Ghost Recon: Wildlands launches on March 7, and as such reviews have started to go live. However, since much of the game is enhanced by online co-op, many publications have elected to delay their final reviews until public servers are live and reviewers have had a little more time to explore Wildlands’ Bolivian setting.
GameSpot is one such publication. You can read critic Miguel Concepcion’s thoughts here, or read on for a roundup of critics’ opinions below. We will continue to update this roundup as more final reviews surface.
Game: Ghost Recon: Wildlands
Platform: PlayStation 4, Xbox One, PC
Release: March 7
Price: US $60 / £45 / AU $100
GameSpot — No score
“There’s comfort in falling into a tactical routine with your buddies as you reach the perimeter of every enemy outpost. This infiltration cycle begins when you use your tiny drone to survey the stronghold and mark all visible enemies. The ability to track marked enemies through multiple walls feels like cheating, though it hasn’t diminished the appeal of the many other Tom Clancy games that use this feature. The openness of Wildlands makes this feature all the more essential and helps your team decide on the best strategy. It remains to be seen whether Wildlands retains the same gadget appeal of Ghost Recon: Future Soldier later on in the game, though perhaps a drone is all the advanced tech you need in Bolivia.” — Miguel Concepcion
IGN — 7.9/10
“This huge, wide-open shooter constantly shows its flaws in its mission variety and vehicle physics, but its strong, sandbox-style gameplay and seamless co-op kept me coming back for more madness. If you must repeat experiences over and over, you could far worse than helicopter chases, assassination missions, or drug busts gone wildly wrong.” — Brian Albert
GamesRadar+ — 4.5/5
“None of those recurring glitches or other, one-time bugs I experienced were game-breaking, and most of the time they resulted in a fit of laughter rather than any actual frustration, but they’re definitely present. Still, it’s hard to look at those shortcomings as anything other than the small unwanted side effects of building a game as massive, detailed, and rich as Wildlands is. In fact, Wildlands is so far removed from what most have come to expect from a Ghost Recon title that it could have benefitted from shedding its sub-franchise namesake and simply standing on its own. It’s certainly got the legs for it.” — Mike Wehner
Destructoid — No score
“If Wildlands proves to be a solid co-op experience, it might be an easier sell as a multiplayer game and not an immersive epic. But as a single player experience, which is the way I’ve been playing the game, it has the misfortune of sharing a release window with two other expansive sandbox titles. Hopefully I’ll be able to definitively answer this question the closer I get to finishing this game–Wildlands might be a long one. Should you absolutely need an answer right now, based on what I’ve seen from all three games: Zelda > Horizon > Wildlands. Take that how you will, especially since I’ve spent the most time with Zelda and the least with Wildlands.
“Since I haven’t seen even half of what Ghost Recon has to offer, there’s no point in writing a full review at this juncture. It’s a fun game, but I’m only just starting to comprehend the sheer breadth of these wild lands. The cartel mechanic makes for a slick opening, but if the campaign is as long as I suspect, there’s a chance I’ll be sick of it by the time the credits roll. If Wildlands can keep things interesting (and the co-op works as advertised), then I’ll probably have a great time in the wilds of Bolivia.” — Mike Cosimano
PC Gamer — No score
“There’s the lingering worry that, deeper into the game, this approach will start to drag. I rarely play on higher difficulty settings, but here I feel it might be necessary. Without a reason to engage in the unlock system, and a need to get new and better gear, the structure risks turning into a repetitive grind. Or maybe, in the right circumstances, it won’t. I suspect the idea is to make co-op play as easy and as frictionless as possible, and that could well be the case.” — Phil Savage