This is one of the worst PC to console ports I've ever had the misfortune to lay my eyes upon. The original unpatched version had the mouse aiming broken only to be patched up later. This fixed the mouse aim but the game's performance dropped to less than half! Even to the latest patch, this has not been fixed.
    Multiplayer connection issues are just impossible. Don't even    Broken game. This is one of the worst PC to console ports I've ever had the misfortune to lay my eyes upon. The original unpatched version had the mouse aiming broken only to be patched up later. This fixed the mouse aim but the game's performance dropped to less than half! Even to the latest patch, this has not been fixed.
    Multiplayer connection issues are just impossible. Don't even bother.

    I don't know what professional reviewers were smoking when they were rating this game. Trust me, listen to the people who bought it. You'll regret it.

    As a game, I guess it's okay. Some fun bits but nothing you haven't done before in a cover based shooter. This could have been something if Ubisoft had actually put some effort into this lazy, lazy port.    … Expand
  14. BigYarik
    Nov 4, 2012
    0
    Bought the game on steam for 5.49 eur. Tried it for 10 minutes but "mouse aim" failed to work. The game is a lazy-port from console and is nothing even close to former ghost recon editions. My advice is stay as far away as you can from this game, buying it will maje you regret it. Configuration possibilities are less than poor and the game is ful of bugs, many of which you will exp
  15. Ansatsu83
    Oct 24, 2012
    3
    I give this game a 3 out of 10, fair review. Tom clancy games have always been about tactical game play, this is far from it. Its an arcade style shooter on par with battlefield 3 and call of duty franchise. The multiplayer matchmaking is still broken, its been broken since launch and its still just as bad months later.

    The single player story is lackluster, the weapons do not do enough    I give this game a 3 out of 10, fair review. Tom clancy games have always been about tactical game play, this is far from it. Its an arcade style shooter on par with battlefield 3 and call of duty franchise. The multiplayer matchmaking is still broken, its been broken since launch and its still just as bad months later.

    The single player story is lackluster, the weapons do not do enough damage in multi player. I was an avid tom clancy fan, books and games, but this is just... I cant begin to describe how they screwed up tom clancy to appeal to the average gamer. No longer a highly tactical gameplay style its just... I cant say anything more than "broken."

    The support for the game is minimal, they do not listen, they do not know how to fix the code that has existed for a while. My advise, skip this game, save your money, by something better, its not even worth 10 dollars imo.    … Expand
  16. TheTaxMan
    Sep 24, 2012
    1
    I was so disappointed by this, I have played all the previous Ghost Recons and loved them all. This should not even have the Ghost Recon title, this is a pile of **** that has been rushed and aimed at simple minded children who love CoD. One of the worst games I've played in years I totally gave up after a few levels. Even if you exclude all the bugs I wouldn't rate this game higher than 4.
  17. awildseaking
    Sep 3, 2012
    0
    GRFS deserves a 0 if you are a fan of the Ghost Recon series. **** butchers yet another game. Health regeneration, snap cover, and other casual features to appeal to the Call of Duty audience abound in this game. GRFS plays more like Gears of War than Ghost Recon. It even has a **** horde mode. The multiplayer doesn't even work yet and **** proves yet again that they don't care about aGRFS deserves a 0 if you are a fan of the Ghost Recon series. **** butchers yet another game. Health regeneration, snap cover, and other casual features to appeal to the Call of Duty audience abound in this game. GRFS plays more like Gears of War than Ghost Recon. It even has a **** horde mode. The multiplayer doesn't even work yet and **** proves yet again that they don't care about a stable release. Paid reviews won't save you this time, you French ****

    They should have just called the game Future Soldier. This game has nothing in common with the Ghost Recon series. Where are the tactical maps and squad orders? Where is the magazine reload system? Why are you given unrealistic amounts of ammunition? Why do you sprint so damn fast with all that equipment on your character? Where did inventory management and weight disappear to? Why are there so many scripted events? Why is there hit confirmation? Don't even try to justify the built-in wallhacks with the "futuristic" technology. This is the perfect example of a "tactical" game. The HUD has random **** everywhere, the trailer makes the player look ultra hardcore and realistic, and all the 14 year old COD players run to their mothers and ask for $60 to buy another ****ty ecksbawcks game.

