
From one of the developers behind the original Rainbow Six® and Ghost Recon® games, comes a thinking-man's first-person shooter featuring in-depth character and weapon customization. Take your time. Think ahead. Get the job done.
Most likely between $17M and $48.2M. How we estimate →
Checked against 8 developer-reported games
Cheapest copy: ≈ $10.14 on Steam · Brazil (−66%). Compare 15 prices in 15 markets →
Reviews
Themes across 1465 recent reviews and how positive each mention is. A keyword signal, not full sentiment analysis.
positive critical· bar length = how often the theme comes up
Reviews
I've had this game for roughly six years now and went through multiple iterations and the release. Yet it feels like a tech demo. A very nice tech demo with great customization options and a massive range of weapons, including mods. But what are they for? I have probably two dozen assault rifles at my disposal. Yet, which one I choose does not really make a difference. Some are shorter, some are longer, which can be a deciding factor in close quarters, but do they differ otherwise? Not really. I do not notice a change in precision or how many times I have to hit my target for it to go down. The only real difference is between weapon classes (assault rifle, sniper rifle, submachine gun...), but within it doesn't really seem to matter if its 5.56x45, 7.62x39 or 5.45x39. So why overload with choices? What will I do with it anyway? There are a lot of single player missions available with multiple game modes. But they all feel more like a sandbox. There's no reward for finishing it. I just did it. Or not. Apart from my own personal motivation, there's no incentive. Now there's an actual (partial?) story for single player with the release out of early access, but at least for me it doesn't work. It just aborts right in the middle without reason. At least it doesn't tell me. Maybe I am just too operator with the Hawaii shirt mod. The state of the game is also questionable for it being full release now. A game that prides itself on realism has no discernable damage model. Of course, with the degrading armour symstem, we got some improvement. But I can shoot my opponent in the leg from 50 m with a 5.56 and it does nothing. Running around happily, full speed, no implications. I do it again, they are dead. Same for me in game though, either I die or I am fully fine. The developers do have this feature on their road map. For more than a year after full release. Is that not something that should've been part of early access testing for a long time? The only thing that keeps this alive for me is the mods, mainly two main creators who basically replaced all the in game gear for me. I don't think I use anything original right now. Find new cool mods, try them out, die in a mission, ALT-F4 until I can be bothered again. Literally the thing that kept me from uninstalling it yesterday was that the Hawaii shirt mod has one pattern that I own in real life. Otherwise, this would've been gone again.
1.0 is out and ... there are issues: --- runs bad, game stutters when you shoot and worse when grenades go off. --- AI teammates are not in yet but the enemies are supposed to be better and what I saw when playing the first mission is that they stand perfectly still and wait for you, that means if you have NVGs on you can easily spot them and take them out. But once they spot you they know where you are even if you move behind buildings and peak the other side. They will just keep firing at you as you enter their line of sight again, in pitch black darkness mind you. At least they are not using aimbot. When I shot them they ran into cover but I did not really see them move to investigate or reposition when I shot one of them nearby (audibly) or turn of the power of the building. ++ has a nice selection of weapons which I could not all try out because of the issues. Otherwise I would have happily started another mission with another setup of gear. There are also attachments for your weapons and plenty options for how to use them. -- guns and movement are weird, when going through a doorway you will glitch around and when opening a door you get sometimes squished into the walls, it also did not help that the weapons would start going crazy when you get to close to a wall or something. I get it you cant have a gun pointing forward when it would hit an obstacle but could that not have been solved better? This game is out since forver! + first map looked nice, fairly easy to understand and had a simple mission: go in and take out target/collect some stuff but I could not tell what the secondary objective even was so I failed that... also I needed to look up how to even start the mission because that was unclear. Well I have succesfully refunded this now and it saddens me that after all these years of developement it has not been fruitful. There are not even AI for you to play with and I am not going to trust promises blindly. Maybe they will turn it around? I have no idea.
100gb??? for what? This game used to be 20gb one update ago, what happened? The game still looks worse than 2004 Source games.. do u guys render cutscenes at 8K resolution? There is no ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ way a few new maps and 3 new guns would not fit into 20gb, let alone 80.
Another early access failure, I had high hopes for this game nearly 10 years ago now. I own it on 2 steam accounts. It just isn't ready for 1.0, the development has slowed massively over the years and to now suddenly and without any good reason to ship the game is an obvious cash grab. Trust those of us who've been on this ride the longest, DO NOT BUY.
Game started development in 2012. GTAV released in 2013. Ground Branch's gameplay loop fundamentally has not changed since its earliest builds. Every 2 years GB gets an update that adds 1-2 hours of playtime at most, adding features that would be considered "basic" in other shooters, especially a LARP-fest like Ground Branch. Why the long development cycle? Their developers have been seen praising modders for implementing things into the game faster than them. Things seen as simple/easily done in 2026 take 10x the time to do when done by this studio. Aug 1, 2023 a solo dev releases a game called "Operator", and within 3 years it has more to offer and delivers on the LARP experience GB promised since 2012. Ground Branch's first public trailer was in 2012. 14 years later, GTAVI announces its final release date. People start saying "We Got GTAV AND GTAVI before Ground Branch!" The publishers catch on, they force Ground Branch to make their latest update a final 1.0 release or risk losing the studio. The final 1.0 update adds again, 1-2 hours more of gameplay if you've already experienced everything in the prior "update." It adds an extremely basic and rudimentary "campaign" that only has two missions, with a roadmap implying only new missions, some basic new gear and maps are going to be added. New missions, basic gear, and maps are basic aspects of the game that modders can easily add on their own. The modding community does not need the developers to spend years of logistics and resources on making new missions, basic gear, and maps. Modders do that in their sleep. Gameplay mechanics, AI, cosmetic functionality not done in any other LARP-sim. And when those aspects are actually done, its done to an incredibly basic outdated standard from the 2010's. I don't know what's a better story, They scammed people? or... They have no idea what they're doing.
I played this game years ago, I played it again today, no difference. you can really just slap 1.0 on anything i guess
After 8 years, devs have announced a last minute plan to launch the game in a "1.0 state" this month. The game isn't ready, and it smells like a desperate attempt to milk more sales, since they themselves have admitted that features once promised won't even be completed in time for launch Don't buy it.
why must every cool mil-sim suffer the same fate of poor optimization, bad bots and/or lack of content when coming out of early access
The game has been in development hell for over a decade and is nowhere near anything promised. Save your money and time and go play something that isn't hollow like GB. I would love to eat my words, but I highly doubt 1.0 will be anything more than unfinished ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥.
They just announced v1.0 with just a prologue and a promise that they'll release the campaign over the next year. Sounds like they'll just checking the box to say its 'released' to meet some behind the scenes requirements. Having seen this play out from indie developers again and again, I can only assume this will be the case here as well.