• Publisher:
  • Release Date:

Mixed or average reviews - based on 24 Critics What's this?

User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 222 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Summary: Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon Online, a new multi-player, third-person, cover-based tactical shooter.
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 8 out of 24
  2. Negative: 0 out of 24
  1. 80
    Give it a chance and enough time – and Ghost Recon Online will award you with catchy playability. Camera movements and UI polish are heavily needed. [Oct 2012]
  2. Jun 27, 2013
    Quotation forthcoming.
  3. Aug 29, 2012
    It's quite good, and we enjoyed its gameplay and its team-based offer. We have to wait and see how it evolves, but the base concept leads us to think Ghost Recon Online may have a very bright future. We deeply encourage you to give it a try, especially if you like tactic action and you don't feel like spending any money.
  4. Aug 20, 2012
    It's a fun, competitive multiplayer shooter that stands alongside its paid sibling. Now if only more people would learn to play the damn thing.
  5. Sep 18, 2012
    This free-to-play shooter from Ubisoft looks quite good, when compared to its competitors - Ghost Recon Online has great quality and a fresh, engrossing gameplay that is full of emotions. Unfortunately - good impression is damaged by a lack of polish. The game is imbalanced and clearly favors those choosing to pay, and these things can throw some players off. A few more months of testing would do this game good. In time it will probably be better, but right now it's a bit mediocre.
  6. 60
    I’m torn. I really like the core gameplay of Ghost Recon: Phantoms and see it being even more fun with friends. But, there’s just not enough here and the frustrating micro-transactions only make it all the more disappointing.
  7. Sep 3, 2012
    Ghost Recon Online has moments of exciting and tense action, but they're fleeting events in an otherwise drab game that's plagued by minor annoyances and a cash shop that adds a pay-to-win element to proceedings.

See all 24 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 52 out of 107
  2. Negative: 49 out of 107
  1. Apr 24, 2014
    Great game! If you play any 3rd person shooters, you will like this. With some time and effort you will get it down in no time! this game IS all about COVER! really it is...Maps are ok, they seem to be a bit unbalenced. some at least. customization is awesome, and controls are great. even if you play with a controller! always you can make it to the way you play. the game is very slow pace at first, and when the snipers come out, oh boy, are you in some heat. take your time and master a class you want to really use. it is then then perks of that class come out. some time to get ahead...you still need to pay to play tho!! You dont need to be greedy! show some support and give them your money.. $14 bucks can go a long way. which really should be the price of the game.... but w.e. Expand
  2. Oct 20, 2013
    Loving it. At first I got a little frustrated because you know, its a Pay to Win game, but then I found out that you can buy all the same stuff just with the points you get from playing (they do cost a bit more but not all that bad). Best of all, they appear to be infinite (not like combat arms where you would buy a gun to use for say, a month...). The game is really well made, has decent graphics and is fun to play (oh ya, and its FREE). Yes it still does help if the other guy has tons of money to spend on guns but because of the point system you can still get better guns w/o paying) truly, I'd give it a 9.7 but that's not on the scale. Expand
  3. Sep 7, 2012
    This is a game with a STEEP learning curve. GR:O is almost completely reliant on tactical game-play, teamwork, and unit-cohesion to win games. Currently in open beta at the time of this review, Ubisoft is doing a fantastic job moving Ghost Recon: Online in the correct direction.

    This game is DEFINITELY worth a try, especially given it's a free to play game. Most players will attempt it, not understand it, and get frustrated. It's not your typical CoD knock-off shooter, and takes some adaptation and patience to really be competitive in-game.
  4. May 15, 2014
    To start off with I have played over 30 hours of Phantoms, for an intelligent review. This game is rather puzzling to me as I can't tell what audience its for, Call of Duty fans? Battlefield fans? Ghost Recon fans? Maybe fans of Gears of War? It would be safe to say from my point of view, none of them. This game is a middle of the road experience on one hand it has some redeeming features (some, not many). The controls are fine, responsive and easy to grasp, the gun and character models are well detailed, audio seems perfect, ranking, connection and game balance all seems good. However, this may be where the good bits end and what is left is a game that provides a few good moments intertwined with a hell of a lot of frustrating, dodgy and rage inducing moments.