    I give Gears of Duty Future Soldier a 10/10. Ghost Recon Future Soldier does not exist yet. This must be some sick joke from ****.    … Expand
  18. HighwayUK
    Aug 29, 2012
    4
    The Recon series is getting worse on each iteratio, this is one of the clunkiest console ports I've seen in a long time, so-so graphics, tiny levels with poor mechanics, unlikely any patches can save this turkey....
  19. graeve
    Aug 25, 2012
    1
    So I had heard that the game had some performance issues prior to buying it for PC but this is unacceptable, I'm willing to accept that some games are going to run better than others but the state that this game was released in is atrocious. My PC is a relatively high end PC and can tear through the most taxing of games but when I play this piece of garbage I'm lucky to keep forty framesSo I had heard that the game had some performance issues prior to buying it for PC but this is unacceptable, I'm willing to accept that some games are going to run better than others but the state that this game was released in is atrocious. My PC is a relatively high end PC and can tear through the most taxing of games but when I play this piece of garbage I'm lucky to keep forty frames per second. I don't typically write reviews but I felt it was necessary to write this one to warn other potential buyers, when you see this game and you think "Hmm, it can't really be as bad as everyone says it is." Trust me in saying that it REALLY is THAT bad, that being said I will still recommend the console versions of the game because it's not a bad game just a terrible port to PC.… Expand
  20. Pegula
    Aug 23, 2012
    1
    Hi everyone,

    I will try not to be the hater of the game - I'll just try to objectively say what can you expect. I gave it score 1 because it does not deserve more - that one point goes for gameplay...and nothing more here is worth the trouble. Please let me explain. The game itself was released TOTALLY broken, and was patched four times and it is still not working correctly.    Hi everyone,

    I will try not to be the hater of the game - I'll just try to objectively say what can you expect.

    I gave it score 1 because it does not deserve more - that one point goes for gameplay...and nothing more here is worth the trouble.

    Please let me explain.

    The game itself was released TOTALLY broken, and was patched four times and it is still not working correctly.

    Even if they do fix major issues - the game WILL NEVER BE what they promoted to us or what you can read in official release.

    So - the Good.

    Gameplay is actually great, kinda innovative...nice gimmicks...great cover system...game story and stuff ok...nice camera...overall - this is what you would probably look in a good game and you'd call nice gaming experience.

    And there the good ends.

    The bad and the ugly.

    While gameplay is great, the implementation of it is not that good - from day one the keyboard and mouse were not working!?!?

    The HUD is all flashy...and there is no options to customize it. There are too many stuff veteran players do not need but you are condemned to play with it.

    The game will surprise you with many crashes it holds up the sleeve - video driver, yeti, audio, CTD, BSOD...you name it, you'll get it.

    Few of the issues have been addressed however in my case, if I don't underclock the video card - I get crash within 2 minutes.

    Multiplayer is not working at all or you may sometimes play but with many difficulties - so in one hour online you'll probably get only 15 minutes of gameplay. That might end up laggy or something.

    Audio - no way to customize options for speaker setup, headphones or anything!?

    No support for 16:10 screens.

    Menus are totally console oriented and there is a bug that resolution always resets so you have to manually set it before EVERY run of the game.

    I think I could go here for much, much more...but I will sum it up now and tell the MOST IMPORTANT THING!!!!

    There is NO SUPPORT WHATSOEVER - if you try to go to forums you'll only get almost automated response from forum managers "please contact support, the link is in my signature" - and support will delay your ticket until you get "please wait until we find a way to fix your issue" only to get "this ticked is closed since you did not respond within 48 hours" after you try to wait...hilarious!!

    No refunds are allowed.

    I don't know - I have never seen such a bad release and have never came up to worse support in my life.

