Syncing shots marks them for your fellow players, making it easier to communicate a joint takedown. Take them both out, and move on.Įven this is better in co-op.

It removes the need to wait for two nearby guards to lose eyeline with each other. You can mark another enemy for a squadmate to target, letting you bring down two (and later, more) soldiers at the same time. This is classic tactical stealth, and executed well. The AI's most useful function is synchronising shots. They can be given basic orders, and can revive you if you're downed, but, unless you've triggered an alarm, you'll be doing the majority of the killing. They're almost entirely inconsequential-to the point where they can be crouched next to a hostile guard and he won't ever see them. Played alone, Wildlands fills your squad with three AI teammates. But it's also happy to let people play solo, despite it being a poorer experience. Wildlands is a better co-op game because of its choices. I find this fascinating, because it's rare for an open world game to make co-op play so central to the design that it actively sabotages the singleplayer experience.

Any more and you'd risk confusing the issue-taking the focus away from your squad's cooperation.

And, while a few more tools would be welcome, Wildlands understands that its most entertaining aspect is the tension between stealth and chaos that arises when four people attempt to silently infiltrate a village. Wildlands' design removes all the chaff that would prevent you and your friends from getting out into the world. Each buchon has a target briefing, but it's optional, and can be viewed at any time. There are no long cutscenes, nor linear set pieces. What feels uninspired in singleplayer, feels streamlined in co-op. In co-op, though, the structure becomes a strength.

Ghost recon wildlands pc