    Lets start with the maps. There are several maps for Ghost Recon Phantoms and yet all of them feel the same no matter what environment, this I believe may be because of the play-style the game requires; spending most of your time in cover means I rarely looked at anything else but my enemies and the next piece of cover I can hop to. Furthermore, Phantom's maps seem to have a lack of effort put into them, blocks of cover dotted everywhere, pillars making a frequent appearance and other interchangeable prop cover. Obviously there are some maps I liked, but not because they were different just because I was better on them than others.

    On the PvP aspect Phantom's is good, one on one fights are energetic and crazy in any one of the three classes; there does not seem to be any map exploits or spots that gave a heavy advantage to one person over others. Phantom's game modes are quite standard nothing that stands out from other titles in its genre, although all are objective so no death-match type games (a positive in this game as camping in rooms and cover would fast become an annoyance).

    Another negative of Ghost Recon Phantoms is the camera angles, constantly swapping sides at the slightest movement in cover and in circumstances enemies can see, and kill you before the camera angle adjusts enough for you to see them, (unfair to say the least).

    Even with the issues above none match this game's micro-transaction store, now i'm not a fan of paying real money in games, but it is a staple of most free-to-play games and so i live with it. However, Ubisoft have taken it way past the line set by other F2P games. There is the usual camo packs and outfits galore for you to spend your dosh on. From my point of view still not an issue, until you arrive at "weapons". Weapons costs anywhere from £3.99 to £7.99 each this is aggravating but this is not issue; its the cost of grinding for a gun in game, the good guns cost from 20000 credits to 100000 credits, for one gun. Well how much do you earn per game? You may ask, well in my best game I would earn over 400 (just over) and in most about 200. So from zero, with games lasting about 30 minutes upwards it would take you 200 games for a gun at 20,000(50 hours in game), For a gun at 100,000 it would take 500 games (250 hours) for a single gun. although this doesn't strike me as pay 2 win as everyone suggests; it is an obvious move by Ubisoft to make it more appealing to pay rather than grow into an old man/women grinding for that prize weapon you wanted.

    Final verdict:
    Ghost Recon Phantoms is in no way a bad game especially for a free to play game, but is lacks polish and it needs it desperately. Its maps are satisfactory, no real imbalance in matchmaking and the feel of being a future soldier with your riot shield(so futuristic) and microwave thingy (ready-meal some fools). Overall, Ghost Recon Phantoms seems half-cocked and unsure of what it wants to be and its micro store is a shrine of overpriced items literally forcing you to buy them with micro-transaction cash. Nonetheless, it had its fun moments and good games and isn't as bad as others in its category. Phantoms is worth a try if you are into the genre (or not), but hold back spending any real money on it as you might regret it.
  5. Mar 21, 2013
    This is by no means Ghost Recon, at least not the one you're used to, except for the name. First is the pay to win, yes there is other options to win, but you can fast track yourself with real life money. You have to pay for grenades with in game credits and you earn more guns over time through play (unless you fork over some cash, then you get it early). I'm impartial to this.

    The bad part is, that it is essentially a Ghost Recon themed Call of Duty. You can get powerups that for example puts a shield around you and your team that stops bullets. Now there are some minor powerups that are perfectly okay, but adding things like Juggernaut from Call of Duty is not really the Ghost Recon I know or at least no Ghost Recon I've ever seen.

    Ubisoft is going the same was as EA.. Pay to win and attract the crowds instead of the fans. This game seriously tarnished the Tom Clancy reputation.
  6. Dec 30, 2012
    Mechanics, shooting and everything is fine, but this game has worst matchmaking I've ever seen. No matter if you just started playing you will fight with vets with 500 hours played, clans etc. Expand
  7. May 23, 2014
    This game has very good concept but when it comes to execution,it has one of the poorest.Match making system is so flawed,there are two levels one is beginners (till lvl 8 ) then rest of the pack.so if start matchmaking after lvl 8 you may end very high level players with far far strong weapons and armor and they will just kill you like an insect.then there is another thing as this is F2P, devs will sell weapons forged in asgard,which are impossible to beat.we all will be taking cover and those people will walk like a beast and kill you,then server crashes,freezes frequently but no one bothers to fix it.players keep reporting issues but developers just don't do anything.In-fact I had a hard time believing that there is a F2P game from ubisoft and thought UBIsoft has changed but once you get inside the game then only you will know its the same money sucking Ubisoft. Expand

See all 107 User Reviews

Related Articles

  1. Ranked: "Splinter Cell Conviction" and Other Tom Clancy Games

    Published: April 13, 2010
    How does the newest Splinter Cell game compare to previous titles in the series, and to other Tom Clancy games? Check out our rankings.