    In my eyes - Ubisoft is dead.

    They don't even bother to admit their mistakes, they only say they are "aware" of them and are working hard to correct them.

    They also said they are working hard to improve PC experience after the release got delayed compared to consoles - did they lie? If you see the result, it's obvious.

    Someone here pushed this out only to grab few bucks - sad move.    … Expand
  21. Thingriz
    Aug 21, 2012
    1
    I hate ports but this game wasn't even a bad port. It was a boxer game that plays on a computer monitor. Not one good thing to say about it. Graphics-Controls nothing notta. Yuk......Pfffffft. I suspect this is the last we'll see of Ghost Recon on PC. Too bad but if this is the best they can give us Yay. Having said all this I should note that I uninstalled the game and have not playedI hate ports but this game wasn't even a bad port. It was a boxer game that plays on a computer monitor. Not one good thing to say about it. Graphics-Controls nothing notta. Yuk......Pfffffft. I suspect this is the last we'll see of Ghost Recon on PC. Too bad but if this is the best they can give us Yay. Having said all this I should note that I uninstalled the game and have not played since the new patch they were suppose to release. But this game is so bad no patch is going to fix it................only a rewrite of all code for PC would help!… Expand
  22. Antisceptic
    Aug 19, 2012
    1
    There is no PC version of this. it is an Xbox game you play on a PC. You get Xbox controls, Xbox logos etc. The Singleplayer is filled with lag, the co-op doesn't work because of Ubisoft's connectivity, and the Multiplayer has the worst Peer to Peer system in history, couldn't find a single game, save for one which I got disconected from before it finished.

    I fought with steam and    There is no PC version of this. it is an Xbox game you play on a PC. You get Xbox controls, Xbox logos etc. The Singleplayer is filled with lag, the co-op doesn't work because of Ubisoft's connectivity, and the Multiplayer has the worst Peer to Peer system in history, couldn't find a single game, save for one which I got disconected from before it finished.

