Ghost Recon: Breakpoint

Clancy’s classic series hits a shameless sandbox low

- Dave Meikleham

Not to be snarky, but that really should be ‘Breaking Point’. When Ghost Recon first burst onto the scene in 2001 it was a drum-tight tactical shooter. Focusing on claustrophobic confines and teamwork, the series reached its highest point with 2012’s brilliant Future Soldier. What happened next? Ubisoft turned the franchise open-world with Wildlands in 2017, and two years later, we find ourselves in this mess.

At the time of writing, Ghost Recon: Breakpoint is not in a release-worthy state. This is as broken and awkward a big-budget sandbox as I can recall playing on PS4. Noticeably uglier than its predecessor, with the blandest open-world environment Ubisoft’s ever made, this feels like a real low for a series the dearly departed Tom Clancy posthumously still puts his name to.

ORA AND OUT

So much of Breakpoint feels half-hearted. The fictional island of Auroa your customisable soldier, ‘Nomad’, finds her/himself on is a joyless mass of impenetrable jungle and barren, horribly desaturated flatlands. Playdead’s astonishing Limbo aside, it’s hard to name a more colourless game on PlayStation than this monochromatic mess. At least Wildlands’ Bolivia looked the part.

Breakpoint’s predecessor also had a squad of AI chums to fall back on during firefights. Were they always reliable? Hell no. Yet even when they refused to obey your commands, the times where they had your back with the series’ trademark Synch Shot were ace. Breakpoint’s solution to ironing out the kinks in its predecessor’s finicky team AI? Drop your squad entirely.