I like this trend of open Betas. Really lets me get a feel for the game and there are plenty I wish had done the same. CODBlOps3 won me over with their Beta, and Battlefront is going to have to be impressive to win me over with theirs.
Saw some footage of the closed Beta, but still am not that impressed. I don't know if I'll be able to get over the lack of bots. It really needs to feel different than Battlefield with Lasers for me to buy his game. Here's hoping for a nice surprise.
If you like floaty gunplay with barely a hint of 'tactics' never mind strategy then sure.
Well, yeah. I want this game to shoot rebel scum, fly TIE Fighters and occasionally take a few heads as Darth Vader. I'm not looking for a perfectly accurate military simulation. Battlefront 2 is probably still among my favourite games of all time, so if this is 'more of the same' with better graphics, then bring it on!
I haven't played it because the videos of game play put me off big time.
My main concerns: Power ups as vehicles etc... very lame. Small maps... very lame Bobble head characters... also lame Wildly inaccurate lasers... why? So. Many. Jump. Packs.
Minor Concerns: Custom Classes ruins games for me. Everyone should choose a set role then play it like everyone else. Weird talking during the game. Everything looks and seems to be incredibly weak.
My Likes: It has more aliens.
So all in all pretty bland, kinda weird and certainly not my thing. Will happily conclude the series at Battlefront 2. I loved the first one the most but the second is also a lot of fun.
The instant that someone says 'go play.......' in any sort of games related discussion they have forfeited the argument. Not that there is an argument here as I was specifically talking about the Star Wars game.
I have now played it for maybe 2 hours and I have yet to have an enjoyable game. It will soon be purged from my hard drive.
Silent Puffin? wrote: The instant that someone says 'go play.......' in any sort of games related discussion they have forfeited the argument.
That implies you have any sort of argument for me to attempt to refute.
Swastakowey wrote: I have been reading from players reviews that not many seem to enjoy it beyond how nice it looks.
Although every single website with reviews seems to say it's amazing.
I usually believe players first.
It's not very good once you get past the graphics and sound design (both of which are excellent). A common description of the game is that it's Battlefield with a re-skin, but that's giving it more credit than it deserves, as at least in Battlefield you can spend the entire game in a vehicle if you want. This game has more in common with Call of Duty then Battlefield, frankly.
They really should have just all-in'd with their design philosophy; either make it a modernized, realistic tacticool FPS ala Battlefield or leave it as the arcadey MOBO-esque game it was before. They tried to make a hybrid of both, and as a result it lacks the best qualities from either.
It's a game that is something any person can play. I read a review that called it a "PS2 era game", saying that it is very simplistic and there's no real learning curve required--just fun.
I think that's the best description of it to be honest.
Actually I don't mind the laser spread. Stormtroopers aren't supposed to be able to hit the broad side of a barn, so it makes sense that it's a gun issue, not a user issue. I mean, take a look at the CG from the original movies. Laser blasts were coming out of the barrel at all sorts of angles. I'm good with that.
I'm not good with the lack of bots. Someone above was commenting on how the originals are still fun. Yeah, because the battlefield is flooded with soldiers and some are more skilled than others. That's not the case here. Now the battlefield is flooded with soldiers and some of them run off to go tee bag in a circle or stare at the wall. There isn't that group of soldiers programmed to play the mission. That's the biggest failing so far that I have seen.
I'd have more to say but I'm still going off gameplay videos because my FRIGGIN INTERNET needs five hours to download the beta. And I just had the thing upgraded...
I really, really dislike it. I HATE that I dislike it as I've been trying to find a shooter to finally replace or at least supplement Battlefield 4 as my go-to FPS, but after a couple of hours on the beta I really don't like it. It is EXTREMELY akin to Call of Duty. Guns have no recoil and the spawning is just atrocious. The guy you just killed can pop in right behind you and take you out no problem.
I really hate that there are heroes, I would have much rather it was just grunts vs. grunts like in the original Battlefront game. Vehicles as powerups is a huge turnoff for me, and the dogfighting just feels off. My cursor is right on the sucker and I don't get any hits, and the A-wing is practically immune to the lock-on missiles from the TIEs. I've never seen it once connect with an A-wing.
It seems that very few people like this game. Virtually all forum chatter on this is negative and the few people who enjoy it basically say that it is 'OK'.
It is looking very much like EA has a flop on their hands.
EA would once again prove that they manage to turn an almost bulletproof idea into crap. I mean, come on! You just had to give Battlefront II a graphics update and polish the gameplay a bit, focus on the real trilogy and boom, you got an amazing game that's loved by gamers and critics alike. Episode 7 comes out, release DLC, BOOM, money.
Uninstalled. If you like moving 24/7, shooting lasers programmed to miss most of the time and throwing grenades every 10 seconds then maybe its for you.
I'll have fun with this Beta but I'm sure I'll get burnt out on it by the week's end. There's just no real hook besides what it looks like. It doesn't feel like one soldier in an army, it just feels like a crappy Rush on Battlefield 3 or Hardpoint on COD. At least I didn't have to waste money to know its not worth buying.
Silent Puffin? wrote: It seems that very few people like this game. Virtually all forum chatter on this is negative and the few people who enjoy it basically say that it is 'OK'.
It is looking very much like EA has a flop on their hands.
Maybe with the gamer crowd, but remember that Star Wars is about to have a new film release.
Do you really think that as simple as this game is that it won't sell well to parents of kids?
Silent Puffin? wrote: It seems that very few people like this game. Virtually all forum chatter on this is negative and the few people who enjoy it basically say that it is 'OK'.
It is looking very much like EA has a flop on their hands.
Don't kid yourself, this game will still sell like hotcakes based purely on the fact that it's a big budget Star Wars game.
It's a game that is something any person can play. I read a review that called it a "PS2 era game", saying that it is very simplistic and there's no real learning curve required--just fun.
I think that's the best description of it to be honest.
Pretty much it, it feels like a bastard of CoD/Battlefield and Battlefront and frankly I like it for that, it's fun. Even having to lose as the Rebels on Walker Assault (which is horribly imbalanced) is fun. The weapons aren't as bad as everyone says you just have to use a little trigger discipline, the weapons go all over the place the longer you hold down the trigger, which I assume is for balance reasons considering the weapons never run out of ammo, only over heat. Having pick ups for vehicles isn't as bad as it sounds (unless its the first part of Walker Assault, because the X-Wing pick ups are practically in Imperial Lines), I've not really noticed anyone just standing around waiting for someone to die so that they can get the pick ups. Flying the fighters themselves is rather simplistic, but they feel similar to how they did in the older games, so more like Space Ships than the Fighters of Battlefield. If I did have to choose a Battlefield game to compare it to, it would be the less realistic Bad Company franchise, which also didn't have amazing gun play, but was really fun.
So, my group of friends and I have all had a blast with it so far, and will likely pick it up.
Kan you must be carrying that Rebel Team, my friends and I played for a couple hours and saw the Rebels win maybe once.
I had lots of fun strafing the Rebel Scum in my TIE, one game I never got brought down. Ended up being the only TIE Fighter in the sky whilst everyone else was in TIE Interceptors.
VictorVonTzeentch wrote: Kan you must be carrying that Rebel Team, my friends and I played for a couple hours and saw the Rebels win maybe once.
I had lots of fun strafing the Rebel Scum in my TIE, one game I never got brought down. Ended up being the only TIE Fighter in the sky whilst everyone else was in TIE Interceptors.
Heh. I can't fly worth a crap in this.
I just pop on the Ion Blaster and shoot down the TIEs that strafe me.
It must be that I'm doing really well, I kept finding the Orbital Strikes and calling them in whenever the ATAT was vulnerable. It was pretty entertaining to see that happen.
I must be the only person playing who isn't using the stupid Cycler Rifle though. I have yet to see anyone whose Hand does not include that.
Me? I go double grenades. Thermal Detonators and Ion Grenades. It's hilarious seeing a TIE get smacked with an Ion Grenade out of the air.
I had someone hit me with Ion but it only seemed to slow me down and make the panel spark.
Yeah, I can see the OS being pretty devastating against the AT-AT. Rarely though have I seen people use it against them though, usually someone tries to get kills on Snowtroopers with them. I hear you on the Cycler rifle though, I don't really use it. Double grenades though, that could be a good one to go with until I get the Jetpack.
As Beta's or previews go, it's fairly weak. On PS4, you are only able to get in on the "survival" mode, and then, only 6 rounds of it.
Yes, the map on this beta is small, it's 6 rounds of shooting things ffs.
Laser spread: you're a bog standard rebel trooper... wtf do you expect? They didn't make this with you playing as Boba Fett or someone who actually is able to shoot
All that said, I'm still looking forward to the full game.
Wait, PS4 really can't do Walker Assault or Drop Zone?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
VictorVonTzeentch wrote: I had someone hit me with Ion but it only seemed to slow me down and make the panel spark.
It also makes any vehicle take increased damage.
Yeah, I can see the OS being pretty devastating against the AT-AT. Rarely though have I seen people use it against them though, usually someone tries to get kills on Snowtroopers with them. I hear you on the Cycler rifle though, I don't really use it. Double grenades though, that could be a good one to go with until I get the Jetpack.
I've been less than impressed with the Jetpack but at least it means that someone potentially had to give up their Cycler Rifle.
Kanluwen wrote:It also makes any vehicle take increased damage.
That I did not know. I guess that makes sense though as the Y-Wings are hitting the AT-AT with Ion Bombs.
I've been less than impressed with the Jetpack but at least it means that someone potentially had to give up their Cycler Rifle.
That thing is just so dumb.
If I have a similar negative experience I'll likely run the two grenades also. And yeah, the Cycler rifle is pretty dumb.
On the topic of dumb things, I think they should have a Rocket Launcher that is an equip-able card, rather than there just being the one which you need to find a random drop for.
Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Kanluwen wrote: Wait, PS4 really can't do Walker Assault or Drop Zone?
I will have to check on that... I don't do PS+ so if it's a multi player thing, then it's possible, but I can't.
Laser spread: you're a bog standard rebel trooper... wtf do you expect?
The two 'main' rifle things (possibly the MG34 disguised as a laser as well but I never got that far) are actually very accurate, too accurate to be honest. Single aimed shots and small bursts can easily get long range hits/kills.
Laser spread: you're a bog standard rebel trooper... wtf do you expect?
The two 'main' rifle things (possibly the MG34 disguised as a laser as well but I never got that far) are actually very accurate, too accurate to be honest. Single aimed shots and small bursts can easily get long range hits/kills.
Laser spread: you're a bog standard rebel trooper... wtf do you expect?
The two 'main' rifle things (possibly the MG34 disguised as a laser as well but I never got that far) are actually very accurate, too accurate to be honest. Single aimed shots and small bursts can easily get long range hits/kills.
I fail to see how that is a bad thing.
Sounds a lot like the standard blasters on BF2 to me, great and very accurate for mid-range short bursts, but fire for more than about a second at anything other than close range and you're going to miss.
Which, as pointed out before, is exactly how Blasters worked in the films, so no complaint here.
In this I have been pretty close to my enemies, yet a large amount of my lasers miss. I once had my scope zoomed in on a guys face and still had shots miss (although he did die).
It's gotten me killed a lot, shooting at someone, only for them to turn around and shoot me because my lasers zap around them.
Sometimes though my lasers are deadly accurate. After a few games I just stopped aiming and fired non stop only pausing to press R to auto remove cool down or throw more grenades (which you should do 24/7).
In battlefront 1/2 the lasers got gradually less accurate as you held down the trigger. In this there is no real reason for the spread or lack of spread.
Honestly if you can sit in a turret, do that. The laser spread in vehicles is way less and their lasers are far more powerful, you will get far more kills in vehicles far easier. Especially when they get spawned right in front of you and you get a bunch of kills straight off the bat.
Because they are effective at all ranges, especially as they both have scopes.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Swastakowey wrote: In this I have been pretty close to my enemies, yet a large amount of my lasers miss. I once had my scope zoomed in on a guys face and still had shots miss (although he did die).
I don't know if you have played the game, but the lasers do not go straight. It's like Mount and Blade Napoleonic Wars style. You aim your gun but the bullet goes in a cone. In Mount and Blade though you can compensate for that by crouching, staying still or firing into enemy lines where the cone means less.
I stopped playing battlefront, but I have found no real way to combat the cone of lasers except by firing more.
Being in NZ lag is common, but you can tell the difference. I just learnt though that the accuracy of the guns do not change based on scoping, moving or crouching etc. So chances are being zoomed on the enemy face was just the same as firing in 3rd person will moving. Which explains why my shots are missing regardless of what I do.
Maybe I just suck at the game, but I felt it wasn't me that was sucking it was the way the stuff works that made it hard. I suspect im not alone, since most of the top players I saw got to the top by simply sitting in vehicles blowing up rebels. Which I started doing and it works far better than using the laser guns could ever do.
Because they are effective at all ranges, especially as they both have scopes.
Still not seeing the issue.
Swastakowey wrote:In this I have been pretty close to my enemies, yet a large amount of my lasers miss. I once had my scope zoomed in on a guys face and still had shots miss (although he did die).
It's gotten me killed a lot, shooting at someone, only for them to turn around and shoot me because my lasers zap around them.
Sometimes though my lasers are deadly accurate. After a few games I just stopped aiming and fired non stop only pausing to press R to auto remove cool down or throw more grenades (which you should do 24/7).
In battlefront 1/2 the lasers got gradually less accurate as you held down the trigger. In this there is no real reason for the spread or lack of spread.
Honestly if you can sit in a turret, do that. The laser spread in vehicles is way less and their lasers are far more powerful, you will get far more kills in vehicles far easier. Especially when they get spawned right in front of you and you get a bunch of kills straight off the bat.
I've not had that issue with weapons being inaccurate at close range unless my finger was hammering on the trigger, which I like to avoid.
It was largely meh for me and friend when we tried out the beta together. We weren't crazy about the interface and so far none of the weapons or feel of the game really wowed us. It was pretty, no doubt about it, but for all intents and purposes it wasn't a real battlefront game. Playing in 3rd person felt like a handicap and an afterthought. It's only really useful if you get the jedi/sith powerup.
Can't get to an Xbox to play this while it's available, so I shall just be watching many, many videos of it!
It's an arcadey spamfest. Lacks the depth of SW:Battlefront or Battlefield (both of which I love/d). No classes, no transporting, spawning is terrible.
It's bloody beautiful - they got the look and sound down perfectly, but the gameplay...
It's not a worthy successor to Battlefront 1 or 2, nor Battlefield.
Played a bit, thought it was cool to see Luke jumping around erasing us with nary a care.
But as beta's go I guess it was OK? Not real impressed with the game though, felt like Battlefield got a really good mod and less like a Star Wars game.
The impression I see to be getting from most reviews I've seen is that people who were expecting a good FPS game don't like it too much, while people who've been waiting 10 years for a fun, simple game that 'feels' like Star Wars seem to be impressed. Would you guys agree with that?
As someone in the latter camp, I cannot wait to get playing this when it comes out!
Objectively, it's a mediocre at best game. Very good graphics, very repetitive and (so far) poorly designed gameplay. Looks more like a cashgrab than anything.
Paradigm wrote: The impression I see to be getting from most reviews I've seen is that people who were expecting a good FPS game don't like it too much, while people who've been waiting 10 years for a fun, simple game that 'feels' like Star Wars seem to be impressed. Would you guys agree with that?
As someone in the latter camp, I cannot wait to get playing this when it comes out!
Absolutely.
People seemed to be under the impression that it was going to be a hardcore gamer's game...but it isn't. It's a game that a parent can play with their kid via offline coop or they can let their kid play offline against bots.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sigvatr wrote: Objectively, it's a mediocre at best game. Very good graphics, very repetitive and (so far) poorly designed gameplay. Looks more like a cashgrab than anything.
Subjectively, Star Wars fan boys will love it.
Have you played all the game modes?
No?
As it stands, we have three game modes to have been playing with this beta: Drop Zone(which isn't exactly earthshattering in how it plays, but it's definitely a fun little mix up to the "King of the Hill" game mode), Walker Assault(which seemingly nobody has realized yet that when on the final set of uplinks, the Rebels can bring down the ATATs with the tow cables instantly after a little pseudo-QTE), and the Survival mode.
Survival modes are always the same, so that's not really anything surprising.
The game, in its beta, just isn't well-designed. Walker Assault is horribly balanced against Rebels during stage 1 and 2, heroes get taken out by suicide divers as it instantly kills them and is very easy to do, the map design itself is unoriginal to say the least along with the trenches' positioning being awkward and the objectives seemingly placed randomly - some offer almost full cover, some offer none.
Weapons balance is off with the standard one having storm trooper accuracy and the second one being both a sniper /and/ a short-range burst weapon.
Horde is boring and way too short. Horde also shows the amazingly underwhelming AI far too well. The AI is worse than the one in Battlefront II where it actively tried to go around cover and strategically throw grenades.
There's a screen blending when going to a turret instead of just adding an animation. Pure laziness. Hopefully fixed after beta.
Drop Zone has already been done over and over, with Halo having perfected it years ago.
Graphics are nice and feel very Star Wars-ish, which is awesome, the original soundtrack is in, which is awesome too despite it just being randomly played to make people think "Wow, this is the Star Wars music!", but on a gameplay level, it's more shallow, uninspired and repetitive than a 10 (!!!) years old game.
SO FAR. Keeping in mind it's beta, EA sure has an extremely long way to go. The fact that it's EA and that there most likely will be tons of overpriced DLC aka cut-stuff-from-the-game-to-sell-at-a-profit isn't putting me in a better mood either.
That coming from someone who absolutely loves Star Wars and will never, ever forget seeing the first one in the movies as his very first movie he ever saw. I'm a real sucker for the Star Wars trilogy and I just wish and pray that the game, once out of beta, will step up its game by a few galaxies. Right now, it's utterly disappointing.
Well, the Survival mode is supposed to have 15 waves in the final game, so I imagine that'll be significantly more challenging.
As for the level design of Hoth, I'd say the design is not so much unoriginal as 'just like the film' from what I've seen. There's only so much you can do with 'snow, trenches and the Rebel Base at one end'.
As for the level design of Hoth, I'd say the design is not so much unoriginal as 'just like the film' from what I've seen. There's only so much you can do with 'snow, trenches and the Rebel Base at one end'.
Have one part of the map be outside and the other part of the map focus on the insides of the base. That way, despite it being a snow planet with nothing but...snow...you'd have two different settings connected to each other. While inside the base, once the AT-AT are vulnerable, speakers ask all personnel to leave the base and attack the walkers. Have red lights flashing. Add /atmosphere/. The entire base right now feels rushed and servers as nothing but being more like a tunnel that offers an alternative route back to the front lines. And - most of all - whoever had the idea of vehicles available via a pick-up and people warping into them is a lazy idiot.
In Battlefront II, it was awesome getting into the hangar, starting the engines, flying out and charging the Empire. Now, you pick up a shiny, meaningless swirly thing that's camped by everyone and suddenly teleport into a TIE / X-Wing. Zero atmosphere, zero effort. The game has /tremendous/ potential and the developer's laziness just oozes out at all ends.
People seemed to be under the impression that it was going to be a hardcore gamer's game..
From EA? Not likely.
I did at least hope that it would be good though. Alas......
It wasn't as if though Battlefront 2 was a hardcore game either, so it's not so much it being too casual as much as the gameplay design smacking of laziness and depth. The class system was pretty balanced for the most part with answers to all a player's problems regardless of map. Heavy trooper for tanks and heroes, engineers to counter said heavy trooper with their immunity to mines and general support with their health/ammo packs, you had the standard infantry class which was all-around and the sniper for those long corridor battles or command post camping. There's a distinct lack of this availability in variety for the multiplayer and having to start off with so little and be limited to the current loadouts in the game feel weird.
And of course the spawning just seems to be broken in beta right now, something that could've been easily fixed if they kept the command post spawn from the previous games.
People seemed to be under the impression that it was going to be a hardcore gamer's game...but it isn't. It's a game that a parent can play with their kid via offline coop or they can let their kid play offline against bots.
People were probably under the impression that it was going to be similar to prior Battlefronts... which were highly accessible children's games.
A good game developer can make a game accessible without compromising on its mechanics. It's fair to say that we haven't seen everything the game has to offer, but what we have seen could have been designed an awful lot better.
I played a few hours of the open beta today. The core gameplay is excellent but I'll echo other sentiments voiced in this thread that vehicles as powerups is kind of dumb.
On that tip about parents playing with kids, what kind of fethed up party game in the shooter category doesn't let multiple people be in a vehicle? Oh right, a game that has vehicles as power-ups like Call of Duty.
Some of my favorite childhood memories are riding around in a warthog with my Dad in Halo MP. That's a true accessible experience.
That would work great for snow speeders, as you have the gunner in the back.
I haven't played anything yet, as my connection has not been acquitted for anything beyond maybe streaming videos lately, but I have watches quite a bit of it. I defiantly looks like something I could get into, just at a later date when it only costs 30-40 dollars or so.
I had a go for a few hours over the weekend. I've never played Battlefront or Battlefield before. To me it felt a lot like Dust 514 on the PS3 not a bad thing at all. The game is good but the problem I have is that it very much favours the organised team, which we weren't. We seemed to be up against teams who played well together all the time. The better games were the ones where it appeared that they weren't all buddies on chat directing each other, and where the games would be 3 - 4 or close like that. This is true of all games though and a noob stomp is never fun. I only played Drop Pod assault and Survival mod though. I didn't want to get into, I guess, the main game, for fear of ruining it if I decide to get it.
I think it will certainly be a fun game playing with a group of friends or for a quick few rounds. But I can see the appeal wearing thin if you are not into playing it heavily and 'gettin' gud' at it.
I was really pleased to see that you did not have to have PS+ to play the multi player.
If I do purchase it I will most probably wait until the price drops. FO4 is out around the same time and I think that I will probably get more enjoyment out of that.
TheCustomLime wrote: I played a few hours of the open beta today. The core gameplay is excellent but I'll echo other sentiments voiced in this thread that vehicles as powerups is kind of dumb.
Now I've had time to think about it, I don't think it's really any less dumb than literally ever Rebel ever knowing how to fly an X-wing, or every fighter being based right in the combat zone rather than a separate base where they can't be nicked by enemies or blownup before anyone can use them.
They have managed to provide amazing immersion, especially on the Hoth map. Really brilliant feel.
However, there are several bad sides to the game (vehicles as power ups aren't even my biggest concern):
- Jump Packs are too good, period. Everyone and their mother will be using them, which ultimately kills variety. This is double for the Escape pod map;
- The flyers are very clunky to maneuver, to say the least;
- The spawn points. Dear god the spawn spots. Rebel spawn points are horrible on the Hoth map. With the slightest whiff of bad luck you'll get killed 3/4 times in a row right after spawn;
- The Hoth Map most often than not turns into a rebel shooting gallery, especially when you get to the trench system.
The game is good, and I might buy it, but not right now. Maybe when it hits the 30€ mark.
They have managed to provide amazing immersion, especially on the Hoth map. Really brilliant feel.
However, there are several bad sides to the game (vehicles as power ups aren't even my biggest concern):
- Jump Packs are too good, period. Everyone and their mother will be using them, which ultimately kills variety. This is double for the Escape pod map;
- The flyers are very clunky to maneuver, to say the least;
- The spawn points. Dear god the spawn spots. Rebel spawn points are horrible on the Hoth map. With the slightest whiff of bad luck you'll get killed 3/4 times in a row right after spawn;
- The Hoth Map most often than not turns into a rebel shooting gallery, especially when you get to the trench system.
The game is good, and I might buy it, but not right now. Maybe when it hits the 30€ mark.
I didn't have a problem with the Jump Packs myself. They at least seemed pretty balanced to me and didn't hamper your normal play style It didn't seem like an auto win if they landed in front of you. Using Raptors/Asms on Space Marine(game) as a point of reference. But of your YMMV
Spawn points did seem a little off though, even on the Drop Pod map.
Oh I don't mean that they are overpowered (I don't think Raptors/asms are in SM either) but they are too good not to take because of the absurd mobility boost it grants on such a short CD. They are good for snipers, regular "troops". Doesn't really matter
It's one of those "best in slot" things that everyone will gun for, unless there are really viable alternatives when the full game comes out.
I mean, that's not surprising. Even in Battlefront 2, the Commando/Jet Trooper was always the best of the bunch. Only time someone would swap away from it is low ceilings or you wanted to play as a Droideka or hero. Now the ability to snipe AND get around the map quick, that's a no brainer. These maps are big, and that's the only thing I'd say the game has going for it. A Jump Pack isn't just good, it's almost required if you want to get to the game quickly. I'm not a fan of the 150m walk back to the fight.
Anyone seen this yet? Had a pretty good chuckle at it myself
Also, is it me or have they messed up the scale of the AT-AT? Looks nowhere near big enough considering it squashed a T-47 speeder beneath 1 foot in Episode V.
Also, is it me or have they messed up the scale of the AT-AT? Looks nowhere near big enough considering it squashed a T-47 speeder beneath 1 foot in Episode V.
I think they had to make them at least a tad smaller or else the map would be way bigger than it already is, and imagine the explosions the chin blasters would cause otherwise. That would be an Orbital Bombardment on its own
Sigvatr wrote: People just suicide-dive heroes with vehicles in general. Instantly kills them.
That implies that it was done on purpose.
The flying controls are so awkward that when I first got to use the TIE fighter, I promptly crashed into the AT-AT.
It is done on purpose. Heroes are incredibly strong and can take hordes of regular troopers down if played well and vehicles crashing into them kills them instantly. Thus a lot of people just dive straight into them and boom, hero is gone.
Sigvatr wrote: People just suicide-dive heroes with vehicles in general. Instantly kills them.
That implies that it was done on purpose.
The flying controls are so awkward that when I first got to use the TIE fighter, I promptly crashed into the AT-AT.
It is done on purpose. Heroes are incredibly strong and can take hordes of regular troopers down if played well and vehicles crashing into them kills them instantly. Thus a lot of people just dive straight into them and boom, hero is gone.
It's funny because I never once saw that happen in my weekend of playing.
The closest thing I saw was Skywalker getting shot by the AT-AT/AT-ST or the person controlling him running under the feet(and since all the person inside the AT-AT can do is move the head from side to side--that isn't on the gunner, it's on Skywalker. Big giant feet coming down, let's run under them! ). Most of the people I saw in TIEs were too busy shooting at the Rebel air vehicles.
My roommate downloaded it (it was taking too long on my Xbox) so I played on his account. Played the escape pod mode and watched Walker Assault. I enjoyed myself, but it's VERY different from BF and BF2. Blowing 4 rebels away in quick order was enjoyable. And it was nice going from worst player in game 1, followed by being in the top 3 the next game. Definitely preferred mowing down the rebel scum.
Tried it again tonight and it's unfortunately still not enough to convince me to buy it. Kill to death ratio oscillate wildly as I play Imp or Alliance, it's not even funny.
If it only had a solo campaign or something alike.
So, being a star wars fanboy and loving the battlefront franchise, I d/led this and played for a good few hours....I'm not enjoying it, the glamour of the locations is not really that good. The ai is underwhelming, and the disparity between the weapons is poor.
Whilst a return to the pick-up and play mode of the original is good, it seems too small for the grandness of the star wars battlefields that we have seen in the movies, in the games, and in the cartoon even.
I think sales of this, will break even, but It won't be overwhelmingly popular. The hype train is strong with this one.
Can't get to an Xbox to play this while it's available, so I shall just be watching many, many videos of it!
It's an arcadey spamfest. Lacks the depth of SW:Battlefront or Battlefield (both of which I love/d). No classes, no transporting, spawning is terrible.
It's bloody beautiful - they got the look and sound down perfectly, but the gameplay...
It's not a worthy successor to Battlefront 1 or 2, nor Battlefield.
That's sad to hear. Battlefield 2 is one of my favourite multiplayer games, was hoping for something more like that (that would require a bit of grey matter and teamwork) than CoD.
That said it will probably sell about 8 trillion copies.
Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote: Tried it again tonight and it's unfortunately still not enough to convince me to buy it. Kill to death ratio oscillate wildly as I play Imp or Alliance, it's not even funny.
If it only had a solo campaign or something alike.
That's sad to hear. Battlefield 2 is one of my favourite multiplayer games, was hoping for something more like that (that would require a bit of grey matter and teamwork) than CoD.
That said it will probably sell about 8 trillion copies.
Pretty sure DICE fired everyone who made that game
Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote: Tried it again tonight and it's unfortunately still not enough to convince me to buy it. Kill to death ratio oscillate wildly as I play Imp or Alliance, it's not even funny.
If it only had a solo campaign or something alike.
That's why it's called a beta...
The thing is, it won't have a solo campaign in the final game anyway, and I doubt EA/DICE will bother with reworking the spawn point mapping/faction disparity in the Hoth map.
Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote: Tried it again tonight and it's unfortunately still not enough to convince me to buy it. Kill to death ratio oscillate wildly as I play Imp or Alliance, it's not even funny.
If it only had a solo campaign or something alike.
That's why it's called a beta...
The thing is, it won't have a solo campaign in the final game anyway, and I doubt EA/DICE will bother with reworking the spawn point mapping/faction disparity in the Hoth map.
But hey, c'est la vie!
Honestly after some significant reflection?
I'm fine with Hoth being so difficult. It's Walker Assault. AT-ATs are beastly no doubt, but as I got more and more unlocks? I started racking up wins in a big way. You really need to try the "heavy" blaster rifle(the MG18 looking one) with the Ion Charge perk(increased damage versus vehicles) and Ion Grenades.
The last game I played of the beta? My partner and I, using that loadout, brought both AT-ATs down 25% by ourselves before they hit the second uplink.
We won that match at the second set of uplinks.
Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote: Tried it again tonight and it's unfortunately still not enough to convince me to buy it. Kill to death ratio oscillate wildly as I play Imp or Alliance, it's not even funny.
If it only had a solo campaign or something alike.
That's why it's called a beta...
The thing is, it won't have a solo campaign in the final game anyway, and I doubt EA/DICE will bother with reworking the spawn point mapping/faction disparity in the Hoth map.
But hey, c'est la vie!
Honestly after some significant reflection?
I'm fine with Hoth being so difficult. It's Walker Assault. AT-ATs are beastly no doubt, but as I got more and more unlocks? I started racking up wins in a big way. You really need to try the "heavy" blaster rifle(the MG18 looking one) with the Ion Charge perk(increased damage versus vehicles) and Ion Grenades.
The last game I played of the beta? My partner and I, using that loadout, brought both AT-ATs down 25% by ourselves before they hit the second uplink.
We won that match at the second set of uplinks.
In theory a decently coordinated team can down one AT-AT in the first bombing run as long as they save the Orbital Strikes that they find. I believe I did not get my point across properly - my main gripe is the spawn point disparity between imp and rebel sides, when the latter are prone to get chain killed quite a few times. This is not so often found in the imp side. It actually only happened once when the rebels had a group of four good players on the first hill at the start of the scenario, and they were hammering down on the imp spawn points like they were a Orbital Bombardment by themselves.
Kanluwen wrote: To an extent, the Rebels can mitigate getting "chain-killed" by spawning on their Partners.
Oh and destroying the turrets. That's a big beef I have with the game, that Imperials can utilize the Rebel turrets.
Destroying turrets is something I am sure other Imperial Players got upset over. In games where my friends and I had air superiority over the rebels I would fly over and take out any turret I could while hitting ground targets. Mostly so the Rebels couldn't use them against the AT-ATs, but also in part to make it so our guys wouldn't just sit in them.
Also Kan, as the weekend went on I started getting more and more wins as the Rebels, so my earlier gripes about balance kinda tapered out. It can be difficult to win as the Rebels as you have mentioned, but ultimately makes victory that much sweeter.
Kanluwen wrote: To an extent, the Rebels can mitigate getting "chain-killed" by spawning on their Partners.
Oh and destroying the turrets. That's a big beef I have with the game, that Imperials can utilize the Rebel turrets.
And that only makes the fact that Rebels can't use AT-ST's slightly more annoying than it already is.
To be fair, the AT-STs are a power-up specific to the Imperial players.
The biggest thing I submitted as a "follow-up" when I got an email asking for feedback was that Rebels needed some ground vehicles put in--or they need the T47 available from the first wave on.
Or Smart Rockets need to be made a card rather than power-up.
The spawn points are kindof janky, especially when you've died but the map thinks its transitioned to the next 'phase' and you spawn out in the middle of nowhere.
Also I'd argue that the Heroes could be a bit tougher
Was looking forward to this title, but watching the gameplay videos it just looks like call of duty/battlefield in a starwars skin. None of the sandboxy charm of the original. No space battles, no swarms of bots, on the rails At-Ats, no mods, x-wings and ties in the battle of hoth (really).
No dramatic approach in snow speeders (dodging at-at fire). You can't even use them till right at the end and you need to disable the shields first. (if they don't get blown to pieces by tie fighters (rolls eyes).
People complain that the rebels can't win... Well the idea is that the imperials get at-ats, but being arrogant imperials, don't realise the rebels can use a humble speeder to trip them up. None of that dynamic is in the game.
Why can't Hoth be just a timed mission anyway (instead of having to knock out the at-ats) . The rebel objective was just to hold the imperials off, not destroy there invasion force.
EA will still sell bucket loads though. People like cod...
I have to admit, I was pretty skeptical of this game due to their whole (baffling) way of talking more about what's not in this game, versus what really is. I downloaded the beta on my PS4, and my wife and I loaded up the survival mode, damned if we weren't both smiling the whole time. I wish they didn't cut you off half-way through the survival (we only have one out of four survival maps, really?), but that said, it was fun. The versus mode is pretty damn imbalanced (opinion!), but it sure is fun. I worry that the game won't quite be worth the sixty dollars, but my wife and I are going 50-50 on it, and I'm pretty darn sure I can get thirty dollars worth of enjoyment out of it.
I'm kind of miffed that the season pass is fifty, so I'm going to have to see some serious proof that it's worth that kind of cash before I buy it.
Er no. This was in fact a beta, to stress test their dedicated servers and to find a few kinks here and there that cropped up(for example, if you stayed in the AT-AT until the timer ran out you would not be able to do anything except move forwards and backwards). The game comes out in about a month(November 18th), unlike most of the beta-demos where it shows up two weeks in advance.
I can say that the beta did deter me from buying the game though. I enjoyed it, but it's not meant for me.
I havent played the Battlefrotn series at all.
I do however love the Battlefield series (really enjoyed all of them), been playing since 1942.
I loathe CoD and everything it is.
I havent played the Battlefrotn series at all.
I do however love the Battlefield series (really enjoyed all of them), been playing since 1942.
I loathe CoD and everything it is.
Will this be for me then?
Do you want a casual game that you can just fire up, play for a bit at a time and not really worry about strategy beyond "Pew, pew! Lasers!"?
If so--Battlefront might be your bag.
If you want a game where teamwork is basically mandatory and lone wolfing is punished, then Battlefront will not be your bag.
Optio wrote: I liked it the more I played it in the end which is probably a good sign for the full game.
Going to agree with this. Also I must be crazy because I had way more fun with Walker Assault than I did with Drop Pod. I did 2 games of Walker Assault with each faction (4 total, naturally) and went 4-0, so that probably had something to do with it. Still, some games were close, some games were slaughters, but all games were enjoyable.
Did I miss a way to play in third person instead of first person? I admit to not checking the controls really extensively, but I always preferred third person in the original battlefront games.
I havent played the Battlefrotn series at all.
I do however love the Battlefield series (really enjoyed all of them), been playing since 1942.
I loathe CoD and everything it is.
Will this be for me then?
It's nothing like Battlefield, old or new. I played the Beta for a bit and instantly went back to BF4.
I lone wolf it. I don't care about my teammates, unless they're friends and we're playing over a headset, phone or sitting in the same room. Online people I don't know? I can't/won't depend on them. Battlefront has always been for me about seeing how good a kill count I could rack up before being blown away by a thousand laser bolts. And running around in the most infamous shiny white armor in the history of cinema. Screw the rebs. I'd be an Imp every time if I could. Even if I stuck out like a sore thumb on every map (barring Hoth).
Kanluwen wrote: Do you want a casual game that you can just fire up, play for a bit at a time and not really worry about strategy beyond "Pew, pew! Lasers!"?
If so--
Then play Halo. Or Call of Duty/Titanfall, or Battlefront.
These are all casual games that have low skill-entry requirements, but are made with enough competency to also have deeper mechanics for hardcore players to indulge in and get an edge over their opponents.
I would recommend Battlefront 4 to anyone who's a massive Star Wars fan and doesn't care about the quality of the game so long as it brings that delicious Star Wars fix. The caveat is that I'd also recommend waiting until it's 30 bucks for the "Game of the Year" edition that has all the DLC included.
Am a massive starwars fan, has been a passion of mine for the last 31 years, a New Hope was the first film I ever saw as a very small boy. But that aside I went it to the beta looking at it as shooter before a Star Wars game.
Yes they have a hell of a lot to tidy up and missed out on some good ideas from the others but I had fun the more I played plus my 3 year old loved shooting storm troopers with daddy, so if I can share my love of Star Wars with him then I'm all in. Ps loved the Xmas advert too.
That trailer makes me wish even more for proper campaign, Palpatine and Ackbar speaking throughout the thing makes it seem awesome!
Just a random thought as well, I wonder if we will have a survival mode with a pair of stormtroopers resisting a rebel attack instead of vice-versa? That could be pretty fun...
Commander Cain wrote: That trailer makes me wish even more for proper campaign, Palpatine and Ackbar speaking throughout the thing makes it seem awesome!
Just a random thought as well, I wonder if we will have a survival mode with a pair of stormtroopers resisting a rebel attack instead of vice-versa? That could be pretty fun...
No info on that yet.
Should we arrange a list of origin usernames for combined Dakka?
timetowaste85 wrote: So the extra $10 goodie bag sounds worthless. Time to drop back down to a standard pre-order. Still hyper excited for release date.
Serious question here:
Why would you preorder the "Deluxe Edition" to begin with? It's been very clear that it comes solely with early access to weapons since the preorders went up.
A compilation of all the new footage from the Battlefront Planets site:
Because we've all been waiting 10 years for a Gonk droid escort mission... I look forward to DLCs allowing you to substitute the slow Gonk for a speedy little Mouse Droid (Imperials only, of course), an Astromech that has all kinds of plot-requirement gadgets or a Protocol Droid that just won't shut up!
timetowaste85 wrote: So the extra $10 goodie bag sounds worthless. Time to drop back down to a standard pre-order. Still hyper excited for release date.
Serious question here:
Why would you preorder the "Deluxe Edition" to begin with? It's been very clear that it comes solely with early access to weapons since the preorders went up.
Made the pre-order in May, and had been told it came with a bunch of extra stuff. I didn't look it up, but saw by accident one day what the "extra stuff" was. Decided it isn't worth getting, I'll save the $10 to spend elsewhere.
timetowaste85 wrote: So the extra $10 goodie bag sounds worthless. Time to drop back down to a standard pre-order. Still hyper excited for release date.
Serious question here:
Why would you preorder the "Deluxe Edition" to begin with? It's been very clear that it comes solely with early access to weapons since the preorders went up.
Made the pre-order in May, and had been told it came with a bunch of extra stuff. I didn't look it up, but saw by accident one day what the "extra stuff" was. Decided it isn't worth getting, I'll save the $10 to spend elsewhere.
Back when it first went up for preorder, I listed exactly what it was just to help people avoid this situation!
3 days and 5+ hours! *twitch*
Already requested Tuesday off so I can play all day. My roommate has to work. Mwahahahahaha!! (We work for same company, hence evil laugh)
According to a video I saw earlier from someone who played the full launch version at a DICE event, here's what's actually in the game:
16 maps
11 online game modes
4 Survival co-op/single player levels (including one that looks like it can be played offline in single player with AI troops)
5 'Missions' (specific 'levels' that are basically 'training' for the game)
The 16 maps thing is really...dubious. What they actually did was making 4 maps and cutting them in parts (roughly).
In general, severly disappointed. The entire game is a dumbified Battlefield game with a Star Wars skin. The game had so much potential to reenact famous moments of Star Wars history, with you right into the battles that made Star Wars history.
And all we get is a Battlefield clone with the depth of your average Call of Duty. What a letdown.
I'm happy, and I'm freaking loving the fighter squadron. I've only had one match that was rough-all others I've rocked.
I think the big takeaway is that the first two BF games existed when online play was still in its infancy. Now, online MP is the main drive. I miss the "story" missions of BF 1&2, but this one is still tons of fun. It's just changed. And change can be very hard on some. Me, I'm working to adapt. And there is nothing more satisfying than watching a TIE fighter disappear in a puff of smoke.
Sigvatr wrote: And all we get is a Battlefield clone with the depth of your average Call of Duty. What a letdown.
You clearly haven't played Battlefield
It's a lot better. More maps, more guns, better gameplay. Can't take anyone saying "it's a Battlefield clone" seriously, because it's far from that.
I'm sorry, I can't let this one slide. I'll give you the point on more maps, as technically speaking this is correct even though each game mode of Battlefront only goes through 3 or 4 maps whereas Battlefield allows every map to be played on every game mode, but even then... Battlefront's map design is pretty bad, and is sorely lacking by comparison to Battlefield 4's maps. Battlefront maps are incredibly linear and don't offer nearly the same opportunities for flanking and maneuver as Battlefield's maps do.
More guns? Are you serious? Have you ever even played Battlefield 4? There are 11 main guns to choose from in Battlefront. That's about as many as you'd find in a single class of weapon in Battlefield. Furthermore, guns in Battlefield have a lot more to set them apart from each other than in Battlefront, and that's before you even get into the complexity of weapon attachments. In Battlefront weapons only differ in 2 ways: rate of fire and damage. That's it.
Better gameplay? I know that this is entirely subjective, but as far as shooters go Battlefront is so incredibly shallow. There are no classes, and while you can kit yourself out to do different things you don't have nearly the same variety of gadgets or gameplay as you do in Battlefield 4. The vehicular combat is incredibly archaic. I mean seriously, when was the last time you played a game where all vehicles were powerups littered across the map? At least in Call of Duty you have to get kill streaks first. Where are my anti-tank mines? Repair tools? Where are my counter measures? Where's my variable weapon loadout on the vehicles themselves? None of it is there.
The only thing this game does well is give you something pretty to look at and nice to listen to, and on these accounts it's a stellar game. It looks gorgeous and sounds just like the movies. If that's all you're looking for, that's great. But a better game than Battlefield? That is really stretching it.
Does anyone know if the AI kills count toward your KD ratio? On ground I am even at best but in the air I'm on the top almost every time, so just curious. Plus is there a dakka group nerding out on this game?
Sigvatr wrote: And all we get is a Battlefield clone with the depth of your average Call of Duty. What a letdown.
You clearly haven't played Battlefield
It's a lot better. More maps, more guns, better gameplay. Can't take anyone saying "it's a Battlefield clone" seriously, because it's far from that.
I'm sorry, I can't let this one slide. I'll give you the point on more maps, as technically speaking this is correct even though each game mode of Battlefront only goes through 3 or 4 maps whereas Battlefield allows every map to be played on every game mode, but even then... Battlefront's map design is pretty bad, and is sorely lacking by comparison to Battlefield 4's maps. Battlefront maps are incredibly linear and don't offer nearly the same opportunities for flanking and maneuver as Battlefield's maps do.
More guns? Are you serious? Have you ever even played Battlefield 4? There are 11 main guns to choose from in Battlefront. That's about as many as you'd find in a single class of weapon in Battlefield. Furthermore, guns in Battlefield have a lot more to set them apart from each other than in Battlefront, and that's before you even get into the complexity of weapon attachments. In Battlefront weapons only differ in 2 ways: rate of fire and damage. That's it.
Better gameplay? I know that this is entirely subjective, but as far as shooters go Battlefront is so incredibly shallow. There are no classes, and while you can kit yourself out to do different things you don't have nearly the same variety of gadgets or gameplay as you do in Battlefield 4. The vehicular combat is incredibly archaic. I mean seriously, when was the last time you played a game where all vehicles were powerups littered across the map? At least in Call of Duty you have to get kill streaks first. Where are my anti-tank mines? Repair tools? Where are my counter measures? Where's my variable weapon loadout on the vehicles themselves? None of it is there.
The only thing this game does well is give you something pretty to look at and nice to listen to, and on these accounts it's a stellar game. It looks gorgeous and sounds just like the movies. If that's all you're looking for, that's great. But a better game than Battlefield? That is really stretching it.
I was saying BF4 is better for reasons mentioned above by you
Yup, lots of flash and pazzaz in presentation but little actual depth in gameplay. Given the lack of content right now, unless you really just want to jump in and gun+play the same thing over and over I'd wait till it comes down in price and the newer stuff gets added in a GoTY version or something similar that might make it worth playing compared to all the other stuff coming out.
DICE doesn't do "Game of the Year" editions. They keep Premium live for the lifetime of a game, meaning that anyone who buys the game next year and gets Premium will get the same rewards/perks as someone who buys Premium now.
The person buying it a year on just gets those rewards immediately rather than spaced out.
Sigvatr wrote: And all we get is a Battlefield clone with the depth of your average Call of Duty. What a letdown.
You clearly haven't played Battlefield
It's a lot better. More maps, more guns, better gameplay. Can't take anyone saying "it's a Battlefield clone" seriously, because it's far from that.
I'm sorry, I can't let this one slide. I'll give you the point on more maps, as technically speaking this is correct even though each game mode of Battlefront only goes through 3 or 4 maps whereas Battlefield allows every map to be played on every game mode, but even then... Battlefront's map design is pretty bad, and is sorely lacking by comparison to Battlefield 4's maps. Battlefront maps are incredibly linear and don't offer nearly the same opportunities for flanking and maneuver as Battlefield's maps do.
More guns? Are you serious? Have you ever even played Battlefield 4? There are 11 main guns to choose from in Battlefront. That's about as many as you'd find in a single class of weapon in Battlefield. Furthermore, guns in Battlefield have a lot more to set them apart from each other than in Battlefront, and that's before you even get into the complexity of weapon attachments. In Battlefront weapons only differ in 2 ways: rate of fire and damage. That's it.
Better gameplay? I know that this is entirely subjective, but as far as shooters go Battlefront is so incredibly shallow. There are no classes, and while you can kit yourself out to do different things you don't have nearly the same variety of gadgets or gameplay as you do in Battlefield 4. The vehicular combat is incredibly archaic. I mean seriously, when was the last time you played a game where all vehicles were powerups littered across the map? At least in Call of Duty you have to get kill streaks first. Where are my anti-tank mines? Repair tools? Where are my counter measures? Where's my variable weapon loadout on the vehicles themselves? None of it is there.
The only thing this game does well is give you something pretty to look at and nice to listen to, and on these accounts it's a stellar game. It looks gorgeous and sounds just like the movies. If that's all you're looking for, that's great. But a better game than Battlefield? That is really stretching it.
I was saying BF4 is better for reasons mentioned above by you
timetowaste85 wrote: You guys can hate on it all you want, I'm loving my X-Wing v. TIE fights!!
I'm pretty sure that when I can finally play the game at Christmas, Fighter Squadron will be me go-to mode for some time. It just looks so brilliant!
Any guesses for the upcoming maps/heroes? I'd like to see a redux of the excellent Bespin maps from BF1 (can you imagine Fighter Squadron around the platforms? Awesomeness!), perhaps a Death Star map (interior for ground modes, exterior for Fighter Squadron), wouldn't mind seeing Kashyyyk at some point.
As for heroes, my guesses are: Chewie, Ben Kenobi (or Yoda, but BK would be cooler and more fitting), but I'm struggling to think of who the baddies would get, unless they want to be total legends and give up Kylo Ren and Captain Phasma at some point...
Sigvatr wrote: And all we get is a Battlefield clone with the depth of your average Call of Duty. What a letdown.
Ironically, despite how much concern I initially had over this being a Battlefield re-skin... I actually wish it had just been a BF re-skin now. Or rather, I would prefer a BF re-skin to what we currently have.
timetowaste85 wrote: You guys can hate on it all you want, I'm loving my X-Wing v. TIE fights!!
I'm pretty sure that when I can finally play the game at Christmas, Fighter Squadron will be me go-to mode for some time. It just looks so brilliant!
Any guesses for the upcoming maps/heroes? I'd like to see a redux of the excellent Bespin maps from BF1 (can you imagine Fighter Squadron around the platforms? Awesomeness!), perhaps a Death Star map (interior for ground modes, exterior for Fighter Squadron), wouldn't mind seeing Kashyyyk at some point.
As for heroes, my guesses are: Chewie, Ben Kenobi (or Yoda, but BK would be cooler and more fitting), but I'm struggling to think of who the baddies would get, unless they want to be total legends and give up Kylo Ren and Captain Phasma at some point...
December 8th(1st for anyone who preordered) sees the "Battle for Jakku" maps release for free to everyone.
Everything else? No clue. I haven't seen any lists.
First thing they need to fix is that invincibility bug. Really obnoxious to have one guy storm an uplink post and just kill everyone there with nothing you can do about it.
streamdragon wrote: First thing they need to fix is that invincibility bug. Really obnoxious to have one guy storm an uplink post and just kill everyone there with nothing you can do about it.
Is it happening on all platforms? I can only play on my pc tonight Q_Q
streamdragon wrote: First thing they need to fix is that invincibility bug. Really obnoxious to have one guy storm an uplink post and just kill everyone there with nothing you can do about it.
Is it happening on all platforms? I can only play on my pc tonight Q_Q
I play on PC and it's definitely happening there. Had a guy go 43-11 running straight down the center of the Sorosubb map taking hits from AT-ATs, AT-STs, Turrets and everything and just didn't die. Ever. He destroyed an AT-ST basically on his own with his rifle.
streamdragon wrote: First thing they need to fix is that invincibility bug. Really obnoxious to have one guy storm an uplink post and just kill everyone there with nothing you can do about it.
Is it happening on all platforms? I can only play on my pc tonight Q_Q
I play on PC and it's definitely happening there. Had a guy go 43-11 running straight down the center of the Sorosubb map taking hits from AT-ATs, AT-STs, Turrets and everything and just didn't die. Ever. He destroyed an AT-ST basically on his own with his rifle.
Good grief. Welp this will definitely be interesting.
Killing AT-STs with a rifle isn't that absurd. There's an "Ion Cycler" or something of the like upgrade which makes it so your weapon does increased damage versus vehicles.
I bought it for the ps4. It's certainly pretty and my children are enjoying killing each other but I'm regretting my purchase tbh. I was hoping for something like the conquest mode in the previous games and all I really have to look forward to is on line multiplayer which to be frank I'm not.
Sooo heres hoping to better content later that I'm hoping I don't have to pay for
streamdragon wrote: Considering an AT-ST can generally one or two shot a person, being able to tank an AT-ST from 100 to 0 without dying IS that absurd.
Seriously though, it sadly turned out exactly what everyone feared: it's a soulless, low effort Call of Duty clone (GET OFF MY BACK BATTLEFIELD FANS )with a Star Wars skin. I highly recommend everyone who did not yet do so to pick up Star Wars Battlefront II. Steam sale starts soon and BFII is the vastly, vastly superior game.
streamdragon wrote: Considering an AT-ST can generally one or two shot a person, being able to tank an AT-ST from 100 to 0 without dying IS that absurd.
This. Unless you got the hero upgrade, you'll more often than not be one shotted.
As for the game - it's exactly what I wanted. I was looking for immersion and for a way to relieve some stress by shooting people after I get home from work in a setting I truly enjoy. For me it's perfect.
Actually, space fights in TOR are exactly what a Star Wars space fight should /look/ like. It basically is a rail shooter (which I love!) but the visuals and sound are exactly what make a good Star Wars starship fight. Loving them!
Still keeps me wondering why EA was too lazy to implement actual space battles. Then again, space battle DLC / "expansion" incoming?
Still keeps me wondering why EA was too lazy to implement actual space battles. Then again, space battle DLC / "expansion" incoming?
I could see one of the map packs being the Death Star. A couple of interior maps (obviously infantry-based) with iconic locations such as the cell blocks, hangar and tractor beam generator and such, then a 'Fighter Squadron' map in which the 'ground' is actually the surface of the deathstar, replete with trench turbolasers and such. Actually, how cool would it be if the Hero Ship pickup was placed at the end of the trench, so you had to actually do the trench run and pull out in time to get it?
As for the others, I am hoping for Besin, Yavin IV and maybe something for Episode VII, as I can't think of any mmajor OT locations that wouldn't be covered by then. Though since they've done Sullust, they could easily pick one of the more obscure ones. Rhen Var from BF1 would love a remake, as would Kashyyyk.
Sigvatr wrote: Still keeps me wondering why EA was too lazy to implement actual space battles. Then again, space battle DLC / "expansion" incoming?
IIRC, it's what SW:Galaxies did. Release a normal ground-based MMO, and add in space combat in the "Jump to Light Speed" expansion.
But, if the season pass allows for 4 expansions, what are they likely to involve? The missing bits of the game, and 1 per new movie?
As for now, I'm liking the game as it is. I spent the weekend pew-pewing at (or as) AT-ATs.
Crashing fighters into the ground is too common, though.
Skinnereal wrote: Crashing fighters into the ground is too common, though.
Tip that they don't really explain in game: You can use your "back movement" key (generally 'S') to slow yourself down. Conversely, forward movement key (generally 'W') accelerates you. Slowing to about 50% speed is practically essential for some maps (Sorosubb has a loooot of towers...), but keep in mind it makes it easier for others to lock onto you.
It also increases the amount of damage you do, because reasons.
Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote: Death Star scenarios (both for ships and infantry) is the only thing that would actually convince me to purchase the Season Pass.
No need to do that, presumably you can just buy the individual map packs when they come out? It'll be more expensive, but only if you're getting all of them. If there's just specific ones you want, it will be cheaper.
Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote: Death Star scenarios (both for ships and infantry) is the only thing that would actually convince me to purchase the Season Pass.
No need to do that, presumably you can just buy the individual map packs when they come out? It'll be more expensive, but only if you're getting all of them. If there's just specific ones you want, it will be cheaper.
I had no idea that was possible, actually. Never played any DICE shooter - or has that been announce for Battlefront too?
Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote: Death Star scenarios (both for ships and infantry) is the only thing that would actually convince me to purchase the Season Pass.
No need to do that, presumably you can just buy the individual map packs when they come out? It'll be more expensive, but only if you're getting all of them. If there's just specific ones you want, it will be cheaper.
I had no idea that was possible, actually. Never played any DICE shooter - or has that been announce for Battlefront too?
That'll be much cheaper indeed.
I'm assuming it's the case here, as it's the 'normal' method for DLC; you can either buy the season pass and get everything early and cheaper in total, or just buy specific packs as and when they release. It's what I do, simply as on top of a £45 game, even if I do get all the DLC in time I'd rather pay 4 lots over time than another £60 up front for stuff I won't even have access to for months.
Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote: Death Star scenarios (both for ships and infantry) is the only thing that would actually convince me to purchase the Season Pass.
No need to do that, presumably you can just buy the individual map packs when they come out? It'll be more expensive, but only if you're getting all of them. If there's just specific ones you want, it will be cheaper.
I had no idea that was possible, actually. Never played any DICE shooter - or has that been announce for Battlefront too?
That'll be much cheaper indeed.
I'm assuming it's the case here, as it's the 'normal' method for DLC; you can either buy the season pass and get everything early and cheaper in total, or just buy specific packs as and when they release. It's what I do, simply as on top of a £45 game, even if I do get all the DLC in time I'd rather pay 4 lots over time than another £60 up front for stuff I won't even have access to for months.
Thanks for the heads up on that. This is my first DICE game so I ahd no idea of their MO.
Also, if any dakkaite with the PC version wants to blast people together, PM me and I'll friend ya
If their Season Pass follows pretty much all other Season Passes, don't get it. Usually, you would only buy 1 out of all released DLC and 1-2 DLC pieces are just useless filler like additional (weapon) skins.
Sigvatr wrote: If their Season Pass follows pretty much all other Season Passes, don't get it. Usually, you would only buy 1 out of all released DLC and 1-2 DLC pieces are just useless filler like additional (weapon) skins.
A season pass with Dice games tends to be 4 DLCs with maps, possibly more.
Sigvatr wrote: If their Season Pass follows pretty much all other Season Passes, don't get it. Usually, you would only buy 1 out of all released DLC and 1-2 DLC pieces are just useless filler like additional (weapon) skins.
A season pass with Dice games tends to be 4 DLCs with maps, possibly more.
A DICE game is usually:
4 DLCs with maps, game modes, and weapons/vehicles added with each DLC.
Additionally between each DLC, you might get "battlepacks" with items that give you customization options or unlocks for weapons. Pretty sure that the latter isn't a thing now, so it might just give you random consumables--basically the stuff you would normally get from any of the packs you buy using Credits earned in-game.
Skinnereal wrote: Crashing fighters into the ground is too common, though.
Tip that they don't really explain in game: ...
It also increases the amount of damage you do, because reasons.
That matches what I read in the dev tips.
More damage when moving slower, so slowing down does nothing bad (apart from being easier to target from the ground)
Well, okay. There's a new game mode coming with "Battle of Jakku". Here you go:
In Turning Point, Rebels must locate Empire bases to attack and ultimately gain control of them. There are three Imperial bases on the new Jakku map. If Rebels capture one, more time is added to the clock and new bases become available. The end goal is to capture the Empire's third base "where the final stand will take place." DICE notes that capturing bases will become "increasingly challenging" as matches play out.
Once the Rebels have initiated a takeover of an Imperial base, Empire forces cannot reclaim it. This is when both sides will have to make some important choices.
"Let's say there's only 25% left of the claim process and the Empire has managed to drive away the Rebels. This means that the Empire have to choose between defending this vulnerable point or another part of the map," lead level designer Dennis Brännvall said in a statement. "The Rebels in turn need to decide where their next attack should be."
In terms of vehicles, Turning Point allows players to use airspeeders and AT-STs, the latter of which DICE notes will take on a "slightly more defensive" role compared to how they function in the other 40-player mode, Walker Assault.
Though the action is largely infantry-focused, there will be a good deal of action going on in the skies above. "The battles are ever-present; debris will be falling from the skies, and you'll even see a Super Star Destroyer come crashing down during the round," DICE said.
Alongside this news, EA also announced a new promotion for UK Battlefront fans. The company is holding a Battle of Jakku: Live from London event this coming Monday, November 30, beginning at 7 PM GMT. You can sign up here for a chance to get to play Battle of Jakku before its released. Sign-ups end November 25 at 11:59 PM. The event will be streamed live from the EA Star Wars Twitch account on Monday.
The Battle of Jakku launches as free DLC on December 1 for people who preordered Battlefront. Everyone else gets access to it on December 8. Jakku, as it's seen in Battlefront, takes place 29 years before its appearance in The Force Awakens. That movie comes to theaters on December 18.
)with a Star Wars skin. I highly recommend everyone who did not yet do so to pick up Star Wars Battlefront II. Steam sale starts soon and BFII is the vastly, vastly superior game.