    I fought with steam and got a refund.    … Expand
  23. cbseatmyass
    Aug 18, 2012
    1
    First of all, CBS can bite me. This is about the ninety-third time I have had to create a new logon because, somehow, my account is cancelled, password "magically" doesn't work no more, or somesuch. They'll eventually ban this one, too, but not before I get to say this: Bite me. I say that to both Ubisoft and CBS. Ubisoft ought to be hung, drawn and quartered for releasing this BLIGHT onFirst of all, CBS can bite me. This is about the ninety-third time I have had to create a new logon because, somehow, my account is cancelled, password "magically" doesn't work no more, or somesuch. They'll eventually ban this one, too, but not before I get to say this: Bite me. I say that to both Ubisoft and CBS. Ubisoft ought to be hung, drawn and quartered for releasing this BLIGHT on the Ghost Recon landscape and upon the Tom Clancy name. If Clancy weren't such a whore these days, I'm sure he'd order a drone strike on Ubisoft HQ. Perhaps the most pressing reason this game is an insult is that it's NOT what the trailers said it would be. Furthermore, it is insulting for a game that BEGAN on the damn PC: this PORT is rubbish -- welcome to the land of a thousand crashes!! Thirdly, and perhaps most indictably, it's just more of the same, teh same, the same, the same, the same, the same... Hasn't CoD raked this fecal field dry, yet? No, honestly, I can't say the last one with much experience -- my second point keeps me from really knowing what the game is much like. I bought GR in 2001 and all its successors. Now THAT was an awesome game, and despite its really old-fashioned gfx, I still play it. Stable, too. Just really tired of Ubisoft ruining game series. And really tired of Ubisoft's wiiiiiiiiiiiiide range of game quality: some really good titles with massive stability and if they were ports you'd hardly know, to games like this that are simply unplayable if you can run them for more than sixteen seconds. Anyone wanna buy a slightly used copy of GR:FS?… Expand
  24. Longbow
    Aug 15, 2012
    1
    I have no idea how people even made it into the game, i played for a max of 5 minutes and couldn't stand it anymore. Graphics are horrible, and the FOV is pretty much the same as looking through a toiletpaper roll.
    A max of 20 fps, there is terrible input lag, takes a second before the game realises you have pressed a button or moved your mouse. Do for the love of god not buy this garbage    I have no idea how people even made it into the game, i played for a max of 5 minutes and couldn't stand it anymore. Graphics are horrible, and the FOV is pretty much the same as looking through a toiletpaper roll.
    A max of 20 fps, there is terrible input lag, takes a second before the game realises you have pressed a button or moved your mouse. Do for the love of god not buy this garbage console port.    … Expand
  25. dmahnke64
    Aug 8, 2012
    0
    OK, there's a good reason that users have rated this game poorly. Cause it's awful! I used to love the entire Tom Clancy series but this is ridiculous it is a terrible console port. There is no mention of PC key commands in any of the tips while loading or in game; all reference XBOX buttons. I can get over that. But most shooters are relatively intuitive. This one's not! Very fewOK, there's a good reason that users have rated this game poorly. Cause it's awful! I used to love the entire Tom Clancy series but this is ridiculous it is a terrible console port. There is no mention of PC key commands in any of the tips while loading or in game; all reference XBOX buttons. I can get over that. But most shooters are relatively intuitive. This one's not! Very few mouse or keyboard buttons will match any of the other shooters currently on the market. So I'm not even two minutes into the game and it asks me to throw a sensor by pushing the "B" button on the controller, that's right, the XBOX controller. I mash every freakin' key on my keyboard with no luck. I finally figure hit something that gets it deployed only to be asked to do it again moments later. This time, no joy. Dead in the water. Can't go any further. I'm done! What a waste of money. Wish I would have read the reviews here first!!! So, I can't play the game so it get's a ZERO!… Expand
  26. HolyYut
    Aug 2, 2012
    2
    The game is great, but it's very hard to find a lobby in multiplayer. The matchmaking does not work well, customization menu always crashes, lobby timer always stops to 10, host migration doesn't work at all and cheaters everywhere that cannot be reported. Campaign is poor. Graphics and audio are good.

    If this game won't be fixed, I'll never purchase an Ubisoft product again.
  27. InvaderJ
    Jul 25, 2012
    0
    This is quite possibly the worst PC release of any game in recent memory.

    I thought Rocksteady's situation with Arkham City was the worst - for me anyway - when they delayed the PC version by a few weeks to add "great DirectX 11 features", just to have none of the DirectX 11 features work properly, and killing all performance when enabled, on release day. Granted, it did work fine in    This is quite possibly the worst PC release of any game in recent memory.

    I thought Rocksteady's situation with Arkham City was the worst - for me anyway - when they delayed the PC version by a few weeks to add "great DirectX 11 features", just to have none of the DirectX 11 features work properly, and killing all performance when enabled, on release day. Granted, it did work fine in DX9, but still - if I wanted a DX9 game I'd have just bought it for the 360, right?

    Anyway. I'm a huge Tom Clancy fan. And even though the multiple series bearing his name have drifted from the tactical delights they once were, I still enjoy them all. (Except HAWX. No one likes HAWX.)

    Now, this is indeed a straight up console port. I don't mind a console port, as long as you make some little considerations for the PC. You know? Throw me a bone and I'm happy. I had a very good experience with Ubi's release of Assassin's Creed Revelations, so foolishly figured the Future Soldier release would be on par. To coin a line from another horrible release: We were so wrong. Let me say that my machine runs every game with aplomb. I have games installed, NVIDIA drivers, Chrome, and 360 controller drivers. That is all. Period. Nothing else. Number of hardware or software problems I've run into with my system: zero, ever.

    Future Soldier behaves, runs, and looks like *smashed ****

    Let me just rattle off some of the major grievances:

    - None of the Graphics menu options save. Change something, back out of the menu, go back in, and it's reverted to default. You can actually get around this by setting every option, one by one, with a keyboard (not mouse, not 360 controller). Set an option, back out of the menu, go back in, change another option, back out, repeat ad nauseum. - If you manage to change the Graphics options to your liking, when you play the game, it'll be displayed at scaled 720p instead of whatever resolution you actually set.

