Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Why would Ubisoft change that ?? Wouldn´t they start with Breakpoint as the newer game? This is not a Turn-based Tactical Breach game, which I love btw
Seriously, I have yet to see a multiplayer game that can really benefit from individual orders.
-> Implementing such in a meaningful way requires a complete redesign of multiplayer-games, as the focus is on PLAYER-interactivity.. not enjoying a smart AI playing stupid and wait till you issue a command to breach that door in front of them
If I was programming such AI in context of Wildlands/Breakpoint, it would be enough to just mark entry points and my AI would use what they have at their disposal (Lockpick, BreachCharge, Shotgun, GrenLauncher) and according to our approach (Silent vs Loud).
But this would make a game extremely hard for Casuals because I´d give enemies a fairly good design, too
>>> Ideally (next step) my AI would define EntryPoints by themselves (considering available options, their inventory and location of teammates). That means it would be enough to give a rough route and define Target + Approach.
To sum up, you´re not wrong and I would appreciate some features myself, but this is a business decision - sadly, the critical parts are not obvious at first glance, where it looks "easy"