• Publisher:
  • Release Date:

Mixed or average reviews - based on 21 Critics What's this?

User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 154 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 21
  2. Negative: 0 out of 21
  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. Sep 17, 2012
    For a free online TPS, Ghost Recon Future Soldier reaches a high standard. Rather nice visually, interesting for group play and with a deep learning curve and numerous customisation options, it's a rather nice contribution to the F2P world that Ubisoft makes, even though there is still too few maps and too high prices in the shop.
  3. Sep 17, 2012
    A great tactical shooter, but you'll need to fork out for the best gear to stay competitive. [Nov 2012, p.83]
  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. Aug 29, 2012
    Ghost Recon Online has a great map design and matchmaking problem. Too many matches are ruined by the massive presence of snipers. Potentially it is a great game, but is ruined by its ambitions.
  7. 55
    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 21 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 44 out of 78
  2. Negative: 31 out of 78
  1. 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
  2. Apr 12, 2014
    Ghost Recon is an amazing game if you enjoy a good tactical shooter. This probably is one of the best free shooters on the market at the moment. Overall 9.5/10. 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. Apr 19, 2014
    A lot of these bad reviews don't give this game justice. Many people here aren't understanding what free to play is.

    As a game its got
    really really smooth and flexible controls. The defaults are a little weird but you can change them to what you want. The gunplay is solid and has some good mechanics. Like giving a slight critical shot bonus to players aiming without moving. So their first shot has a chance of dealing cortical damage. This also prevents quickshotting close range snipers. A sniper acts like a sniper but he can help his team with a scan or choose closed instead to help his team flank around somewhere. Each class can have a cool ability thing that can help the whole team. For example the assault can have a riot shield which has about a 2 second deploy time then you sprint forward fast and knock people down on the ground while your team shoots them all lying on the ground. Or take a shotgun with you bash someone down swap to your shotgun and blast the hell out of them.

    The cover system is great too. Spacebar by default is the cover button which I don't like (I play RO2 and spacebar is the vault button). But you can change it to whatever you want. But you can be in 3 stances while in cover which is awesome. Going prone in cover looks cool.

    The camera can go a little funny sometimes and not be where you want it that needs a little bit of polish.

    The graphics look good for how well it runs. It run so bloody well. Many people have been complaining about graphics. This is a competitive game and competitive gamers don't care about graphics. Though it still looks rather pretty for how it runs.

    Pricing wise its cheaper than planetside 2. You can also unlock every gameplay related its with earned currency. Only things like camo or helmets cost real money. But $5 can get you a primary weapon, a secondary weapon and a helmet. And if you are good you can get the in game cash pretty fast. They also give you a generous amount of starting cash and starting equipment. Level up once and you will get a few more items.

    Also the matchmaking problems that many have been complaining about have been fixed.

    This is a hardcore game relying on tactics ad proper thinking instead of mindless shooting. If you are some mindless Cod player who pushes two buttons to win you are gonna get thrashed in this game. It has a learning curve. Its not for whiny children.

    And its in no way pay to win you can do perfectly fine with the starting gear. And unlock things easy.
  5. Feb 8, 2014
    I rated this game a 4 because it has great graphics and controls. GRO could have been an amazing f2p game, but it has many issues.
    complain about campers, but i feel like the map design and cover system were thoughtfully developed in a way that turns the traditional run-and-gun style shooters on their heads. It makes you carefully plan out what cover you're moving to next, and gives a whole new dimension to the use of suppression fire. The straightforward maps force opposing teams into choke points, and only teamwork will get you through.
    This style of gameplay is what drew me into GRO, but after a month or so of playing, i've called it quits. I completely agree with other reviewers when they say that the matchmaking is terrible. Noobs get matched up against pros, and oftentimes teams' numbers will also be unbalanced.
    The absolute worst part of the game is the blatant pay-to-win arrangement. Most FPS' try to keep weaponry somewhat balanced, to make things sporting and fun for all. If you play GRO, you will realize very quickly that the higher-tiered weapons are completely superior. Anything you can earn within a reasonable amount of time without paying can't hold a candle to the purchased guns. Almost every match in GRO is completely one sided, and the winner is inevitably the team with more pay-to-winners.
    It's too bad that a game with such potential had to go this route. I play a lot of f2p online games, and I have spent plenty of money on them, but not until they have earned my respect with their free features. GRO did the opposite. The complete disregard for the free experience made me NOT want to spend any money on it.
  6. Apr 15, 2014
    Oh my god. This game - I so wanted to like this game. It killed; it was everything I could've hoped for in a multiplayer shooter - it was tactical, smart, you had to rely on teamwork more than your own firepower. It emphasized skill and strategy. It was amazing. It starts you off in a beginner bracket, so that everyone from ranks 1-7 is playing together, and everyone is still figuring out the game like you, while getting better. Those first couple of hours were some of the best multipayer shooter experiences I've ever had, especially with my friend. Probably one of my best free-to-play experiences, period.

    But then, when your class gets to rank 8, you now have to graduate into the "veteran" bracket. There is no in between. So now, you're dancing with these level 30+ guys who can floor you on their own. However, you're also trying to compete with pay-to-winners, because the equipment you can buy can make you nearly invulnerable to just about anything, and the guns... Well, they get ridiculous. You can test them all in the firing range, and trust me when I say that some of those guns are just flat out horrendously overpowered. They are very obviously trying to take a snatch at your wallet, as these weapons cost ridiculous amounts of AC so that you'll probably never be able to earn them, but hey - you can fork over forty bucks and with that GC you just bought, get this assault rifle with the power of a sniper, control of a sidearm, and the power of a close range shotgun - at any range.

    Also, they say the new matchmaking takes equipment and level into account now, but because of how few people are playing, this doesn't make the slightest difference. You will have to fight whoever is available.

    So, because of vets who may have actually earned their equipment and the pay-to-winners who buy everything without developing any real skill, the game devolves from one of the classiest and most advanced tactical TPS games I've ever played, to basically CoD, with impervious tanks-of-a-man's strolling around, poppin' caps and takin' names.

    It is truly sad, as this game looked like it originally was really meant for the real fans, but then became a game that is appealing to the standard shooter demographic of people, specifically the ones who don't "have the time to build up skill", who want to just show up and light up.

    If the game becomes more pupulated, and matchmaking evens out, and you are TRULY getting paired by equipment, so that every match is fair, and the teamwork aspect is brought back, this game will get an 8. Maybe 9. But as of April 15, 2014, for me, this game isn't worth the download, as the sudden shift out of advanced, ghost recon multiplayer tactics into formula shooter just leaves you wanting more, and makes you sad that you can't get more because you can't go back.
  7. Apr 14, 2014
    Just 5 maps and they are too short, pathetic graphics, the gameplay is really bad and you need too much money to get gold points...

    Go to
    hell ubisoft, i spit in your **** game Expand

See all 78 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.