    - Also, on the 2nd launch of the game (after first install, or resetting all user data), the game will try to output video at 24Hz. That's right. My TV can take it of course, but it's still 24Hz. I feel sorry for folks with    … Expand
  28. killerquag
    Jul 21, 2012
    0
    Game still doesn't work with a keyboard and mouse, inputs shown are for XBox 360 controllers. Game fails to launch (except twice). Ticket in to customer support has yielded a whopping 3 responses in 3 WEEKS! Their forums (for the PC) are filled with people still unable to play the game and unable to play in multiplayer matches. Their last patch broke the graphics system that wasGame still doesn't work with a keyboard and mouse, inputs shown are for XBox 360 controllers. Game fails to launch (except twice). Ticket in to customer support has yielded a whopping 3 responses in 3 WEEKS! Their forums (for the PC) are filled with people still unable to play the game and unable to play in multiplayer matches. Their last patch broke the graphics system that was working, and they are now (from 3 different posts) only having about 700 people online to play a multiplayer match WORLDWIDE.

    Diablo 3 may not have been playable at launch, but this is almost a month of the game has been released and it's still not playable. STAY AWAY!    … Expand
  29. D-vid
    Jul 17, 2012
    3
    After the patch 1.1 and 1.2 : Technically its a broken PC game, very very low fps, even with a super computer from the future you will get low frames per second, the graphics are made of washed up low res textures ( even if all settings are at maximum ), random framedrops all over the place, performance is a complete disaster. The PC game has been pushed a month later than the consoleAfter the patch 1.1 and 1.2 : Technically its a broken PC game, very very low fps, even with a super computer from the future you will get low frames per second, the graphics are made of washed up low res textures ( even if all settings are at maximum ), random framedrops all over the place, performance is a complete disaster. The PC game has been pushed a month later than the console version, but the only thing the developers did was port it from the consoles and didn't optimised the game at all until they don't fix it its not a worthy game to buy.… Expand
  30. FilthyPierre
    Jul 16, 2012
    0
    Really looked forward for this game however its a bugged beta on PC. I have sound issues that aren't fixed after 4 or 5 patches they have released. Poor quality control have left console buttons in the game for PC users.
    It would get some points because on the console it is a good game however no points for PC as its buggy beta early release and my ongoing sound problems (echo from    Really looked forward for this game however its a bugged beta on PC. I have sound issues that aren't fixed after 4 or 5 patches they have released. Poor quality control have left console buttons in the game for PC users.
    It would get some points because on the console it is a good game however no points for PC as its buggy beta early release and my ongoing sound problems (echo from voices) are holding it back from scoring.
    Worst part is you can't take it back because it registered to my account now. PC gaming is getting killed by poor game ports and registering products so we can't return buggy poor games like this one.
    Shame on you for releasing this.    … Expand
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

50
#50 Most Discussed PC Game of 2012
47
#47 Most Shared PC Game of 2012

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
71

Mixed or average reviews - based on 13 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 8 out of 13
  2. Mixed: 4 out of 13
  3. Negative: 1 out of 13
  1. Pelit (Finland)
    Oct 14, 2012
    82
    Slightly irritating 3rd person view, cover shooter parts are very average, but ultimately fun as a stealth game seasoned with some tactics. [Sept 2012]
  2. PC PowerPlay
    Sep 16, 2012
    50
    This shoddy console port has cast a shimmering invisible cloak over what would have been a serviceable third-person shooter. [Sept 2012, p.55]
  3. Armchair Empire
    Sep 5, 2012
    70
    At its worst, Future Soldier is an uneven experience with some unchecked boxes as they pertain to PC ports (e.g. no option to invert the controls on a gamepad) and an unrecognizable story, but at its best it's a good shooter with a little more thought required than many other 3rd person shooters available right now.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »