I've been playing around with the demo today. Some odds and ends...
- The free play run around the world doing whatever you want sort of stuff can be done solo. The game will automatically match you up for the story missions, though. I *think* you can force it to allow you to solo by doing a private server. But I haven't confirmed this. There's also a single dungeon that's available.
- Content is scaled to your level and gear. The game explicitly notes that two members of the same party can have the same content scaled individually to each of them.
- The power armor suits are called "Javelins". There are four different models, and you pick one based on the role you want to fill. The Ranger, which everyone gets at the start of the demo, is the jack of all trades model, though it does have some unique abilities. The Colossus is the heavy. The Interceptor is the light, agile model. And the Storm has access to powerful elemental attacks. As previously mentioned, you start with the Ranger. You can unlock a second suit when you reach level 12.
- Flight is a lot of fun. You jump into the air, activate your thrusters, and head in the direction that you're facing. You can continue flying until your thrusters overheat, at which point you'll fall to the ground (which doesn't hurt you). Environmental conditions (such as a waterfall) can cause your heat to build more slowly, or even be reduced. Skimming just above the surface of water is a great way to extend your flight time, assuming you're careful not to actually touch the water (which will cause you to crash).
- Most of the powerful enemies have weakpoints. They don't have big flashing signs saying "Shoot me here!" But you can usually figure out where they are without too much trouble. And when you shoot them, your damage numbers change color.
- With one exception (noted below), I enjoyed the mission fights.
- There are world quests that you can come across when you're wandering across the landscape. The difficulty seems to vary tremendously from mission to mission. One mission had me take out five small boxes on the ground, and then mop up the surviving enemies. Another had me take out the contents of three small storage buildings... and two heavily armored powerful gun turrets.
Overall, I had fun with it. None of my friends have signed on (I don't know whether they'll be trying it out), but the group content seemed fine with just the pickup groups that I ran with.
- The world map takes a little getting used to. Once you figure it out, though, it's not a problem. You'll quickly realize that the area around Fort Tarsus is apparently made up of a lot of twisty canyons, separated by very high (I.e. you can't fly over them) but very thin ridges.
- The second storyline mission had a fight that seemed dramatically harder than anything else I had to deal with. I'm not sure if that was just because the fight is really supposed to be that hard, or because I missed something "obvious".
- I had a bug in the third storyline mission. When I reached the first enemy camp, there were no enemies. This broke the mission, and I had to exit. When I reentered, everything worked properly. Also, the storyline video after completing the mission froze up right at the start.
- Scar grenade spam sucks. You'll know what I'm talking about when you first encounter them.
I played around with it over the last half hour.
Looks pretty. Buy, ye gods, loading screen after loading screen after loading screen, with menu after menu after menu. Flight controls take some getting used to if you're using keyboard and mouse, as they use mouse-steering rather than keyboard-steering. You can play by yourself, but it ain't easy. I tried the first mission by myself, got killed pretty damn fast, joined a group, and breezed through it. I'll try it some more over the weekend.
Eumerin wrote: As previously mentioned, you start with the Ranger. You can unlock a second suit when you reach level 12.
If you played during the vip demo, you get all four suits to play around with. During the actual game, you'll unlock suits at different levels than in the demo.
I wasn't impressed with the game to be honest, it's right up my ally but for some reason It just felt...meh, maybe it will grow on me, I am looking forward to the division 2 and still need to finish resident evil 2... Which is bloody awesome.
Eumerin wrote: As previously mentioned, you start with the Ranger. You can unlock a second suit when you reach level 12.
If you played during the vip demo, you get all four suits to play around with. During the actual game, you'll unlock suits at different levels than in the demo.
One of the loading screen messages in the demo tells you when you unlock suits. The first one is at level 2, and the second is at level 12 (which is when you unlock it in the demo). I don't remember off the top of my head when you unlock your last two suits, but the third suit unlocked quite a bit later on.
I don't know whether the Ranger is the default suit at level 2 (it would make sense if it was, since it's the generalist suit), or if you get to choose which Javelin is your first.
Buy, ye gods, loading screen after loading screen after loading screen, with menu after menu after menu.
I seem to recall that there was quite when I first started up the demo. But I didn't particularly notice the issue later on. I don't remember if that's because I got used to it, or there really was more right at the start of the demo.
No microtransactions exist in the game right now, so there isn't yet anything to be ridiculous. I know there will be in the future, but acting like it's already in...
Also? The devs have said they intend to include no lootboxes-- no gambling mechanics. If you spend money, you will get what you intended to get. If you want to pay for a certain cosmetic piece to your Javelin, you'll buy with in-game currency or premium currency.
At least complain about actual problems. Anthem is far from perfect in its current iteration from the demo we're playing right now.
If you're referring to the leaked bit...they're waaaaaaaaaay outdated prices and they have made zero effort to hide that yes, cosmetic microtransactions will be present.
Me and my partner have enjoyed the demos, when we've been able to play.
Just took down the Ancient Titan that is spawning in Freeplay during the shaper storm event, though both times we did so we were kicked back to Tarsis with the message "The server has shut down" upon its death and before we could even pick up what it dropped.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kanluwen wrote: According to the devs, you do get to pick your first Javelin. Unlocks are at:
2
12
20
26
This. It makes sense for people to be able to pick their own at level two, also. Otherwise for all the missions between level 2 and 12, everybody will be in the same suits and so interplay between the classes will be absent.
I haven't been able to find that free play titan mission .. been flying all over, mostly just finding missions to rescue people. Hoping there will be a lot more variety in the free play missions, really hate it when I'm trying to fly somewhere new and it tells me I went to far and I get teleported away and have to wait and wait for it to re-load everything
I picked the storm for my 2nd javelin and it's pretty fun to play, love setting up combos with the 2 different powers.
Necros wrote: I haven't been able to find that free play titan mission .. been flying all over, mostly just finding missions to rescue people. Hoping there will be a lot more variety in the free play missions, really hate it when I'm trying to fly somewhere new and it tells me I went to far and I get teleported away and have to wait and wait for it to re-load everything
I picked the storm for my 2nd javelin and it's pretty fun to play, love setting up combos with the 2 different powers.
Is the sky different with a big glowing vortex? If yes then the titan should be around the giant mushroom area due north of Tarsis. If not, try leaving freeplay and going back in.
I think I might have found it by accident roaming around. Just saw a Titan sitting there. Was a little too easy to kill, he had a lot of health but I pretty much just stood on a rock and kept using my powers on him, didn't even use any ammo. He would shoot a big ball at me once in a while that hurt a little, but by the time he would attack again my shield was back up to full again. Hopefully they make them more challenging in the end
Necros wrote: I think I might have found it by accident roaming around. Just saw a Titan sitting there. Was a little too easy to kill, he had a lot of health but I pretty much just stood on a rock and kept using my powers on him, didn't even use any ammo. He would shoot a big ball at me once in a while that hurt a little, but by the time he would attack again my shield was back up to full again. Hopefully they make them more challenging in the end
His most damaging move is an energy wave thatyou have to jump over. Unfortunately for the devs, that's not so dangerous when you've got uneven terrain. They need to make it more of a sphere with holes in it instead of waves.
The way you two talk about him, he seems like just another copy of that molten guy you meet from time to time - the one that takes almost no damage except for when his arms are on fire? I'd think we're talking about the same guy, except I ran into that guy rarely all weekend.
Colossus is great. But it actually takes the most skill to play IMO. Your shield is more powerful, but it also must be activated and is directional meaning you need a lot more situational awareness. But you have a ton more armor (aka health) and your abillities are supremely powerful.
Yeah that Titan wave attack murdered me the first time.. then I realized I could just stand on a high rock and avoid it all. I'm sure that's something they'll fix if Titans are supposed to be big bads.
Toward the end I found a pretty nice level 19 heavy pistol that became my main weapon, and then I had a sniper rifle for my alt.. Devastator I think? Not enough ammo, but it hit pretty hard. I was doing 10K damage on the sweet spots of the giant bug in that repeatable mission. I had another sniper rifle that was more rapid fire that worked nice too.
Devastator is going to be looked at heavily for adjustment; they found people using it waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much.
The Titan's "wave attack" is functioning as intended. It's supposed to be a thing you actively try to avoid--but it'll throw/spawn the fiery orb on your location if you don't move around too much when it isn't doing the waves.
This is one of the games I am more excited about this year, but after MEA I am waiting until the game actually comes out before I get, like, emotionally invested in it.
Ouze wrote: This is one of the games I am more excited about this year, but after MEA I am waiting until the game actually comes out before I get, like, emotionally invested in it.
I've been burned, baby.
If you've got EA Access or whatever the PC equivalent is, you can play 10 hrs of the full game starting February 15th.
Ouze wrote: This is one of the games I am more excited about this year, but after MEA I am waiting until the game actually comes out before I get, like, emotionally invested in it.
I've been burned, baby.
Dont buy it, save your money and spend it on a game that is acctualy worth the asking price.
"I've been burned, baby."
Missile locked and launched.
It'll put out the fire. I promise.
#rangercomboftw
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'm fairly close to preordering it right now. I figure I'll wait to see the buzz from early access and lifted embargos.
Formosa wrote: looking like EA has taken a massive hit in the stock today :/
Investors call was.
They basically admitted that BFV failed misserably in PR and player retention.
to no ones surprise.
But blamed it on single player , which bodes poorly for future Bioware games.
Ehhhhhhhh...BF1 actually was well-received with its "War Stories" and BFV did (kinda/sorta rightfully IMO) get slammed for the shorter length of their War Stories compared to BF1's.
There was also the whole nonsense about certain campaigns not being "realistic enough" leading to people trying to organize boycotts.
I'm actually hoping they release more Javelin models. It's perfect for DLC tbh, since most of the time drops are tailored to the javelin you're driving.
I brought it up here as a downgrade could lead to more agressive monetisation of anthem going forward or a stock crash leading to EA not being able to sustain the game in the future, since we are all going to buy the game (I assume) it's good to know what could be down the pipeline, such as the "test" of the $20 skins for the javalins.
I have a XboneX, I felt like it ran just fine. I'm sure it will look way better on a nice PC. I wouldn't mind playing on my PC too, but I prefer sofa gaming for the kinds of games that take a long time to play. Would be nice if they would let you play on both, but I don't think you can.
Ouze wrote: This is one of the games I am more excited about this year, but after MEA I am waiting until the game actually comes out before I get, like, emotionally invested in it.
I've been burned, baby.
I feel much the same. I haven't preordered a videogame since ME3 (never making that mistake again) and havent played any Bioware games since then
For those that have gotten to play Anthem, thoughts on the combat? It looks fun, and reactions (from what ive seen at least) tend to be split between "flying like Iron Man is awesome" and "combat is boring because enemies are unreactive bullet sponges". I haven't gotten a chance to play it myself but I've seen lots of reactions broadly along these two points and was wondering if anyone had any thoughts on that?
Melissia wrote: That's because investors are short-sighted ignoramuses who only care about trying to get the next Minecraft or Fortnite.
I'm fairly convinced this is the biggest problem with the entertainment industry right now.
Everyone is chasing the billion dollar mega hit. No one is content to simply make a tidy game on a respectable budget and take a modest profit, even if it would be far more reliable and effective a business model long term.
Ouze wrote: This is one of the games I am more excited about this year, but after MEA I am waiting until the game actually comes out before I get, like, emotionally invested in it.
I've been burned, baby.
I feel much the same. I haven't preordered a videogame since ME3 (never making that mistake again) and havent played any Bioware games since then
For those that have gotten to play Anthem, thoughts on the combat? It looks fun, and reactions (from what ive seen at least) tend to be split between "flying like Iron Man is awesome" and "combat is boring because enemies are unreactive bullet sponges". I haven't gotten a chance to play it myself but I've seen lots of reactions broadly along these two points and was wondering if anyone had any thoughts on that?
Did you play Mass Effect 3 or Andromeda? The combat is similar there--gunplay is viable, the different types of weapons are viable(only one I was disappointed in was autocannons for the Colossus, but the feedback on them seemed to be getting taken to heart) and abilities once you figure out the interplay between a "primer"(flamethrower, ice grenades, etc) and "detonator"(the Colossus' mortar/railgun, Rangers' missiles, etc) really makes it feel a hell of a lot more fluid and you'll realize why enemies(especially "armored"[yellow health bar] and shielded[blue bar over the red/yellow] might feel like "bulletsponges" if you're not using your abilities as well as guns.
Ouze wrote: This is one of the games I am more excited about this year, but after MEA I am waiting until the game actually comes out before I get, like, emotionally invested in it.
I've been burned, baby.
I feel much the same. I haven't preordered a videogame since ME3 (never making that mistake again) and havent played any Bioware games since then
For those that have gotten to play Anthem, thoughts on the combat? It looks fun, and reactions (from what ive seen at least) tend to be split between "flying like Iron Man is awesome" and "combat is boring because enemies are unreactive bullet sponges". I haven't gotten a chance to play it myself but I've seen lots of reactions broadly along these two points and was wondering if anyone had any thoughts on that?
If you don't want to get yourself squished, then it's generally a good idea to stay mobile and/or in cover while in combat. This went to extremes during the final fight in the second story mission in the demo, as there were enough (infinitely respawning, so far as I could tell) adds that it was difficult to stay on the boss (who also hit pretty hard by himself; imo, that fight was the hardest fight of all of the story mission fights in the demo). Enemy camps out in the wilds also often have very accurate long-range guns that will pick you off from quite a distance away if you don't use cover.
Also, I got stepped on by the final boss of the dungeon instance. I was looking the other way (focusing on adds), and didn't see her (I think? I think it was a queen) until it was too late. Instant one-shot.
Ouch.
Edit -
On another note, I had a brother and a brother-in-law both try out the demo. My BIL liked it. My brother, though, had a problem in that his audio didn't work in the game. He couldn't figure out how to fix it, and so didn't spend much time actually playing.
Ouze wrote: This is one of the games I am more excited about this year, but after MEA I am waiting until the game actually comes out before I get, like, emotionally invested in it.
I've been burned, baby.
I feel much the same. I haven't preordered a videogame since ME3 (never making that mistake again) and havent played any Bioware games since then
For those that have gotten to play Anthem, thoughts on the combat? It looks fun, and reactions (from what ive seen at least) tend to be split between "flying like Iron Man is awesome" and "combat is boring because enemies are unreactive bullet sponges". I haven't gotten a chance to play it myself but I've seen lots of reactions broadly along these two points and was wondering if anyone had any thoughts on that?
Did you play Mass Effect 3 or Andromeda? The combat is similar there--gunplay is viable, the different types of weapons are viable(only one I was disappointed in was autocannons for the Colossus, but the feedback on them seemed to be getting taken to heart) and abilities once you figure out the interplay between a "primer"(flamethrower, ice grenades, etc) and "detonator"(the Colossus' mortar/railgun, Rangers' missiles, etc) really makes it feel a hell of a lot more fluid and you'll realize why enemies(especially "armored"[yellow health bar] and shielded[blue bar over the red/yellow] might feel like "bulletsponges" if you're not using your abilities as well as guns.
This. Setting up combos is incredibly important for doing damage, like in Mass Effect 3 on higher difficulties. Your guns cans mow down the basic enemies but the tougher enemies need you to use your javelin abilities to take down effectively. So, setting your gear up with a primer and detonator is really important, as Kan said.
My personal set up for my colossus was a mortar that created a wall of flame and a railgun. The mortar could set a wide area on fire, setting any enemies who went through it on fire and then I could detonate them with the Railgun or melee attacks. Was very effective for the boss at the end of the stronghold in the demo, where swarms of normal enemies would come out of tunnels. The flame wall was long enough to cover the whole tunnel mouth, so all of the enemies coming out got primed ready for a hulk smash from the air to explode them all.
On another note, I had a brother and a brother-in-law both try out the demo. My BIL liked it. My brother, though, had a problem in that his audio didn't work in the game. He couldn't figure out how to fix it, and so didn't spend much time actually playing.
Just thought I'd mention that.
Both played on the PC.
That sound bug affected me and my partner too, though it was fixed by closing and restarting the game.
I did have some concerns at first about bullet spongieness. Then I realized my abilities bad really short cooldowns; they weren't just oh-crap buttons you get to use once an encounter. Things didn't feel like sponges any more.
Then I got the fire grenade (a primer). Things that weren't bosses didn't last long enough to even ask the question once I started comboing anything larger than a grunt.
The bosses felt a bit like a bullet sponge if you focus fired. But if you did your part keeping the adds clear, the boss's health was more of a timer than a sponge.
Yeah the only oh-crap button is the ultimate. The rest are meant to be used often. Using an ultimate won't just activate it, either, it'll also restore your shields and I think your health/armor.
Melissia wrote: That's because investors are short-sighted ignoramuses who only care about trying to get the next Minecraft or Fortnite.
I'm fairly convinced this is the biggest problem with the entertainment industry right now.
Everyone is chasing the billion dollar mega hit. No one is content to simply make a tidy game on a respectable budget and take a modest profit, even if it would be far more reliable and effective a business model long term.
That's because the industry isn't important to the people making money off of it. If they make a billion dollars, great. If they lose a couple million, they'll find another industry to make them billions. There's no investment in investments. Everything is disposable for something else that can make more money.
That sound bug affected me and my partner too, though it was fixed by closing and restarting the game.
My brother went so far as to uninstall and reinstall the game. But the problem didn't go away.
That's very odd. Does sound like some kind of driver issue. Wonder whether it would be fixed in the full game? I suppose the way to check would be for someone who bought it to log into Origin and install it on his machine to test.
I tried to like Destiny 2, but:
-The writing is painful
-It's too cartoony
-Classes barely vary
-Abilities beyond guns are impactful, but on long cooldowns - so it's just gunplay
-The "world" is very, very small
I know Anthem is getting meh reviews, but it looks like the loot-shooter for me. Solid atmosphere, non-cartoony, classes that actually differ, and abilities beyond gunplay each are awesome.
Also, unlike Destiny, the world - and what we know of the story - actually makes sense. Not a hard SciFi, and certainly nowhere the quality of ME/DA. But good.
The fact that it looks beautiful, and the flying feeling is amazing, are just icing on the cake.
Also, doesn't hurt that I don't need to shell out $60 every couple months just to "keep up".
It's odd, that BioWare's most recent game has masterwork combat, and it's other systems are getting ragged on; when BioWare deserved it's legendary status, it's combat/gameplay was passable, but everything else was flawless.
How many people does it take to play this? Can you do 2 player groups viably?
The story missions that were in the demo and the short quests in the free roaming mode were possible solo or in 2 player groups. The strongholds didn't have an option to play privately so if you are a squad with less than 4 people you'll get some randoms to fill out the empty slots.
The whole game tries to put you in squads of 4. It fills the squads for you, though, so you're not LFG'ing at all. And, if you don't talk to them, the other guys are basically OPNPCs (from what I saw).
I did read some posts that suggest playing the main storyline quests solo (although duo for a close pair would be basically the same thing). Pacing reasons, mostly.
Automatically Appended Next Post: From what I've read, aside from the Stronghold, the main story quests can all be solo'ed on normal without issue.
It's worth noting that you can turn matchmaking off for the story--but can't for "open world"(can't do a Private open world session BUT it won't bring people into your group unless you want to let them in) or Strongholds(which are effectively the Dungeons/Raids rolled into one bit).
How many people does it take to play this? Can you do 2 player groups viably?
Day 1 is the first day anyone who wants to pay can play the full game and that day was 2/18. If EA Bioware wants to play word games with a concept as simple as a release day by breaking it into more pieces than the triforce in Zelda then they need to be called out on that. It's not a day 1 patch regardless of how hard they try to make that fetch happen just like the buggy last minute beta they tried to pass off as a demo. It's interesting to see the early reviews of the final product coming in *below* even Mass Effect Andromeda currently making this the third debacle in a row for a previously largely unanimously beloved developer and their lowest rated game (albeit that rating is subject to change).
Yeah, I don't trust player reviews any more, too many politically motivated review bombs whose text basically amounts to "Wah wah sjws waaaaaah!" for me to trust amateur reviewers unless I actually know the person.
I actually saw one website call it a day zero patch. (As in the day before general release), but that seems absurd with it in circulation for a week.
What puzzles me with this release model is trying it out early costs $15 or whatever, but gets you everything in the origin access program and it for a month. If you aren't certain of the game, paying full price and getting it 'late' seems the absolute worst option. If you pay $15 for a month and then maybe $15 again a couple months later when the first (only? Never? ) content update comes out, you'll pay half the list price and probably get your fill of the game.
Unless there is something else to this access model I really don't understand, it seems like sensible behavior should involve flipping access on and off and saving money, and letting EA have fewer dollars.
The Origin stuff is part of a subscription for early access to certain games, occasional discount, and other content EA tries to use to justify the subscription, sometimes with other bonuses like free skins or whatever. It's generally not worth doing IMO.
Melissia wrote: The Origin stuff is part of a subscription for early access to certain games, occasional discount, and other content EA tries to use to justify the subscription, sometimes with other bonuses like free skins or whatever. It's generally not worth doing IMO.
How so? General player behavior means getting bored and moving on to a new game.
Paying $15 for a couple weeks of Anthem before getting bored seems more sensible than paying $60 for a couple weeks of anthem and getting bored.
Melissia wrote: Yeah, I don't trust player reviews any more, too many politically motivated review bombs whose text basically amounts to "Wah wah sjws waaaaaah!" for me to trust amateur reviewers unless I actually know the person.
I wasn't referring to the player reviews but rather to the aspiring political commentators who get by as game reviewers and post too many politically motivated editorials. The supposed "pros" are giving it so far a lower score (again... early, in progress, subject to change, etc) than MEA on aggregate sites like metacritic. In this rare case, they seem to be agreeing with the pleb player reviews overall.
The 15 dollars doesn't get you the game itself. It got you access to two weekends of "demo" which was had a limited selection of quests and terrain, so it's really like 4 days of playing the same two levels of content over and over again.
If you prepurchased the game and have the subscription, you got a week of early access.
I really wanna get Anthem.. the demo was a lot of fun. but I am forcing myself to resist it. Too much work to do and if I invest in an all new game like this, there goes the next 6 weeks of my life. At least this way I can wait till some more of the kinks are worked out and maybe I can pick it up if there's a sale in a couple months.
Voss wrote: I actually saw one website call it a day zero patch. (As in the day before general release), but that seems absurd with it in circulation for a week.
What puzzles me with this release model is trying it out early costs $15 or whatever, but gets you everything in the origin access program and it for a month. If you aren't certain of the game, paying full price and getting it 'late' seems the absolute worst option. If you pay $15 for a month and then maybe $15 again a couple months later when the first (only? Never? ) content update comes out, you'll pay half the list price and probably get your fill of the game.
Unless there is something else to this access model I really don't understand, it seems like sensible behavior should involve flipping access on and off and saving money, and letting EA have fewer dollars.
Yeah, I don't understand the reasoning behind it but obviously I don't have the detailed financial data they have. Withe MEA at least, the early access lead to bad reviews and the creation of the various negative memes that convinced people to not buy the game. The game wouldn't have been better without that early access but some amount of people might buy it at $60 during the first week without that coverage. Same with Anthem and them paywalling the first week of release behind Origin access. The only reason I can come up with is that if they know the game will not live up to expectations that they're hoping that the one month of Origins subscription cost will make up for the shortfall in week with some players who already bought the game also getting the subscription in addition to people who never would buy it trying it out for only $15. That's pure conjecture on my part though.
It used to be back in the 360 days that developers in various interviews look in retrospect at all the demos that used to come out as a negative both in that they took time/attention away from the full release AND convinced more people to not buy games than buy them. That wasn't the case with me personally; if I'm not sure then I wait for reviews like with stinkers like Alien Colonial Marines for example. YMMV.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Melissia wrote: The 15 dollars doesn't get you the game itself. It got you access to two weekends of "demo" which was had a limited selection of quests and terrain, so it's really like 4 days of playing the same two levels of content over and over again.
If you prepurchased the game and have the subscription, you got a week of early access.
Thanks, I didn't know that. I figured it was like the xbox game pass in that you have full access for that subscription cost. That somewhat changes what I said above but I suppose someone could possibly still preorder, get the early access, and possibly cancel the preorder although that isn't particularly likely.
Huh. I was under the impression there were two levels to 'Access,' one got a demo period and the other got free reign.
Could be wrong, as I've booted up origin only once or twice in months. In that case though, yeah, definitely not worth it.
Edit: But checking on it, Origin access tells me I can pay:
$5 for access to a 182 game collection, 10 hour trial (Anthem and more) or
$15 for access to a 189 game collection, and Full game access to Anthem and more.
And checking the FAQ, the second question is 'Can I keep playing after the early access period?' The answer is: Yes, with the $15 Premier membership. So unless there is a really hidden caveat...
And its the special edition version too, for whatever that is worth.
So, yeah, pay $15 for a month of access to the $80 edition of the game. Cancel and pay $15 again whenever. You'd have to play this one game for more than 4 months to really lose out in any real fashion. For most people, that seems unlikely.
I remember getting the basic access for the 10 hour trial of andromeda, and got to play and finish ME3 as essentially a freebie. The only real problem at the time was their back catalog was incredibly limited.
Played a couple hours of Anthem after its release. Gotta say, the story is pretty good so far, very coherent worldbuilding. The gunplay feels just as good as in the demo / beta (whichever you want to call it). Have experienced none of the bugs I found in the demo, as well, so it looks like they fixed all my complaints. Saw some more varied terrain too.
Day 1 patch markedly improved loading times on my rig (which was my only real complaint during the early access). Need to spend more time with it post-patch, but I'm cautiously optimistic.
warboss wrote: There is a 10 hour demo period on consoles. Given that I was wrong apparently about the paid level above, I won't guess morning than that.
The "10 hour demo period" is tied to EA Access for the Xbox. I don't think PS4 has a demo, since they don't have EA Access.
Looking at the review bomb it's gotten on metacritic makes me annoyed. Like, someone gave it a 0.0 because "the character isn't in the center of the screen", even though off-center characters in 3rd person games is pretty standard so that aim reticle can be in the center.
Game continues to have solid gunplay, fluid movement controls, a pretty good idea on what it's doing with worldbuilding, and generally is a good game. And yet 33% because downvoting anthem is the popular thing to do.
Congrats, maybe? I hope the 10 year live service support plan lasts longer in actuality than the DLC support Mass Effect Andromeda got. If it's on sale in two weeks at 33-50% off like Battlefield 5 then I think we'll know the sales aren't living up to expectations.
The quips every character make seemingly every five minutes get on my nerves. The gerenal uselessness I feel when using weapons in the game gets on my nerves (Seriously, they are in power armor, why is the recoil so atrocious?), the general uselessness of the class specific weapons (Other than the Flamethrower and Lightning Cannon on the Colossus) get on my nerves.
Like, I really wanted to like this game, I really really did. I love power armor, I liked Mass Effect Andromeda. But I just cant really invest in this game, the power armor doesnt feel special to me, the quipyness feels worse than it did in ME:A and I know that was a big complaint among people I know that played ME:A
How exactly are you finding abilities useless? The Ranger for example; the grenade kills a horde of enemies, the smart missile deals a ton of damage in one shot, etc. And both recharge pretty fast.
And to be honest the only weapon that has a ton of recoil is the LMG, and well, it's an LMG, so it's about what one would expect?
Yeah, the weapons seem useful. I've been running a Ranger this go round (iirc, I'm level 7, so I'm just about to unlock my second Javelin; apparently the levels required to unlock additional Javelins have been reduced since the Open Demo), which is the "boring" jack of all trades master of none Javelin, and I've been having lots of fun using Frost Grenades to freeze enemies in place (particular the big Scar guys with the flamethrowers).
And I have to disagree about the quips. The quips that I've seen so far have mostly been related to the mission narrative. The problem was the exact opposite in ME:A. One of my team mates would start to provide some commentary related to the mission narrative, and get cut off by someone making a random comment (or SAM telling me that the area I was entering could be mined). That hasn't been a problem so far in Anthem.
One thing that I've found interesting about the game is the amount of freedom to run the missions that I want. You start the game, run your first few missions... and then the next "critical" (the word for main storyline) mission is to find three NPCs and run their first missions in any order you choose. And if you, say, run the Sentinel's mission first, then you can ignore the other two "first missions", and run the sentinel's second mission immediately afterwards. IIRC, Destiny and The Division are much more linear in comparison.
One comment I've seen in youtube video reviews (not playing the game myself) is that those quips as well as other things are interesting and novel in the beginning but then slowly start to grate on you. Obviously that would vary from person to person so take it with a grain of salt.
FWIW, here is a link to the just published "roadmap" for updates over the coming months. Alot of the commentary I'm reading/watching is that with 5+ years of development that this kind of stuff should have been in the game in the first place like the first end game "cataclysm". Maybe the game will be unrecognizable (for the better?) in 6 months to a year for new players similar to Destiny? YMMV.
warboss wrote: Alot of the commentary I'm reading/watching is that with 5+ years of development that this kind of stuff should have been in the game in the first place like the first end game "cataclysm".
IMO, it depends on what's involved in preparation. If it takes the "average" (whatever that means) player a little while to prepare for it, then it's not such a big deal. And it shuts down the power gamer who blows through *all* of the content in a couple of weeks, and then starts screaming for more while the more typical players are still working on getting there. Slowing down the power gamers through slow-walking releases is pretty typical for on-line game developers. It's not until it slows down the more typical players that it starts to become a problem.
But we won't know until it rolls out, so we'll have to wait and see whether it deserves criticism or not.
They did a great job buffing the heavy javelin. Felt way too squishy during the demo, but now feels about right really. Do think they need to buff assault cannons a bit though, but theyr'e very close to a good spot.
warboss wrote: Alot of the commentary I'm reading/watching is that with 5+ years of development that this kind of stuff should have been in the game in the first place like the first end game "cataclysm".
IMO, it depends on what's involved in preparation. If it takes the "average" (whatever that means) player a little while to prepare for it, then it's not such a big deal. And it shuts down the power gamer who blows through *all* of the content in a couple of weeks, and then starts screaming for more while the more typical players are still working on getting there. Slowing down the power gamers through slow-walking releases is pretty typical for on-line game developers. It's not until it slows down the more typical players that it starts to become a problem.
But we won't know until it rolls out, so we'll have to wait and see whether it deserves criticism or not.
Well aside from being puzzled by the idea that anything is undeserving of criticism, content is a big problem for games, and developers too often underestimate what the 'average player' will blow through, especially if it's loot'n'shoot kind of play. (or MMO play in general, Blizz gets hammered on this each and every expansion)
But having 'expand progression' being 2 months away (scheduled, not actual) and a vague 'cataclysm starts' at 3 months, with acts 2 and 3 off in a nebulous future, I really expect even 'average players' will be done long before the 'expanded progression' of a mastery system drops in April.
----
My big question (one that started in Inquisition and was cranked up to 11 in Andromeda) is... why is Bioware so terrible at menus? There is zero reason for burying multi-layered nests of information that way. The important stuff should be on the top, not the bottom.
I'm not sure it has any less content than Warframe, Destiny, or Destiny 2 did at launch. Those have years worth of additional content to go through (especially Warframe, given that it's one of the older and more defining examples of this style of game), but you have to remember how they were at launch as well. It's like a new MMO launching and someone complaining it doesn't have as much content as the latest version of WoW. But WoW has had like a decade of time and literally billions of dollars with which to add new content, so that's really not a good comparison.
Melissia wrote: I'm not sure it has any less content than Warframe, Destiny, or Destiny 2 did at launch. Those have years worth of additional content to go through (especially Warframe, given that it's one of the older and more defining examples of this style of game), but you have to remember how they were at launch as well. It's like a new MMO launching and someone complaining it doesn't have as much content as the latest version of WoW. But WoW has had like a decade of time and literally billions of dollars with which to add new content, so that's really not a good comparison.
Well, no. The comparison isn't about WoW as a whole, but the limited content in each expansion. People finish them in a matter of days (in extreme cases overnight), except for grinding Rep and hunting for rare loot drops. In this regard, it's exactly the right comparison. At about 3 months and 6 months, Blizz drops patches X.1 and X.2 unlocking new areas, which again are consumed in a matter of days or hours. WoW is designed to ignore old content unless you want to grind out achievements or costume appearances. Every expansion now comes with a level boost so players never have to touch the old content, because they know the majority of their player base isn't interested and doesn't bother. At best, the hundreds of theoretical hours [in reality, leveling is absurdly fast] of old content is something to do in the down time when their isn't any new content, which if you look at the WoW forums, is generally felt to be most of the time. The item level systems pretty much guarantees that- nothing picked up outside the current patch is relevant to character progression, and there are almost always catch up mechanics to skip up to the beginning of the current patch.
I am talking about how those other looter/shooter games were at launch, though. That's actually my point- companies consistently underestimate how quickly players burn through content. One of the major problems of Anthem that keeps coming up is Bioware has learned nothing from their competitors, and Anthem was released based on 2012 assumptions (and broader principles that have been a factor in online games since mid-2000), as if the past 6 years of lessons for the genre never happened. Its the same kind of missions with the same kind of problems and if you aren't twitching power by +1 and wondering what all your percentages in various things add up to (because they failed to include a character screen !!), there isn't any point in the current 'end game'
[Aside: Blizzard also doesn't add anything close to 'literally billions of dollars' of new content. They make an absurd amount of money, but that doesn't go toward the games or the dev teams. They just, for example, had a record breaking year... and fired 800 people. Though most of that didn't affect the WoW dev team, which never recovered past 60-70 people after the layoffs of years ago]
No, I'm saying they have billions of dollars worth of income to use for development. Not that they use it all on development. WoW is basically a way for Activision-Blizzard to print money.
No one finished both Horde and Alliance quest chains in every zone for BfA overnight. Leveling 110-120 !== all content. Doing that in under 30 hours would require tons of prep, to include playing in beta to know exactly the best path to take. Even then that seems like a stretch. I could see doing it in under 40 or the 50-60 range for most people. Note: doing 2~ full zones of quests would get you to 120. IIRC, both factions got 4, plus the faction war quest chain. All content at launch together, dungeons, raids, and quest chains would probably take 72~ hours to get through once for a dedicated player. IMO, that's not a 'very little' content. The problem for Blizzard is that people routinely play 20+ hours during the initial weeks of launch and burn through everything.
By comparison, the ME Trilogy each ran around 40-50 hours to complete all storyline content (maybe more with expansions). DA:I took me around 60~ hours on my first play through (including all expansions). I don't think Blizzard's content compares poorly to single player games, gamers just log a lot of hours.
Edit: Looking back, KotOR didn't have much content compared to a many modern and older RPGs. I think finishing it took under 35 hours even on my first play through.
Melissia wrote: How exactly are you finding abilities useless? The Ranger for example; the grenade kills a horde of enemies, the smart missile deals a ton of damage in one shot, etc. And both recharge pretty fast.
And to be honest the only weapon that has a ton of recoil is the LMG, and well, it's an LMG, so it's about what one would expect?
Because all of the weapons on the Colosuss other than the Flamethrower and Lightning Coil have way to long of a recharge for what they do. I had the same issue with the Railgun that i did in the beta, the hit boxes dont seem to work for it all the time and an enemy standing still, with the Target Icon in Red still misses way more than it should, or hits the wall two feet bellow where I was aiming. The Flack Canon fires too slowly, recharges too long and has too much spread. The Assault Launcher seemed ok. All of the mortars seemed eniterly situational.
There's the unreliability I have experienced with those or I can use the Lightning Coil and Flamethrower, with the occasional shield bash and pretty much never need to use one of the basic guns ever. Which is fine, because most of the guns seem pretty meh in the first place. Suffering from too much recoil, or just uninspiring damage. As for what to expect with the LMG or Autocannons is power armor to be able to handle the recoil, because its power armor and its built to resist recoil.
My weekend was spent doing nothing but Antheming, got up to level 22 or so I think. Overall the colossus is my favorite. I tried Storm first, then collossus then the little ninja one. I think I like it more because the colossus just feels more Mechy to me. I usually go with a LMG and a grenade launcher, and then I have a cannon that hits pretty hard and the mortar thingy, but I agree they recharge too slow for what they do. I usually end up using my guns more than my powers, but I do love the ultimate cannon. I did the stronghold with the big bug, soon as that thing appeared everyone hit it with their ultimates at the same time and dropped it down to like 25% health. Was an easy fight after that.
Overall really enjoying the game. The story is cool and the missions are fun. Dammit Owen!
I don't find them to have a terribly long recharge at all? The super-shotgun one currently on my colossus for example has two shots for recharge, and recharges in like three to five seconds. The cluster mortar recharges in at most seven to ten (but I'm pretty sure it's shorter?), and it's a fairly strong skill. Sometimes they'll recharge faster than I realize and even end up going unused for some time.
But yeah, have to concur with the positive impressions. Between the weekend and early access week I kicked up to level 25, mostly by just zooming in freeplay and farming the first stronghold for goodies while experimenting with builds. Currently using an artillery storm (Frost blast and fireball) for ranged AoE goodness and a close-in Interceptor (still trying to figure out my favorite build, but it for sure involves the acid grenade because its such a fantastic force multiplier).
Tech issues are better, though the occasional disconnect or stalled mission in Quickplay still happens. I came in with pretty low expectations, but am pleasantly surprised. I wouldnt call it a GotY contender, but for me it's a quite enjoyable title I dont regret spending money on.
I think the cannon i'm using has a 14 second recharge, i forget what it's called. Either way it's not a complaint, just wish it was a little faster. I saved up my cash and bought that special colossus suit from the store for 61k credits, looks badass
I only had 1 glitch with the game, a couple times in the middle of a mission the sound just stopped working. On Xbox One X, dunno about PCs. Pretty much have to quit the game completely and come back to fix it.
I kinda wish there was cross play, so I could switch over to my PC when my girlfriend decrees it's time for her to play fortnite.
Melissia wrote: I don't find them to have a terribly long recharge at all? The super-shotgun one currently on my colossus for example has two shots for recharge, and recharges in like three to five seconds. The cluster mortar recharges in at most seven to ten (but I'm pretty sure it's shorter?), and it's a fairly strong skill. Sometimes they'll recharge faster than I realize and even end up going unused for some time.
Maybe they get better and I just need to stick with it. But the Flak Cannon I had was 2 shots also, but there was a few second delay between shots that was annoying when in the thick of things.
Your component choice can have a major impact on recharge times. Dunno about the Colossus, but both the Storm and Interceptor have multiple gear items that reduce cooldowns considerably.
Weapons can also drop which speed up CDs on one or both of your non-Ultimate abilities.
Fairly confident I've had +Speed for Ult on a weapon, too.
I've been playing this game as much as I could since Friday, and am loving it so far.
Although I had to AFK after the second trial of Fortress of Dawn. Got back, expected to be kicked out of the mission, but found the success screen instead.
The after-mission cutscene makes me know I now hate Owen, but it sucks to lose out on seeing *why* I should hate him. And, with no way to replay that mission aside from either lucking into it with Quickplay (waiting on that until I finish the game) or starting a new toon (and replaying up to that point), it'll be a while before I see it.
The gaming news (source is Eurogamer) is reporting that Anthem physical sales in the UK are half that of Andromeda two years ago and lower than other recent releases like Resident Evil 2 remake and Kingdom Hearts 3 in their first week. Obviously there are caveats in that digital sales percentage will only go up with time and it's the UK only but regardless it's not looking good for EA's goal of 5-6 million copies of Anthem sold by the end of March. Additionally, it looks like Amazon UK has started adjusting their price for the game down to 35-39 GBP (it apparently varies with the number of immediate sales).
It's been fun playing but I have a feeling it's gonna be the kind of game that gets better with age.. like the Division was just kinda OK at first but got a lot better over time. Hopefully EA doesn't give up on it.
I think the fact that it has EA's name on it is hurting it the most, like the name is poison these days.
warboss wrote: The gaming news (source is Eurogamer) is reporting that Anthem physical sales in the UK are half that of Andromeda two years ago and lower than other recent releases like Resident Evil 2 remake and Kingdom Hearts 3 in their first week. Obviously there are caveats in that digital sales percentage will only go up with time and it's the UK only but regardless it's not looking good for EA's goal of 5-6 million copies of Anthem sold by the end of March. Additionally, it looks like Amazon UK has started adjusting their price for the game down to 35-39 GBP (it apparently varies with the number of immediate sales).
OH NO! PHYSICAL SALES ARE DOWN?!
What a shock!
Why do people bother posting stuff like this?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Necros wrote: It's been fun playing but I have a feeling it's gonna be the kind of game that gets better with age.. like the Division was just kinda OK at first but got a lot better over time. Hopefully EA doesn't give up on it.
I think the fact that it has EA's name on it is hurting it the most, like the name is poison these days.
No, what's "hurting it the most" is that people don't seem to comprehend the idea of "I expect this game to be as much content as Division/Destiny right off the bat!". I have several people on my friends list for XBL whining about having "nothing to do" when they:
-Bought EA Access to power through the main story before the game was even generally available.
-Have done nothing but run Strongholds since the game launched.
We're talking people clocking 8 or more hours a session. They come home from work, get on, then go till 1am or so. It's ridiculous.
Because it's the only hard number indicator that we have even if not a complete picture and it is still indicative of total sales. Along with premature discounting, it was the first indicator that we had of lower than expected sales for example for Battlefield V until it was confirmed in a quarterly earnings call by the CEO of EA.
So I still havent broken away from the Flamethrower and Lightning Coil + Shield Combo ( think thats just my Colossus Playstyle and Im ok with that) but I found an Autocannon i like alot more, its the one that gets more accurate as you fire. Recoil seems much more manageable.
No, what's "hurting it the most" is that people don't seem to comprehend the idea of "I expect this game to be as much content as Division/Destiny right off the bat!"
To be fair, the exact same complaint was directed at The Division and Destiny when they released. With the Division I'd say it was pretty damn accurate. That game had jack all to do after leveling if the whole dark zone or whatever it was called didn't appeal to you. Destiny at least had PVP... for what little that was worth.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Melissia wrote: I'm not sure it has any less content than Warframe, Destiny, or Destiny 2 did at launch. Those have years worth of additional content to go through (especially Warframe, given that it's one of the older and more defining examples of this style of game).
I'd go so far as to say that Warframe today is a completely different game from Warframe at launch. I remember when Excalibur, Volt, and Mag were the only Warframes in the game during the beta (alpha?) and to even call it a game then would be exceedingly generous.
Necros wrote: It's been fun playing but I have a feeling it's gonna be the kind of game that gets better with age.. like the Division was just kinda OK at first but got a lot better over time. Hopefully EA doesn't give up on it.
I think the fact that it has EA's name on it is hurting it the most, like the name is poison these days.
No, what's "hurting it the most" is that people don't seem to comprehend the idea of "I expect this game to be as much content as Division/Destiny right off the bat!". I have several people on my friends list for XBL whining about having "nothing to do" when they:
-Bought EA Access to power through the main story before the game was even generally available.
-Have done nothing but run Strongholds since the game launched.
We're talking people clocking 8 or more hours a session. They come home from work, get on, then go till 1am or so. It's ridiculous.
Why is that ridiculous?
It indicates a genuine enthusiasm for the game, frustrated only by the game itself. You're honestly complaining that they enjoyed the game and want more of it.
After a five year development cycle... It doesn't seem unreasonable to want more out of the endgame than refighting boss fights for uninspiring loot drops.
And again, it's a known issue and top complaint for these types of games, and could have been accounted for.
No, what's "hurting it the most" is that people don't seem to comprehend the idea of "I expect this game to be as much content as Division/Destiny right off the bat!"
To be fair, the exact same complaint was directed at The Division and Destiny when they released. With the Division I'd say it was pretty damn accurate. That game had jack all to do after leveling if the whole dark zone or whatever it was called didn't appeal to you. Destiny at least had PVP... for what little that was worth.
Which was my point, that I could have expounded on a bit more.
Every time a game like this comes out, people inevitably expect as much content as established games.
Necros wrote: It's been fun playing but I have a feeling it's gonna be the kind of game that gets better with age.. like the Division was just kinda OK at first but got a lot better over time. Hopefully EA doesn't give up on it.
I think the fact that it has EA's name on it is hurting it the most, like the name is poison these days.
No, what's "hurting it the most" is that people don't seem to comprehend the idea of "I expect this game to be as much content as Division/Destiny right off the bat!". I have several people on my friends list for XBL whining about having "nothing to do" when they:
-Bought EA Access to power through the main story before the game was even generally available.
-Have done nothing but run Strongholds since the game launched.
We're talking people clocking 8 or more hours a session. They come home from work, get on, then go till 1am or so. It's ridiculous.
Why is that ridiculous?
It indicates a genuine enthusiasm for the game, frustrated only by the game itself. You're honestly complaining that they enjoyed the game and want more of it.
After a five year development cycle... It doesn't seem unreasonable to want more out of the endgame than refighting boss fights for uninspiring loot drops.
And again, it's a known issue and top complaint for these types of games, and could have been accounted for.
Seriously? You don't understand why people who paid for an early access service specifically to level up before everyone else are ridiculous for whining about having nothing to do?
This is the issue, not the games themselves. People don't seem to grasp that you don't have to bingeplay a game to the point of excluding everything/anything else.
LordofHats wrote: I'd go so far as to say that Warframe today is a completely different game from Warframe at launch. I remember when Excalibur, Volt, and Mag were the only Warframes in the game during the beta (alpha?) and to even call it a game then would be exceedingly generous.
I remember during the beta when they had the ability to flat out buy additional power on top of your normal power for maxed out warframes. Thankfully that didn't make it in to the full game of Warframe! Though Anthem is still more bug-free than Warframe-- the same obnoxious team invite bug that existed some time ago still hasn't been fixed, for example. And with Destiny 2 don't forget they got caught with their pants down deliberately slowing down progression (especially end-game progression) in order to encourage people to buy more lootboxes... twice.
I got to the last main story mission last night, even though I still had a couple of other side quests... it wouldn't let me do the side quests though :( would have been cool to do them first and get a an extra level or 2.
And then, right when we are fighting that final boss, he does some attack that wipes the whole group and for some reason I don't respawn, my broken heap of a collossus is just sitting there looking all sad and pathetic. The other guys in the team run up to try and fix me, and can't .. some kinda glitch. Had to just quit the game, and it was late so I didn't wanna try again.. will have to do it tonight.
Overall enjoyed the story but I kinda wish it was longer, maybe not RDR2 long, but another 6-8 missions would have been more fun, i kinda feel like you should be pushing level 30 by the end, i'm only 22 and I did all the side missions I could find.
Kanluwen wrote: Seriously? You don't understand why people who paid for an early access service specifically to level up before everyone else are ridiculous for whining about having nothing to do?
This is the issue, not the games themselves. People don't seem to grasp that you don't have to bingeplay a game to the point of excluding everything/anything else.
I hear what you are saying, and I understand it. However, the fact there was going to be early access on Origin wasn't a secret and wasn't a surprise and I don't think they get to point to that and say well, that's why - they should have accounted for that a very long time ago.
They've been harping for a long time about games as a live service, not just a single player campaign you're expected to beat in X hours and be done with it. If you have people running out of stuff to do 4 days after the game officially drops, that's a bad look: early access or not.
I am still conflicted about getting the game. I watch gameplay and it seems fun, but I also wonder if I am going to get annoyed by forced into teaming with randos (which at my patience and skillset is pretty much the worst situation now).
Kanluwen wrote: Seriously? You don't understand why people who paid for an early access service specifically to level up before everyone else are ridiculous for whining about having nothing to do?
This is the issue, not the games themselves. People don't seem to grasp that you don't have to bingeplay a game to the point of excluding everything/anything else.
I hear what you are saying, and I understand it. However, the fact there was going to be early access on Origin wasn't a secret and wasn't a surprise and I don't think they get to point to that and say well, that's why - they should have accounted for that a very long time ago.
They did--because early access on Origin and EA Access were both paid and time-sensitive. 10 hours of gameplay.
It's worth noting that Playstation didn't get early access offered at all. Not because EA hates PSN or whatever--because Sony opted out of ever striking a deal with them for EA Access(which is effectively a Redbox/Netflix for EA titles. Pay a fee, get access to a library of games)
They've been harping for a long time about games as a live service, not just a single player campaign you're expected to beat in X hours and be done with it. If you have people running out of stuff to do 4 days after the game officially drops, that's a bad look: early access or not.
The problem, again, is that some (notably vocal) gamers nowadays do what is effectively a binge session to "reach the end ASAP". I don't think companies should be expected to cater to that garbage.
I'm not done with the story yet, despite someone who I started playing story with on launch day being done. Why?
Because I take breaks and have other games I play as well.
I am still conflicted about getting the game. I watch gameplay and it seems fun, but I also wonder if I am going to get annoyed by forced into teaming with randos (which at my patience and skillset is pretty much the worst situation now).
I mean, if you're concerned about that then avoid it. Because Strongholds(the equivalent to Dungeons/Strikes/Whatever you want to call a storytime instanced encounter) require you to be in a group of 4. You can go in with a group of people you choose or get matched with randos.
Freeplay is Public, but you're not forced into teaming up with anyone. Story stuff can be Private.
I've noticed for some time now that AAA developers don't seem to get what a live service game should look like on any level. They seem to mistakenly assume they can just make games like they did before, throw in a bunch of microtransactions, and call it live service, but they all suffer from the same issues mixed with horribly unrealistic expectations from the publishers releasing them.
EA should have expected Anthem to have some of these issues, but then I think it's obvious the development team's work got scrapped once or twice cause Anthem doesn't look like a game that was worked on for six years.
I've noticed for some time now that AAA developers don't seem to get what a live service game should look like on any level. They seem to mistakenly assume they can just make games like they did before, throw in a bunch of microtransactions, and call it live service, but they all suffer from the same issues mixed with horribly unrealistic expectations from the publishers releasing them.
EA should have expected Anthem to have some of these issues, but then I think it's obvious the development team's work got scrapped once or twice cause Anthem doesn't look like a game that was worked on for six years.
It's worse than that. A "live service" game is an excuse to cut even more out of the game that was developed PRIOR to the release to add in at a later date as part of the "service" instead of releasing the full product at one time to get the minimum viable product at launch for the minimum cost. I watched the AngryJoe Anthem discussion video last night and he pointed out that the official dev streams a month ago featured 6 different helmets modeled, completed, and available for the javelin on screen and yet in game there are only one or two (one unlockable in game and the other a deluxe edition one?) that you can get currently. There are also dozens of materials on screen when they're scrolling through that screen as well. Those used to be things that were simply included in the base game at launch as easy unlockables in game that didn't require significant grinding or real world currency. Those are now instead the live service items that will likely be drip fed out over the coming months despite being ready before launch in order to pad out the live service at the expense of the base game.
It's worse than that. A "live service" game is an excuse to cut even more out of the game that was developed PRIOR to the release to add in at a later date as part of the "service" instead of releasing the full product at one time to get the minimum viable product. I watched the AngryJoe Anthem discussion video last night and he pointed out that the dev streams a month ago featured 6 different helmets modeled, completed, and available for the javelin on screen and yet in game there are only one or two that you can unlock currently. There are also dozens of materials on screen when they're scrolling through that screen as well. Those used to be things that were simply included as easy unlockables in game that didn't require significant grinding or real world currency. Those are the live service items that will be drip fed out instead over the coming months.
Did you people not also pay attention to the fact that there's Stronghold drops of cosmetic crates that aren't in the game yet? That the various events are going to have cosmetic rewards as well as actual item drops?
I mean, what an absolute shock that game devs are showcasing builds that they're working on that have stuff not in the live game yet!
It's just in the same place MMOs were a decade ago. Everyone tries to make a game that people play and pay for forever, but ultimately, the community will largely consolidate around one of them (WoW) and the rest will drift towards various models to try and pick up the scraps. Introducing new challengers stops being an attractive proposal because they're not able to launch with enough content to compete with established entities and feel inherently years behind. It's just a limited market, particularly with, as mentioned, there being a crowd that races through the content at an impossible rate and then complains about having nothing to do while the average player will still be busy for a couple months at least.
Did you people not also pay attention to the fact that there's Stronghold drops of cosmetic crates that aren't in the game yet? That the various events are going to have cosmetic rewards as well as actual item drops?
I mean, what an absolute shock that game devs are showcasing builds that they're working on that have stuff not in the live game yet!
They were showcasing cosmetic items that were DONE prior to the game going gold aka finished and ready for launch, not "builds they're working on". It's an absolute shock that you can get the verb tense so wrong so consistently in favor of the devs/game and not pay attention enough to correct it yourself. Live service items should be completed after the game is finished, not artificially cut out of the base game as previously shown in order to pad said service at the expense of the core game.
Did you people not also pay attention to the fact that there's Stronghold drops of cosmetic crates that aren't in the game yet? That the various events are going to have cosmetic rewards as well as actual item drops?
I mean, what an absolute shock that game devs are showcasing builds that they're working on that have stuff not in the live game yet!
They were showcasing cosmetic items that were DONE prior to the game going gold aka finished and ready for launch, not "builds they're working on". It's an absolute shock that you can get the verb tense so wrong so consistently in favor of the devs/game and not pay attention enough to correct it yourself. Live service items should be completed after the game is finished, not artificially cut out of the base game as previously shown in order to pad said service at the expense of the core game.
Cosmetic items being done prior to the game going gold doesn't mean jack when you do not seem to understand that devs are consistently working on builds past what we're seeing.
That demo we had? That was a build from October. It had to go through certification processes, debugging, etc via Microsoft and Sony (which still seemed to miss some big ones) to get published when it did.
And again:
There are cosmetic crates that are not in the game yet as part of the Stronghold loot tables.
warboss wrote: It's worse than that. A "live service" game is an excuse to cut even more out of the game that was developed PRIOR to the release to add in at a later date as part of the "service" instead of releasing the full product at one time to get the minimum viable product at launch for the minimum cost.
I think that's how AAA devs and pubs have approached it, and it's part of why they keep failing.
Making a successful live service game means having a fundamental gameplay concept that is solid enough and strong enough to stand on it's own, even with content limitations. That's how PUBG got started, and Fortnite, Warframe, Overwatch, DOTA clones, and Path of Exile. I'd argue that when it comes to this model they're the most successful games at the moment but no one in AAA development has bothered to take a real hard look at how these games designed themselves and instead continue making games the way they were made when I was in highschool and they wonder why that model isn't bringing them similar results.
I think Anthem actually has a really solid concept. Sci-Fi Iron Man survivors in a post apocalyptic world? That's solid as feth, but even watching Lets plays I can see that the game runs out of anything to do with that concept after a few hours, and then you're stuck waiting for content releases which isn't really encouraging for a player. The execution of the solid concept appears lacking. They'll probably fix it like they fixed The Division, but it took the Division like, a year, to get its gak together and by then a lot of people moved on to other games.
Kanluwen wrote: It's funny with regards to the racer crowd because devs are damned if they do and damned if they don't.
If they have all the content available right off the bat at launch? There will be complaints once it's beaten. No matter what.
If they time-gate or stagger content?
There will be complaints there is not enough content.
Devs are damned if they publish a complete game at launch with the free options they've already shown off included? Are you posting from an alternate bizarro universe? The "live service" is and should be separate from the game and not carved out of it prior to launch. They had 6 years to come up with more than 2 unlockable/buyable armor options for each class in the base game. I don't think that is an unreasonable thing to expect given that games with 1/2 the development time and less resources do much more.
How many people actually bought Fortnite though? Before the addition of the Battle Royale mode which seems to be all anyone does now?
Warframe took quite some time to find its feet and if they hadn't had infusions of cash by being a Freemium game? It probably wouldn't be around for us to still be talking about it.
Overwatch is just...bleh. It had Activision and Blizzard both propping it up so who knows if that would have worked.
warboss wrote: They had 6 years to come up with more than 2 unlockable/buyable armor options for each class in the base game. I don't think that is an unreasonable thing to expect given that games with 1/2 the development time and less resources do much more.
It's never been stated but I think it's fairly obvious Anthem was scrapped somewhat in 2014 and again in 2018 (both times Casey Hudson came and went from the project). Anthem doesn't look cheap by any means, but I can't fathom what they spent six years doing because the game doesn't look like something that should have taken six years to develop. There's a black hole somewhere in there that some development clearly went down and didn't come back.
Kanluwen wrote: It's funny with regards to the racer crowd because devs are damned if they do and damned if they don't.
If they have all the content available right off the bat at launch? There will be complaints once it's beaten. No matter what.
If they time-gate or stagger content?
There will be complaints there is not enough content.
Devs are damned if they publish a complete game at launch with the free options they've already shown off included? Are you posting from an alternate bizarro universe? The "live service" is and should be separate from the game and not carved out of it prior to launch. They had 6 years to come up with more than 2 unlockable/buyable armor options for each class in the base game. I don't think that is an unreasonable thing to expect given that games with 1/2 the development time and less resources do much more.
Woe be the gamers who cannot buy multiple cosmetic items for their Javelins!
The "Premium" store has a timer on it. They put up an armor set for the Storm and Interceptor both, making it so all 4 Javelins have had complete armor sets available to them as a discounted bundle that can be bought via in-game currency or Premium currency.
Along with a decal, emote, and two materials for customizing.
The items aren't exactly something you can achieve in a single sitting playing reasonable amounts of time. Hence why the timer is a weeklong thing.
warboss wrote: They had 6 years to come up with more than 2 unlockable/buyable armor options for each class in the base game. I don't think that is an unreasonable thing to expect given that games with 1/2 the development time and less resources do much more.
It's never been stated but I think it's fairly obvious Anthem was scrapped somewhat in 2014 and again in 2018 (both times Casey Hudson came and went from the project). Anthem doesn't look cheap by any means, but I can't fathom what they spent six years doing because the game doesn't look like something that should have taken six years to develop. There's a black hole somewhere in there that some development clearly went down and didn't come back.
Yes, it's called going from one generation of consoles to the next and changing game engines.
Kanluwen wrote: How many people actually bought Fortnite though? Before the addition of the Battle Royale mode which seems to be all anyone does now?
Warframe took quite some time to find its feet and if they hadn't had infusions of cash by being a Freemium game? It probably wouldn't be around for us to still be talking about it.
Overwatch is just...bleh. It had Activision and Blizzard both propping it up so who knows if that would have worked.
I think it's a pretty good question to ask, which game do you think EA is more impressed with right now? Apex Legends, or Anthem?
I suspect the former is going to dictate the course of future EA projects more than the later, cause Legends is a lot more solid on the surface.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kanluwen wrote: Yes, it's called going from one generation of consoles to the next and changing game engines.
That wouldn't explain why content wise the game looks like something with a 1 year turn around time more than a 6 year project.
Kanluwen wrote: How many people actually bought Fortnite though? Before the addition of the Battle Royale mode which seems to be all anyone does now?
Warframe took quite some time to find its feet and if they hadn't had infusions of cash by being a Freemium game? It probably wouldn't be around for us to still be talking about it.
Overwatch is just...bleh. It had Activision and Blizzard both propping it up so who knows if that would have worked.
Anthem hasn't completely changed game genres in the past few weeks and nor will it change to free to play so using Fortnite as an example is particularly a bad choice. Warframe is a better comparison but it has always been free to play and that generally means that gamers allow the devs more latitude in what/how they offer updates since it literally costs them nothing. That latitude isn't and shouldn't be afforded to a full priced game IMO. In a game like Warframe that has no cost of entry, the service is the product/game so the base expectations at launch are alot lower for most players. For a mandatory $60 entry fee, the expectation that something at least be comparable to games from 10 years earlier in terms of options isn't unreasonable.
Kanluwen wrote: How many people actually bought Fortnite though? Before the addition of the Battle Royale mode which seems to be all anyone does now?
Warframe took quite some time to find its feet and if they hadn't had infusions of cash by being a Freemium game? It probably wouldn't be around for us to still be talking about it.
Overwatch is just...bleh. It had Activision and Blizzard both propping it up so who knows if that would have worked.
I think it's a pretty good question to ask, which game do you think EA is more impressed with right now? Apex Legends, or Anthem?
I suspect the former is going to dictate the course of future EA projects more than the later, cause Legends is a lot more solid on the surface.
People said the same thing about Battlefield Heroes a few years ago, and yet...
Will Apex Legends have an impact? Sure! But it's really "just another..." of that style of Hero oriented game. It stripped out the stuff that made Titanfall and Titanfall 2 fun to basically just play off the brand.
Kanluwen wrote: Yes, it's called going from one generation of consoles to the next and changing game engines.
That wouldn't explain why content wise the game looks like something with a 1 year turn around time more than a 6 year project.
Reworking a game from scratch to suit a new generation of consoles isn't an easy thing.
Reworking a game from scratch to suit a new engine isn't an easy thing.
warboss wrote: They had 6 years to come up with more than 2 unlockable/buyable armor options for each class in the base game. I don't think that is an unreasonable thing to expect given that games with 1/2 the development time and less resources do much more.
It's never been stated but I think it's fairly obvious Anthem was scrapped somewhat in 2014 and again in 2018 (both times Casey Hudson came and went from the project). Anthem doesn't look cheap by any means, but I can't fathom what they spent six years doing because the game doesn't look like something that should have taken six years to develop. There's a black hole somewhere in there that some development clearly went down and didn't come back.
I agree but it isn't an excuse IMO for the final product that is being sold as if that wasn't the case. If the game is a service then I don't think it's unreasonable for complaints if that base expectation of service isn't met. YMMV (and obviously with Kanluwen it does). If you go to a restaurant and order a meal, you don't care if someone called in sick last week and they were short staffed so forgot to order the key ingredients in the name of the meal you already ordered that came without them. I expect we'll see a behind the scenes expose in 6-12 months on a social justice gaming website like Kotaku like what we got with Andromeda.
Kanluwen wrote: How many people actually bought Fortnite though? Before the addition of the Battle Royale mode which seems to be all anyone does now?
Warframe took quite some time to find its feet and if they hadn't had infusions of cash by being a Freemium game? It probably wouldn't be around for us to still be talking about it.
Overwatch is just...bleh. It had Activision and Blizzard both propping it up so who knows if that would have worked.
Anthem hasn't completely changed game genres in the past few weeks and nor will it change to free to play so using Fortnite as an example is particularly a bad choice. Warframe is a better comparison but it has always been free to play and that generally means that gamers allow the devs more latitude in what/how they offer updates since it literally costs them nothing. That latitude isn't and shouldn't be afforded to a full priced game IMO. In a game like Warframe that has no cost of entry, the service is the product/game so the base expectations at launch are alot lower for most players. For a mandatory $60 entry fee, the expectation that something at least be comparable to games from 10 years earlier in terms of options isn't unreasonable.
Warframe "has no cost of entry" but let's not pretend there aren't microtransactions out the wazoo.
Want to add a Reactor or Catalyst to a Warframe, Sentinel, Kavat, Kubrow, or Weapon? Platinum, please! Or use one of the relatively rare ones that get given to you via an Alert or wait for an event.
Want to add an additional weapon, Sentinel, pet, or Warframe slot? Platinum, please!
Color palettes? Plat!
People love to pretend that "Well you can sell things via the in-game marketplace!" makes Platinum not a real thing. But they also love to pretend that the market isn't ridiculous.
Kanluwen wrote: Warframe "has no cost of entry" but let's not pretend there aren't microtransactions out the wazoo.
No one is pretending that. I'm certainly not. Let's also not pretend that in most of the good and popular games that those microtransactions are actually optional in practice and are not comparable to a $60 mandatory entry fee prior to playing your first session.
Kanluwen wrote: Warframe "has no cost of entry" but let's not pretend there aren't microtransactions out the wazoo.
No one is pretending that. I'm certainly not. Let's also not pretend that in most of the good and popular games that those microtransactions are actually optional in practice and are not comparable to a $60 mandatory entry fee prior to playing your first session.
Find me a single microtransaction in Anthem that is mandatory.
Kanluwen wrote: Warframe "has no cost of entry" but let's not pretend there aren't microtransactions out the wazoo.
No one is pretending that. I'm certainly not. Let's also not pretend that in most of the good and popular games that those microtransactions are actually optional in practice and are not comparable to a $60 mandatory entry fee prior to playing your first session.
Find me a single microtransaction in Anthem that is mandatory.
Dude, now I know you're purposely miscontruing the discussion so as not to confront the actual point being made. I'm clearly referring to the base cost of the retail game and have never even hinted that any Anthem microtransaction is mandatory. You're not even tilting at real windmills in your quest to defend the fair maiden Anthem's honor.
LordofHats wrote: Making a successful live service game means having a fundamental gameplay concept that is solid enough and strong enough to stand on it's own, even with content limitations. That's how PUBG got started, and Fortnite, Warframe
I gotta stop you there.
Warframe launched as an almost no-content non-game on release. Its gameplay was fairly mediocre as well. It's had to go through multiple iterations in order to get where it is now. Stop looking at these rather old games and comparing where they are now as if where they are now is the same as where they were at their launch.
Kanluwen wrote: Warframe "has no cost of entry" but let's not pretend there aren't microtransactions out the wazoo.
No one is pretending that. I'm certainly not. Let's also not pretend that in most of the good and popular games that those microtransactions are actually optional in practice and are not comparable to a $60 mandatory entry fee prior to playing your first session.
Find me a single microtransaction in Anthem that is mandatory.
Dude, now I know you're purposely miscontruing the discussion so as not to confront the actual point being made. I'm clearly referring to the base cost of the retail game and have never even hinted that any Anthem microtransaction is mandatory. You're not even tilting at real windmills in your quest to defend the fair maiden Anthem's honor.
Then make a frigging point. You cut out my statement to then throw out some gobbledygook about how those "microtransactions are actually optional in practice and are not comparable to a $60 mandatory entry fee prior to playing your first session".
Because quite frankly, if you track spending patterns for Warframe players? You will see plat purchases that equate to around $60 if not more over the course of their early game experiences--assuming the person actually sticks around rather than just quits.
Content issues aside, I found the combat to be fun, and the visual artwork astounding. Enemies felt a bit odd in not taking too much advantahe of a 3d battlespace, but I could overlook that, especially if the point was to emphasize the power of the player characters. Flying around the world was pretty great.
Unfortunately the mishmash of coop multiplayer and story elements did not mesh well at all, ultimately feeling like two different unfinished games being frankensteined together into something that sounds cool on paper, but in practice makes for an awfully frustrating experience of waiting on other people, missing lots of story elements, and lots of looooooooong loading screens. These aspects fundamentally drag on each other. Actually sitting down with a group of pals and trying to experience the full panoply of the game just didn't feel possible, one had to give up on one aspect to enjoy another.
Games like L4D or Vermintide do the coop combat thing well without a deep interactive story, just as ME3 didn't try to tell its story directly through the multiplayer elements.
The lack of indication on exactly what item bonuses do, and the inane process that equipping new gear entails, was also not helpful.
I think a lot of problems can and likely will be fixed over time, but the fundamental SP/MP melding is going to be a hell of a stumbling block. Some people won't mind the waiting or skipping and whatnot, and I think that crowd will have lots of fun over time, but at least for myself I found it to be intenstly frustrating.
1. Accepting the pre-order bonus crashed the client. But the content was in my inventory when I reopened it.
2. One Contract, the last collectable for the quest was bugged and nobody could pick it up. Dropped the mission, started the mission again, and it worked.
3. I force-closed in a stronghold once, and when I reopened, pressed "X" to load, and it took that to mean I wanted back into the stronghold - but it respawned me *alive*.
I know the game is unfinished, and that many others are seeing a lot more defects, but it's been quite reliable for me.
As for unfinished - that stronghold run I forceclosed. This has only happened once, but there was a party member who just ran around and if anyone died, they'd go to their corpse and /wave.
Annoying, but strongholds aren't too hard. We made good progress. Then, a little over halfway through, all 3 of us actually *playing* went down.
Now what?
If 4/4 go down, it'll wipe you, and you all respawn. But with 1 alive? Doesn't happen.
So drop group? Can't. No menus, no nothing while dead. So you can't even ditch if things go really sideways.
Wait? He was at it for over 10 minutes. Just running to each corpse in order. Being a tool.
Hence why I force-closed out of a stronghold. Didn't intend to return to it.
I'm only lvl 14 (playing missions solo, only grouping on contracts/freeplay), but it's been a ton of fun.
My complaints, though:
1. Loading screens
I had the same problem in Destiny, but in Destiny, you can go into the menus/review gear/track quests.
The menus aren't any longer than other games, since launch. But they're more noticeable. First, they're too often (Forge and one-room-dungeons have loading screens?) Second, it's just a fullscreen with an image and one line of text.
I'd *love* it if they added the "Codex" to the Loading Screens. There's so much to read and see in that menu. Put it over the loading screens, and most players won't notice loads at twice the length!
2. Assumed multiplayer.
I want to do the core story missions solo. I don't want to jump through the same hoops every time. And some of the stuff seems clearly tuned to be a headache for solo play. A quest with 4 Ursix? Without combos (and my Ranger solo can't Prime the Ursix - neither the Fire grenade nor Shock Mace did enough to Prime), each Ursix took a *long* time to take down.
3. Gated Contracts
I'm a decent way through the main story quest. I don't want to progress it before I talk to everyone. And sometimes, I just want action. Freeplay exists, and is a lot of fun, but sometimes instead of roaming and doing whatever, I want a canned multiplayer experience - drop in, do some contract, drop out.
I think I've had 3 Contracts *total* so far. Sounds like the rest don't unlock until you finish all the related story content.
Why? Why not let me choose those so I can "play my way"? I want to digest the story missions at my own pace.
4. Game by numbers
The guns each feel like they came from a spreadsheet. 1 "normal" all-rounder (Scout, Guardian, etc). One either super-fast or super-slow. And one mini-gimick (such as "2-round bursts"). Most (if not all) categories have these 3. No more, no less.
Each Javalin has the exact same number of skills for each slot. So maybe there was this crazy cool idea for a skill, but that slot already has the mandatory number? Well, too bad. Or maybe there was a dumb idea for a skill, but nothing better came along? Oh well. Skills should be included because they're interesting, not just because it brings a Javalin to the right number.
Why doesn't the Interceptor have a "Turn invisible for 3 seconds" skill? Why does the Ranger have exactly one skill of each element (minus Lightning - which is only available on melee)? Why are there no skills that can fit in either slot? Why are all the utility skills so bland?
They really need to open up and just put ideas out there. They don't need to keep all the options limited to some "magic number". Build what makes sense. Provide options as they come up.
I can't wait to hop back on.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @Vak,
For the SP/MP melding, I think it'd work a *lot* better if they didn't gate so much of the MP behind the story quests. If you could go run contracts or side missions early on, and leave the story quests for when you were playing solo, I think it'd be a much better game. Your thoughts?
Automatically Appended Next Post: @Vak,
For the SP/MP melding, I think it'd work a *lot* better if they didn't gate so much of the MP behind the story quests. If you could go run contracts or side missions early on, and leave the story quests for when you were playing solo, I think it'd be a much better game. Your thoughts?
I think that would help the player experience a lot, but at that point it would be a fundamental admission of the defeat of the original game concept and leave one to wonder why they dont just split the MP/SP elements entirely back to their traditional areas. It'd definitely make the game more fun however, at least for me.
The aforementioned lack of communication tools also didn't help the feeling of disconnect.
I'll give my 2 cents since preordering and playing it now for a few days.
Over all, I find myself wanting to keep playing it. Im not super far so I cant speak to end game stuff or loot issues ive heard.
Pros:
Visuals and sound. Both top notch.
Lots of story and characters
Fairly fast action, very eye catching
Cons:
Loading. they said it was fixed, but wow. So many loading screens, and boy does it suck.
Guns. Really, seems like you just want the one that shoots the fastest. Your spamming abilities with short cooldowns and flying so I don't see much reason to use a sniper or any gun that doesent spray
Enemies. Not very smart. Very run of the mill.
Story and characters. While its good, it also isn't. I don't want to do missions where I cant skip a cut scene that goes on 10 min when ive done it before. Also if your with friends you need to yell on the mic for them to shut up so you can listen
Unable to go solo freeplay. Why? I get strongholds, that's the point of them but why do I need randos running around in my freeplay.
Im sure I could list more cons, and while it seems like theres a lot of issues, I am enjoying the game.
The aforementioned lack of communication tools also didn't help the feeling of disconnect.
Out of curiosity, which platform are you considering playing it on? Console have included mics usually but it seems like in recent years they're being used less and less in modern games by players compared with even in the original xbox days when they were a novelty. As for the tools, I've heard alot of buzz about the pinging tools/functions that don't require voice chat on the F2P Apex Legends game by Respawn (also owned by EA) but haven't played it myself to know for sure. Perhaps if those are good they could consider adding something similar.
str00dles1 wrote: Guns. Really, seems like you just want the one that shoots the fastest. Your spamming abilities with short cooldowns and flying so I don't see much reason to use a sniper or any gun that doesent spray
I've come to the opposite conclusion. Guns like the fastest firing variants on assault rifles, lmgs, and machine pistols are the least useful guns to me. A sniper rifle I can use to kill an enemy or two while the powers are on cooldown, and usually slower firing weapons have better range, which helps keep me out of danger. A hand cannon style heavy pistol is great for cqb as I don't have to deal with recoil for the most part, with them. Marksman rifles are my favorite kind of weapon in this (ironically, in Destiny 2 they were my least favorite!).
Only exception is the colossus' Assault Cannon class of weapon variants, which... well... just look at the name of that. They're just a great heavy weapon to carry around.
Kanluwen wrote:
People said the same thing about Battlefield Heroes a few years ago, and yet...
There was no point in time where Battlefield Heroes wasn't looked at like a bad joke.
There's also a very big difference between a game that reached 7 million users at it's peak, and one that topped out at 25 million users just last week. Apex Legends sudden success literally saved EA's stock price from a dive caused by it's lack of success in the traditional AAA games market and lagging sports franchise sales. If EA were smart they'd pay attention but... I won't be shocked if EA feths it up. I never doubt EA's ability to screw itself, especially not with the past three years as a wonderful display in how not to run a company.
Reworking a game from scratch to suit a new generation of consoles isn't an easy thing.
Reworking a game from scratch to suit a new engine isn't an easy thing.
I find that argument unconvincing. Xboxes basically run on windows with a different GUI at this point.
Melissia wrote:Warframe launched as an almost no-content non-game on release.
I'm not strictly talking about content (I think that as a general rule this medium has a particular struggle at the moment with content scarcity across the entire industry). Too much money goes into visuals and graphics. Not enough into actual gameplay. Case and point, Tomb Raider spent more than a million dollars animating Lara's hair. Who the feth thought that was a valuable use of their admittedly overblown budget?
For this though I'm talking about how the game is intended to work mechanically. From the start Warframe had a clear model in mind. Cyborg-Techno ninjas go into a mission stage, clear out enemies, get rewards, grind their gear up into better gear, go into new mission stage. Even in the early days when the AI was bat gak gak stupid, the combat a clunky rendition of it's current state, and items numbered at ten, the game had that model and stuck to it for years before moving out of it. As clunky and barely a game as the start was a clear vision was present of what the game would be and how it would keep players playing.
AAA devs have largely failed at that. They throw together the same kind of game they always have, and their only ideas about how to keep people playing seem to hinge on microtransactions and sparse content updates. Anthem and Destiny are the first games I've seen come out that seem to actually be moving in the right direction on turning a AAA game into a successful service game. My criticism is directed at the industry, not Anthem specifically (though again, I never doubt EA's ability to feth it up).
If you're just talking about the industry, that's fine, but not all criticisms of the industry at large is applicable to specific games, as you yourself admitted with your example of Warframe.
I think Anthem's fortunes have become unfortunately tangled in the ongoing disaster of the industry. A couple of years ago the excitement would have been unquestioned, but in the meantime the reputations of EA and Bioware, the genre of game they're aping and even rival studios who we once used to use as a way of comparing Bioware's quality have been pretty thoroughly tarnished, with Anthem sort of showing up late after someone already threw up and ruined the party (and unfortunately, not bringing anything SO great as to start it up again).
LunarSol wrote: It's just in the same place MMOs were a decade ago. Everyone tries to make a game that people play and pay for forever, but ultimately, the community will largely consolidate around one of them (WoW) and the rest will drift towards various models to try and pick up the scraps.
Just for fun...
Reportedly some WoW subscription numbers were leaked late last year (since Blizzard apparently no longer releases the numbers) that put the number at 1.7 million. Unfortunately, since Blizzard isn't officially releasing the numbers, we can't examine them to see how many of them are "active" as opposed to "barely playing", etc... But it's something to work with.
Final Fantasy XIV apparently had just over 750,000 active characters this month, according to the FFXIV Census website. That doesn't include players in China, which is a bit off by its own due to the unfortunate restrictions that country imposes. While the census only counts "characters" as opposed to "accounts", keep in mind that FFXIV allows you to level up multiple classes/jobs on the same character, so there are a lot fewer alts than in most other MMORPG games. So the number of active accounts is probably right around the same number. Additionally, FFXIV is in the end of life cycle for the Stormblood expansion. Shadowbringers will be releasing this summer, which will probably bump the number of active characters up for a while.
While I'm aware of other MMORPG games, I'm not aware of any others that fit the same general genre, and could compete with FFXIV, let along compete with WoW (assuming the leaked numbers are accurate).
Anyway, getting back on topic...
The "race through the content" problem is an issue for every on-line game. Developers have to cater to the "normals", but also have the hard-core "put in a ridiculous amount of time" players. And the latter tend to loudly complain when they run out of new content. Though developers can still have fun with them at times using content explicitly aimed at them (see FFXIV's Ultimate Binding Coil of Bahamut for an example).
Anthem's solution appears to be a grind. After you finish the big mission in the story, you're confronted with a long grind requiring lots of world events, stronghold runs, contracts, and "quickplay" missions (which is where you join a randomly selected player's mission to help them complete it). IIRC, you're looking at 100 missions (of assorted types), and 100 world events to clear the grind. Is it the best solution? Of course not. Grinds can get to be annoying, and will burn you out if you're not careful. But it is one way of playing for time while they prepare whatever it is that they're planning next. And the story has at least a few dangling plot hooks ready to go.
At the very least, it gives players something to work on besides just leveling up their equipment. And I would imagine that the average "normal" player could get through it in a month or two.
Anthem's solution appears to be a grind. After you finish the big mission in the story, you're confronted with a long grind requiring lots of world events, stronghold runs, contracts, and "quickplay" missions (which is where you join a randomly selected player's mission to help them complete it). IIRC, you're looking at 100 missions (of assorted types), and 100 world events to clear the grind. Is it the best solution? Of course not. Grinds can get to be annoying, and will burn you out if you're not careful. But it is one way of playing for time while they prepare whatever it is that they're planning next. And the story has at least a few dangling plot hooks ready to go.
Destiny 2 ultimately wen the same route with the Foresaken expansion, though I'd argue the results show case why catering to the 12 hour a day player is an awful idea, and their complaints about having nothing to do should just be met with "we're sorry." The game has become so grindy that it doesn't even seem worth playing. There were 4-5 hour a day players who even after three months still hadn't reached the item level cap there was so much time gating and grinding involved. I stopped last month after my frustration with a lack of meaningful rewards for my time reached its peak and I went back to playing Grim Dawn for my looter fix (helps that Forgotten Gods is coming).
Grind can be fun with properly incentivized. I love grinding. Warframe practically made it an art to make your grind as efficient as possible. A mindless, tedious grind, with pathetic rewards at the end however has very negative consequences.
Unable to go solo freeplay. Why? I get strongholds, that's the point of them but why do I need randos running around in my freeplay.
I actually wish there were *more* people in a Freeplay instance. If I stumble across a tough world event, it's nice having support arrive to help out if something goes wrong. For instance, I suspect that if I run into one of the four named titans that are listed in the achievement, then I'm going to need help (I have trouble with the titan blast rings; and whenever I manage to successfully avoid them, I invariably get blind-sided by the seeking fireball that they seem to like to launch immediately after the last ring) But so far as I can tell, a freeplay instance appears to consist of exactly four players in the entire world area (which is pretty good-sized), usually all off in different parts of it doing completely different things. I was up in Shadowmarch(?) last night - the northwest part of the map - and cleared out two world events on my own (including a titan) - without any other players getting anywhere even remotely close to me while I was doing so.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'd *love* it if they added the "Codex" to the Loading Screens. There's so much to read and see in that menu. Put it over the loading screens, and most players won't notice loads at twice the length!
This is what they do in Monster Hunter World. MHW has long loading screens. But whenever you're stuck in one, there are seven little messages with either helpful hints, or in-game lore, that the game automatically advances through over the course of the loading screen. It helps distract a bit.
warboss wrote: They had 6 years to come up with more than 2 unlockable/buyable armor options for each class in the base game. I don't think that is an unreasonable thing to expect given that games with 1/2 the development time and less resources do much more.
It's never been stated but I think it's fairly obvious Anthem was scrapped somewhat in 2014 and again in 2018 (both times Casey Hudson came and went from the project). Anthem doesn't look cheap by any means, but I can't fathom what they spent six years doing because the game doesn't look like something that should have taken six years to develop. There's a black hole somewhere in there that some development clearly went down and didn't come back.
Yes, it's called going from one generation of consoles to the next and changing game engines.
What? Anthem? No, that is just a completely incorrect assertion.
Anthem is very clearly built from Andromeda with an iteration of the same Frostbite engine with a handful of new subsystems (flight being the biggest). It looks the same, handles much the same, and has a very similar UI and functionality in powers.
There isn't a major generational change here. This is Bioware building further on the back of Frostbite, which they've been using for years now. Both DA:I and Andromeda are very present in this game's graphics and design.
Story wise and sale model wise, this is a different game. But from a programming/mechanical perspective, Anthem is straight up Andromeda 2: Soaring Boogaloo.
Finished the main story last night, was cool, but a little short. Nice to see them already setting up the next big bad though. And nice to see plenty of new missions and contracts open up now.
Forget what they called it.. Valor something? But with that new achievement/challenge where you have to do like 50 contracts and 100 freeplay missions and more, seems like it'll be a long grind. I'm sure someone on the web be bragging about finishing it by friday though. Makes me wonder though if it might have been better to save those side contracts I was doing earlier in the game for now, when I need to do contracts for that achievement.
So.. those little diamond loot thingies that mobs drop or you find in chests ... do you have to pick them up? Or do they automatically get collected for you anyway at the end of the mission?
strange .. seems the last few games I was coming away with tons of loot, mostly white and green items.. didn't recall picking up that much but maybe I just wasn't paying attention.
Would be nice, I had one game where I opened a chest just as the rest of the team was flying away, I think they missed it. Would be cool if you could still get rewards when that happens. Or maybe just the mission rewards but not monster drops or random chests.
Yeah, I agree. There's several suggestion threads on the forums to that effect, too. Looting should be convenient in a Shoot-and-Loot style game like this.
Necros wrote: Finished the main story last night, was cool, but a little short. Nice to see them already setting up the next big bad though. And nice to see plenty of new missions and contracts open up now.
Forget what they called it.. Valor something? But with that new achievement/challenge where you have to do like 50 contracts and 100 freeplay missions and more, seems like it'll be a long grind. I'm sure someone on the web be bragging about finishing it by friday though. Makes me wonder though if it might have been better to save those side contracts I was doing earlier in the game for now, when I need to do contracts for that achievement.
I suspect that contracts are infinite. You've got three main sources of side story missions, and at least two of those individuals intersperse their story missions with contracts (I'm not sure about Mathias). So I don't think you risk running out of them.
A funny little animation by one of our fellow dakkites (don't recall his name but he has the crudely drawn ultramarine done in his style as his avatar pic) about Anthem. Lol.
I have been playing Anthill for few days now. So far I'm happy to field the Jäger suit. I unlocked the bigger King Cobra, tried it for one mission and returned back to the Jäger. I guess I'm gonna play the variant suits when I have finished the story missions and get to the grindy part of the game.
I was half tempted to paint my Jäger in red-yellow colors to look like Iron Man, but I'll stick to my red-white theme I'm using in Destiny2 also.
So far it has been fun game and I've actually felt like using a power armour.
I saw a few iron man colored suits running around. I have my colossus in stormtrooper colors all back with white armor plates, and the dirty wear & tear look.
I got my first masterwork last night! Wasn't expecting it since I'm only level 25 or so. It was a grenade launcher, but I didn't get to try it out since right at that moment my girlfriend decreed it was time for her to play fortnite. The item level was 40, which kinda sucks cuz I'm gonna have to replace it with a max level item eventually.. wish there was a way to just upgrade an item you already have with crafting, rather than scrapping it.
I managed to get a whole 3 missions done for the valor challenge... I think that one's gonna take a while. Apparently there's a challenge of might after it, and the reward is something dumb like 2000 coins.
I'm still trying to find out which weapons are my faves. I'm currently packing a slow-firing LMG with scout rifle as packup (don't remember their names as I keep replacing them).
I know I shoulg give some combo powers to my suit, but I just enjoy the straightforward regular grenade and homing missile combo. I guess I could keep the homer, if I change the grenade into something that has a priming effect...
Anyway, I'm still low level (having just unlocked my second Gear. 2 more to go.), so there is time to figure out the weapons.
I also recently found out it's quite fun to steamroll stuff with a colossus. Just whip out your shield, sprint and squash all the baddies in your path. Well, some of the tougher things need you to back up over them and then hit em twice, but that just makes it double the fun.
I'm torn on this one. It looks like a generally interesting power armor game, however...
Jim gave it a pretty poor review, sighting concerns over the dullness of the levels, a focus on lore rather than a compelling story, and the repetitiveness of missions coupled with long loading times.
Jim Sterling is entitled to his opinion. I very much disagree with most of his assertions, though. The "repetitive" complaint, for example-- there's always a bit of a grind in these "Shoot and Loot" style games, but Anthem is fairly generous in its loot in the early-mid levels, and this latest patch is designed to rectify the end-game rewards not feeling satisfying enough.
The level design is varied and alien in nature with a unique focus on exploration and vertical as well as horizontal terrain that hasn't been seen in most games of this type, so I'd hardly call it dull. The focus on lore vs compelling story is the closest he came to a valid complaint, but despite there being a ton of effort being put in to there still IS a good story in there.
To be honest, many of his complaints basically boil down to "I already have Warframe so this game has to be extra special perfectly awesome to make me want to play it." Which fair enough. Only have so much time in the day, after all. But that you already have a game you're spending your time on doesn't make all other games bad, and trying to belittle other games in order to justify your choice is just kinda sad.
Melissia wrote: Jim Sterling is entitled to his opinion. I very much disagree with most of his assertions, though. The "repetitive" complaint, for example-- there's always a bit of a grind in these "Shoot and Loot" style games, but Anthem is fairly generous in its loot in the early-mid levels, and this latest patch is designed to rectify the end-game rewards not feeling satisfying enough.
The level design is varied and alien in nature with a unique focus on exploration and vertical as well as horizontal terrain that hasn't been seen in most games of this type, so I'd hardly call it dull. The focus on lore vs compelling story is the closest he came to a valid complaint, but despite there being a ton of effort being put in to there still IS a good story in there.
To be honest, many of his complaints basically boil down to "I already have Warframe so this game has to be extra special perfectly awesome to make me want to play it." Which fair enough. Only have so much time in the day, after all. But that you already have a game you're spending your time on doesn't make all other games bad, and trying to belittle other games in order to justify your choice is just kinda sad.
That makes me feel a little bit better about trying the game out then. I haven't bought an electronic game in months, this is the closest I've come and I'm thinking about getting it this weekend. Thank you!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kanluwen wrote: I can confirm that you need to stop reading Jim, since he relies on being negative for ad revenue.
Jim is one of those people who I agree with 30% of the time, but when we do agree on something, I feel it's more trustworthy coming from him. However, in this case, he clearly could be biased.
Also, he is negative, but he doesn't run ads, so I'm more in the belief that it is because he's just a gak-hole in real life.
Jim is negative because he deals with a lot of news about the gaming industry at large, which is itself largely negative. But lately he's gotten really repetitive about it. And I get it, there's not much good news to go around sometimes. But it's kinda tiresome to listen to him ramble on so much. He needs fresh material.
Togusa wrote: Jim gave it a pretty poor review, sighting concerns over the dullness of the levels, a focus on lore rather than a compelling story, and the repetitiveness of missions coupled with long loading times.
Having watched the video, it really feels less like an Anthem review and more like a general review of AAA gaming as an industry. While I think a lot of his points are very worth thinking about, I'm not sure this is worthwhile as a review for a game XD
I think Jim can be funny at times, but yeah, most of the youtubers are all about being negative cuz that brings them the views. It's kind of a pain when you want to find a good and honest review of something, and all you get is a bunch of complaints. Not just for games either, it's like a youtube epidemic.
Melissia wrote: Jim is negative because he deals with a lot of news about the gaming industry at large, which is itself largely negative. But lately he's gotten really repetitive about it. And I get it, there's not much good news to go around sometimes. But it's kinda tiresome to listen to him ramble on so much. He needs fresh material.
I can very much agree with that. It's because he and I have very different views on games that I tended to trust him on his reviews, but I definitely now think this game really deserves a second look. I think that the loss of Steam Greenlight really took the wind out of him in terms of content.
Be aware that yes the loot stuff has had a hotfix, BUT the Uncommons/Commons at 30 fix wasn't something they could do serverside. It's going to be a bit before it happens.
Pretty sure they mention it in the Reddit post, but just a FYI.
Melissia wrote: Jim Sterling is entitled to his opinion. I very much disagree with most of his assertions, though. The "repetitive" complaint, for example-- there's always a bit of a grind in these "Shoot and Loot" style games, but Anthem is fairly generous in its loot in the early-mid levels, and this latest patch is designed to rectify the end-game rewards not feeling satisfying enough.
The level design is varied and alien in nature with a unique focus on exploration and vertical as well as horizontal terrain that hasn't been seen in most games of this type, so I'd hardly call it dull. The focus on lore vs compelling story is the closest he came to a valid complaint, but despite there being a ton of effort being put in to there still IS a good story in there.
To be honest, many of his complaints basically boil down to "I already have Warframe so this game has to be extra special perfectly awesome to make me want to play it." Which fair enough. Only have so much time in the day, after all. But that you already have a game you're spending your time on doesn't make all other games bad, and trying to belittle other games in order to justify your choice is just kinda sad.
Agree with all of this. Jim's industry level commentary I think is quite valuable (his crusade against loot boxes and other structural issues within the industry at large for instance) but his game level commentary is...questionable at best.
Anthem has a good foundation, but a lot of rough edges. The team has already shown a responsiveness to those rough edges with improvements, and if they continue to do so its gonna be a title to watch and enjoy.
Kanluwen wrote: His crusade against lootboxes is also a joke if he's someone who shills for Warframe.
Knowing what you're buying doesn't make microtransactions any better, it just makes it so that it's not a blind buy.
Knowing what you're getting instead of a random selection of possibly duplicate and/or useless items isn't "any better"? I've never played Warframe and likely never will so I don't have a dog in that fight nor am I a big fan of Jim Sterling (he's entertaining on occasion in small doses only IMO) but that is a very odd position to take. Unless that random selection is priced significantly lower than just picking and choosing an item of the same rarity/type, it is demonstrably better.
Actually I think loot boxes are fun... however, I would never pay for one. As long as they are just cosmetic things or emotes or whatever, I don't really care either way.
Necros wrote: Actually I think loot boxes are fun... however, I would never pay for one. As long as they are just cosmetic things or emotes or whatever, I don't really care either way.
The problem I have with lootboxes is that they often lock content behind a pay wall, that 10 years ago would have been just a part of the game. At their core, lootboxes are predatory. They are designed to go after people who have addictions, and no self control in order to make even more money.
I don't have a problem with loot boxes in theory but rather in practice. First, that style of monetization should have some sort of a benefit for all players (like free DLC moving forward that all can enjoy without splitting the playerbase) as well as an equivalent in all cases benefit to the player purchasing it regardless of the roll. The odds of each drop should be public and there should be some sort of minimum failsafe for RNG as well as a system for giving equivalent drops instead of dupes.
My only significant experience with loot boxes was EA's first (?) take on them in Mass Effect 3 multiplayer. Everything was fine and dandy in the beginning when I had tons to earn. Everytime a new DLC worth came out, I bought a few of them ($5-15 worth) as a thank you for continued support of the game but otherwise just earned them in game instead. Once my inventory became almost full, it became apparent that your ultrarare item (when you got one) was linked to a specific weapon and, if you already had it maxed, it instead gave you a relatively worthless lvl 4 boost instead. It took me almost a year of trying to close out before I gave up on the last two weapons because the duplicates gave the relatively worthless boost instead of switching to an equally valuable rarety weapon. I simply stopped spending money and later stopped playing the game after I'd spend several nights grinding to collect 1,000,000+ credits and not get a single ultrarare on my spending sprees. (My record was spending 2 million and getting zip). It took a few years before I restarted playing again and that was only because I did a trilogy run through prior to Andromeda's release and decided to try and finish off my equipment list.
Melissia wrote: I have to agree with Warboss. Not having lootboxes is a positive for both Warframe and Anthem.
I think it has to be said Warframe goes about it's microtransactions intelligently. Every item is farmable, and every weapon and frame and upgrade buildable through farming. They always hide 1 component though behind a hard grind, while the rest are usually obtainable without even trying. The devs seem to have realized that if they give the player the first 2/3rds of something, a decent number will pay $4-5 to get that last third, cause pretty much everything can also be bought in the game store, and they space new stuff out enough that a lot of players feel no qualm about spending a couple bucks every two or three weeks to keep their progress steady.
It's a manipulative model to be sure, but it's also hard to really bash it when it's better than pretty much every other model on the market.
Kanluwen wrote: His crusade against lootboxes is also a joke if he's someone who shills for Warframe.
Knowing what you're buying doesn't make microtransactions any better, it just makes it so that it's not a blind buy.
Knowing what you're getting instead of a random selection of possibly duplicate and/or useless items isn't "any better"? I've never played Warframe and likely never will so I don't have a dog in that fight nor am I a big fan of Jim Sterling (he's entertaining on occasion in small doses only IMO) but that is a very odd position to take. Unless that random selection is priced significantly lower than just picking and choosing an item of the same rarity/type, it is demonstrably better.
When they price the items in question fairly high and only sell currency in such a way that you either have to make multiple small transactions or a large one and when the item has 0 other way to be obtained?
Yeah. That's just as damn exploitative.
Warframe is an example of the huge issue with this since they looooove to talk about the whole "We have no lootboxes!" thing(which isn't technically wrong--but they do sell Mod Packs for Platinum, their in-game currency that is only obtained via real world currency purchases) while ignoring that most of their game is locked behind Platinum. Slots for weapons, warframes, sentinels/pets(which actually have an in-game effect) require Platinum not in-game currency. And they actually tax you via in-game currency for any trades(which are limited based upon your level each day) you make via their in-game marketplace to "regulate the marketplace". It can be offset by trading within a clan's dojo that has it set to the smallest tax amount, but that requires you to be in a clan that allows for it.
And yeah--it's a free game, but that doesn't give them any excuse to be doing that while also pushing $79.99 or $59.99 "early access" items for new Warframes.
Melissia wrote: I have to agree with Warboss. Not having lootboxes is a positive for both Warframe and Anthem.
I think it has to be said Warframe goes about it's microtransactions intelligently. Every item is farmable, and every weapon and frame and upgrade buildable through farming. They always hide 1 component though behind a hard grind, while the rest are usually obtainable without even trying. The devs seem to have realized that if they give the player the first 2/3rds of something, a decent number will pay $4-5 to get that last third, cause pretty much everything can also be bought in the game store, and they space new stuff out enough that a lot of players feel no qualm about spending a couple bucks every two or three weeks to keep their progress steady.
It's a manipulative model to be sure, but it's also hard to really bash it when it's better than pretty much every other model on the market.
Slots aren't farmable.
Catalysts and Reactors are kinda/sorta farmable.
Technically they are, but only in the sense that you can sell items you farmed for for plat (some warframes are pretty easy to farm out, and people will trade for them), so even that could be obtained without spending a dime but that's also probably not something a non-whale is going to spend time doing so *shrug*
Getting back to Anthem, I'm surprised that I wasn't able to find the inevitable "Art of...." book when I went to my local bookstore. Apparently it's set to come out on March 12th. I enjoyed looking through previous books for games like Andromeda even if I didn't buy/play them. I'm still sad we didn't get to see brunette Cora from the concept art although I suppose some mods out there might replicate it somewhat.
So I got to level 30 and changed to hard level missions and I'm getting a masterwork almost every time.. but they're only guns? I thought there were other items too like grenades and stuff? I have like 8 now, and every one is a gun.. or are the other types of gear only legendary?
I think that's just bad RNG, but I might be wrong. Haven't really had enough time to farm that level of stuff, all my free time is taken up by other things lately.
Necros wrote: So I got to level 30 and changed to hard level missions and I'm getting a masterwork almost every time.. but they're only guns? I thought there were other items too like grenades and stuff? I have like 8 now, and every one is a gun.. or are the other types of gear only legendary?
There are other types of Masterworks, but they dont drop on anything less than Grandmaster 1. Hard is mostly meant as prelim gearing for the "endgame" of GM difficulties.
Necros wrote: So I got to level 30 and changed to hard level missions and I'm getting a masterwork almost every time.. but they're only guns? I thought there were other items too like grenades and stuff? I have like 8 now, and every one is a gun.. or are the other types of gear only legendary?
There are other types of Masterworks, but they dont drop on anything less than Grandmaster 1. Hard is mostly meant as prelim gearing for the "endgame" of GM difficulties.
Hard has a limited pool(1 of each type or something like that).
Which isnt to say there arent some really good MWs in the basic pool. The auto-pistol that boosts all damage is hellaciously fun for my Interceptor (700+ damage per bullet on a crit with that rate of fire is *chef's kiss*), while my Storm loves the combo popping rifle.
I started doing GM1 games now, sometimes the masterworks flow like rain, other times you get all purples and blues. I managed to snag my first legendary, and it was just a totally random kill on a basic bad guy that I steamrolled with my colossus. His item level is like 470 now and the damage I can do is kinda ridiculously high. On GM1, every legendary contract you do gives a masterwork at the end, in addition to any you find while playing. So even if you just stuck to those you can get 3 a day guaranteed.
I forget the names of them but I am using the MW railgun that lets you shoot twice before needing to recharge it, and also a shock thing for ordinance that's just crazy. I whip out my shield, start steamrolling things, and hit that and it zaps the crap outta everything near me. If someone does an AOE primer I get tons of combo spam. I just figured out that combos make your ultimate recharge faster. I barely even use my guns anymore, between the double railgun and the zapper I'm doing plenty of damage without them.
I heard the loot was messed up in GM2 and GM3, so I want to wait to see if they fix that before moving up but I think I'm probably high enough.
Agree with all of this. Jim's industry level commentary I think is quite valuable (his crusade against loot boxes and other structural issues within the industry at large for instance) but his game level commentary is...questionable at best.
Basically this. It's certainly not just Jim, but he's kind of become the face of the argument. I think there's zero doubt that investors are treating games as the next bubble to pillage and flee before it bursts and I won't be surprised to see the biggest industry crash since ET sooner than later. That said, Anthem definitely suffers from being announced after EA made the problem extremely obvious with Star Wars and had to build hype in a year of watching everyone flail around with just how far they can exploit the playerbase while being a game pretty obviously funded with those intentions. It's quality would probably have to be on RDR2 level for reviewers to see it as more than another band wagoner.
Agree with all of this. Jim's industry level commentary I think is quite valuable (his crusade against loot boxes and other structural issues within the industry at large for instance) but his game level commentary is...questionable at best.
Basically this. It's certainly not just Jim, but he's kind of become the face of the argument. I think there's zero doubt that investors are treating games as the next bubble to pillage and flee before it bursts and I won't be surprised to see the biggest industry crash since ET sooner than later. That said, Anthem definitely suffers from being announced after EA made the problem extremely obvious with Star Wars and had to build hype in a year of watching everyone flail around with just how far they can exploit the playerbase while being a game pretty obviously funded with those intentions. It's quality would probably have to be on RDR2 level for reviewers to see it as more than another band wagoner.
The irony with regards to Star Wars is that, as I've said numerous times on the subject, they flatout disabled the ability for you to engage in pay to win behaviors past the first month or so because of player complaints. Now all lootboxes that exist? They're one time purchases of skins.
Won't stop people like Jim from continually whining about EA though.
Won't stop people like Jim from continually whining about EA though.
Do you think that maybe because they're integrated heavily into pretty much every sports title that EA produces and that he mentions pretty much every time I've bothered to listen to him has anything to do with it? You know... those sports titles that both numerically and especially financially (in FIFA's case) constitute a large portion of their yearly portfolio profit which is exacerbated by recent relative failures of nonsports AAA (since we're talking about Jim Sterling it is mandatory that you read those letters in a nasally voice) titles like Battlefront, Andromeda, and Battlefield (and possibly Anthem)?
What is the exploit that he is referring to? Is it minor or something major? If he was anything but a popular (apparently? I don't follow him personally) streamer then it wouldn't be reversed.
warboss wrote: What is the exploit that he is referring to? Is it minor or something major? If he was anything but a popular (apparently? I don't follow him personally) streamer then it wouldn't be reversed.
Apparently there's a glitch in game that allows infinite use of an ultimate if you press a certain series of buttons which probably speeds up clear times to crazy levels.
I'd call that minor, but only in the sense that that's one of the most common kinds of bugs I encounter in these kinds of games (a similar glitch was in Grim Dawn for awhile, and FGO still has Musashi's double hit skill working 200% more effective than intended), so mileage may vary.
To be fair, if he wasn't a streamer EA probably would have never known he did it in the first place and he (I haven't checked) claims to have only done it once to see if it actually worked and that his video of the glitch included something like "putting this up so the devs can see it and get it fixed." And permabans frankly are a rather severe punishment for that kind of exploit, one that can be permanently solved by the devs fixing the glitch, especially since a game like Anthem doesn't really have an in game economy. It made sense when Arena.net banned a bunch of people for exploiting a gold farming glitch in the Catacombs dungeon since that actually caused significant weeks long damage to the player auction house, but this is more like when Bungie accidentally released a 1 hit kill weapon that murdered players in competitive PVP and no one got banned for using it since Bungie's the one who fethed it up to begin with.
If it allows an infinite use of the ultimate ability then I can understand the banning but it should have been temporary for a first infraction and not insta-permanent before they backtracked due to the publicity (how many folks who aren't streamers with a big following were treated the same and won't get reversed?).
From your description, it reminds me (at least superficially) of the infinite rockets glitch in ME3 which was also PvE multiplayer farming based and Bioware would ban folks for using it back then as well.
warboss wrote: (how many folks who aren't streamers with a big following were treated the same and won't get reversed?).
No idea. A quick peruse through the Anthem reddit shows a few threads with people complaining they got banned for the glitch, and I saw another video somewhere that mentioned it.
I don't think anyone should be banned because the devs released a glitch though (especially in a cooperative game with no competitive game modes), so I have a hard time holding it against anyone who got unbanned regardless of why.
Just to be clear, I'm not holding anything against anyone who got unbanned. I don't think a permanent ban was appropriate for a first time infraction for anyone. I do think its reasonable to temporarily suspend folks for a week or two for doing that glitch repeatedly (even in a PvE game) while the company fixes the glitch. That second part is key though.
To be sure it was really stupid of them to abuse an exploit in an online multiplayer game, but permaban on first offense is a massive overreaction, and it's really disappointing that this is what's happening.
warboss wrote: Just to be clear, I'm not holding anything against anyone who got unbanned.
That's okay. I wouldn't think less of you if you did. Streamers have basically ruined Destiny 2 (and that's a rant for another thread), so I don't really have sympathy for them XD
But glitches are just part of games (some of the most beloved aspects of gaming have even been born from glitches), and I think it's shaky ground to go around punishing players for something that only exists because the developer made a mistake somewhere.
I'm always a little weary of people complaining about bans. They're probably in the right and its probably a massive overreaction.... but.... well, I've seen the things people don't fess up to when they get banned and it's often a lot more than they're saying.
Melissia wrote: To be sure it was really stupid of them to abuse an exploit in an online multiplayer game, but permaban on first offense is a massive overreaction, and it's really disappointing that this is what's happening.
And this is the reason I much prefer single player games. Games are games, their for time wasting. They're not "serious business" as some try and treat them. It's the companies own darn fault that this exploit exists, and it should fall on a player for using it. As far as I'm concerned, these kinds of exploits are fair game.
I think, overall this is my issue with the "live services" game model. We don't really own our games anymore, we're playing these online games at the mercy of the company, and they can change or edit these services at any time. It is entirely possible that a game can change so much, that it is no longer the game it once was, I mean, just look at how much Space Engineers has changed since 2012, it's practically unrecognizable. All of the power is in the hands of the companies, not the consumer and that isn't a good thing.
I keep hoping that the culture will shift, but so far it doesn't seem to have changed much. And, just to add, I agree. The ban is idiotic, no matter what the game is or how it is meant to play.
I used to years ago occasionally read the xbox live official support forums for lulz where people would post threads to get unbanned. The factual responses from the xbox live enforcement team were quite entertaining.
Parent: Little Jimmy got banned for no reason! I know my son and he said he did nothing wrong. If you don't unban him then we're switching to playstation.
XBL Team: usually one of the following:
1) Jimmy was advertising/hosting/sellling/spamming modded boosting lobby messages in CODMW 1/2 to every player in his matches.
2) Glitched Avatar options not possible without glitching
3) "I'm a bad ass m***f***ker who will kick your b***ch f***t ass back into yer momma's c**t" bios or messages to other players.
warboss wrote: I used to years ago occasionally read the xbox live official support forums for lulz where people would post threads to get unbanned. The factual responses from the xbox live enforcement team were quite entertaining.
Parent: Little Jimmy got banned for no reason! I know my son and he said he did nothing wrong. If you don't unban him then we're switching to playstation.
XBL Team: usually one of the following:
1) Jimmy was advertising/hosting/sellling/spamming modded boosting lobby messages in CODMW 1/2 to every player in his matches.
2) Glitched Avatar options not possible without glitching
3) "I'm a bad ass m***f***ker who will kick your b***ch f***t ass back into yer momma's c**t" bios or messages to other players.
I wish it was still on Youtube but as far as I can tell it's not anymore.
My favorite was the kid who got caught streaming over his mic to the entire Battlefront II game (the original) that he wanted "some fething chocolate milk" to his mother who was a "lazy bitch" and that video is like, ten minutes long of this ten-twelve year old sounding kid just screaming profanities at his mother in the background of the game. He got banned for it, and then screamed profanities in a follow up video. Cue generic "kids those days" responses from the older people
I didn't realize that the xbl support forums were a youtube thing. I stumbled on it years ago during the heyday of the 360 era when I have my 3rd or 4th RROD that I had to send into Microsoft for the first time as my Best Buy warranty had run out (I'm currently at #8 360 lol). Once I found that gold mine of lulz, I would occasionally come back and catch up for a few years. I don't know if they're still around and didn't know that stuff had also made it onto youtube.
I'm surprised they were able to record that during the original Battlefront II days as support for that on xbox live (even backward compatible on 360) ended around a decade ago. That's some early youtubing with a capture card! Sounds like a real life Cartman (MOM! Moar hot pockets! pffftttt....). For anyone who gets that old reference.
warboss wrote: Once I found that gold mine of lulz, I would occasionally come back and catch up for a few years. I don't know if they're still around
Sounds like you went there for the same reason I go to Wikipedia' administration notice boards XD
I'm surprised they were able to record that during the original Battlefront II days as support for that on xbox live (even backward compatible on 360) ended around a decade ago.
I first saw it back on X-Play if you remember that. Back when G4 still existed and was actually about video games instead of constant reruns of TNG and cops. The original video I don't think was even captured gameplay. It was someone with a camera recording the TV with the sound all the way up (you could see the camera shake). It was on Youtube for a few years after that but now I can't find it anymore.
Back in the old days when the only people who seemed to be able to get in game voice to work were the the awful ones.
Sounds like a real life Cartman (MOM! Moar hot pockets! pffftttt....). For anyone who gets that old reference.
I'm definitely feeling old and was a big fan of G4 watching many of their shows at the time. AOTS, Xplay, etc... You forgot the endless reruns of American Ninja Warrior that also later infested the channel.
They also get in the way of good changes to Warframe. Paying attention to "elite" players instead of the common player is a very common problem in gaming.
They also get in the way of good changes to Warframe. Paying attention to "elite" players instead of the common player is a very common problem in gaming.
I don't feel like it's a common problem in gaming, but it is a common problem in the AAA industry as it bumbles around trying to figure out how this live service thing is supposed to work. Maybe if we're lucky the whole issue was really just Activision trying to force Bungie down a certain path. It's really fuzzy right now exactly how deep the rift between the two companies was and exactly how much it had already effected gameplay by the time Bungie decided to call it off. I'd like to think Bungie won't Bioware itself, but after all the Biowares that have managed to Bioware over the years I find myself skeptical.
And apparently I'm not using Bioware as an adjective and a verb. Huh.
I also think the permaban was a bit much. If you don't want people using exploits, why not just fix them instead of creating a bunch of ill-will?
Using Fortnite Save the World for an example, there's been lots of exploits that popped up in the past that made finishing even the toughest missions super easy, no one got banned over them, the devs just fixed it in the next weekly release and everyone moved on with their lives.
In these kinds of games, people will always find the path of least resistance. They shouldn't be punished for your buggy code.
That said, I'm still loving Anthem either way I managed to get my faction xp all the way up to level 10 last week.. it said Max Level, but I was still getting XP and made it to around 10.5... is there a level 11? Or does the amount just stop?
I'm honestly contemplating getting the game (after a price drop) just to see it, though by then it might not resemble the game everyone's playing right now XD
Unfortunately sating my curiosity isn't worth $60 on a game from a company I refuse to buy full price from (that's right EA< you screwed me on ME3 and I'm still holding a grudge!).
Melissia wrote: ME3 is the one you're salty about? At least complain about a game with real problems, like Andromeda's borderline unplayable PC release
My issue is rather specific (I've mentioned it a few times). Sure the ending sucked but the online coop carried that game for me and I loved it. Until one day the game just stopped starting up. Origin would start "syncing to cloud" and whatever that process is never ended. Restarts. Full reinstalls. Even switching to a new computer entirely two years ago and looking just to see didn't fix it. I'd probably have let it go, but customer support hung up on me (twice) mid chat, and then blew me off on my third attempt to figure out why I couldn't start the game.
I haven't paid full price for an EA game since 2013 as a result.
Personally I think Anthem is worth the $60 considering (I think) all the new stuff they will be adding is supposed to be free.
I suspect that content deserves a big question mark. Yes, they've talked about their 10 year plan for the game but Mass Effect Andromeda also had plans for both multiplayer and single player DLC support (albeit not 10 years) until the day it was announced that they weren't coming beyond a few MP characters. That 10 year plan is just bluster (beyond what they've already shown off in streams months ago and cut out of the base game prior to launch) until the sales numbers are in and EA sees how close they are to their 5-6 million sales expectation at the end of March. I have little doubt that EA will cut their losses if the number of sales (and remaining players by that point) doesn't justify the expense of adding more content. I doubt they're shutter Bioware prime though...
Highly questionable and largely debunked story based on updates made to the narratives over the course of the day. Crashes and power offs yes, bricks no.
Debunked isn't the right word. I heard about the bricking thing too but Iooked around and someone already found a fix for the issue (apparently unplugging the PS4 to do a full reset resolves it). It's similar in effect to the memory leak issue Skyrim had, also on Playstations, so I'd bet there's a memory leak in the game somewhere.
It'll probably get fixed fast whatever it is. That's not the kind of glitch that gets ignored.
Sterling191 wrote: Highly questionable and largely debunked story based on updates made to the narratives over the course of the day. Crashes and power offs yes, bricks no.
Okay! Thank God.
I was going to say, bricking your system sucks, and I'd hate to see a game be the culprit for something like that.
I thoroughly enjoyed the end of ME3. But then again I'm also the kind of person that looked at the apparently massively popular story of CoD: Modern Warfare series and thought it wasn't impressive at all. And ths isn't an ME3 thread anyway.
As far as Anthem's story goes, I'm enjoying it. It's more about the journey than the end here, similar to most games of its kind, but I think they did good to set up character arcs and the personalities of various factions within the central town.
Melissia wrote: I thoroughly enjoyed the end of ME3. But then again I'm also the kind of person that looked at the apparently massively popular story of CoD: Modern Warfare series and thought it wasn't impressive at all.
I think it worked (the later that is) mostly because of how it played out. Especially among shooters at the time, here weren't many games that had the sort of cinematic flair both in and out of cut scenes like the early Call of Duty titles. It always felt like being in an action movie (helped that entire levels were built to imitate popular films). Shooters that aren't also RPGs just don't make campaigns like that anymore. Other than the Halo franchise they don't even try. EDIT: It was like a well made popcorn flick. The whole experience just streamed together so well and so fluidly you got to sit back and just play the game and then it was over and you were sad cause you were having fun XD
Oh, boy... I was into the weird mission where I had to get the old Javelin suit of some general. The mission crashed in the end and after I managed to get the game back in, the mission was over. I dunno what happened (storywise)... Apparently I didn't get the old suit and the boy that was running the matrix support for me is gone and I'm mad at him or something... sigh.
Anyway, the story continued from that point, so whatever. I don't need the suit anymore or something.
Bought a skull tat for my suit with the money I earned from the mission, so all is good?
makes your javelin freeze up and then steals the old general's javelin and takes off and joins the dominion. Then later on he comes back to help like "Sorry I was an ahole, but boo hoo sob story. You're still my bestest friend though."
guessing he'll be popping in and out of later parts of the story as they add new stuff. In the end he'll probably sacrifice himself in some spectacular fashion to save the whole universe or something.
guessing he'll be popping in and out of later parts of the story as they add new stuff. In the end he'll probably sacrifice himself in some spectacular fashion to save the whole universe or something.
He's gonna have a role to play in the story for sure. The end of the Heart of Rage story tees up the ongoing world narrative, and I expect him to pop in for that.
I still want an option to punch him though. Cause feth that guy.
Melissia wrote: I thoroughly enjoyed the end of ME3. But then again I'm also the kind of person that looked at the apparently massively popular story of CoD: Modern Warfare series and thought it wasn't impressive at all. And ths isn't an ME3 thread anyway.
I thoroughly enjoyed absolutely everything about ME3, including the end right up to the Star Child. I don't even hate that it ends on a sacrifice, or with a massive deus ex machina button or the color coding or any of that. I hate that the story gives up on all of the themes of the franchise and gives you 3 ways to wipe out everything different from you. Apply those 3 choices to any of the obvious parallels in the real world; race, gender, etc. Destruction, Subjugation, Homogenization. They're all terrible solutions to the thematic problems that drive the core of the conflict.
Some people have found a bug where the level 1 gun that you get as the standard weapon for your javelin is more powerful than any of the masterworks.
Despite the gun showing less damage numbers per shot, it actually kills the enemies in less shots than masterwork gear, due to some glitch in the enemy scaling.
I'm getting kinda tired of Zoe asking me where Gunther got his scar. I hope she doesn't start saying that she used to be a freelancer till she took an arrow to the knee.
Had something odd happen last night. Three missions in a row - that I initiated - all had only myself and one other random player. After the second mission with only two of us, I started a Quick mission and ended up in a full group of four. But after finishing that, I launched a final (non-quick) mission for the evening, and that mission once again only had myself and one other player.
Fortunately, none of the missions had particularly difficult opponents. But it was very strange.
I've had that happen as well. When I do Strongholds or Freeplay, I never am at a lack of players, though, which is good as Strongholds I can't solo in a fun way.
So Ive quickly begun having more fun in the game as I soldiered through the early stages. So far the weirdest issue was being stuck in the Public Area at the Fortress, where I leave the Public Area through the door.
has anyone else noticed these buggs/annoying things:
-now and then there is no checkpoint in contracts, meaning no way to complete the contract.
-stuck in a limbo in temple of scar, aka blocked off by a purple wall and without the auto transport to next zone timer appearing. has happend to me more then half of the times i have done the instance, yet never in tyrant mine.
-very limited mastercrafts drop pool. managed to get into GM1 before the weekend and i have prolly recived about 25-30 of them. 11 are unique spread over 2 different suit,. the rest are duplicates..............
heck, in my last stronghold run i got 2 masters and 1 legend, all 3 was the same item, and i had allready recived 3 masters of that same item during the weekend...................
I had the contract issue, but decided to wait and it turned out to just be really lagged. 2 people gave up and left but me and the other guy that stuck around made it to the end. Also, trying to do GM1 quickplay missions is messed up for me almost every time, it's like a contact group but there's no contract to do. Like free play but without any missions or random mobs.
I got locked out of a dungeon once, got stuck behind the wall and couldn't teleport. Usually works fine for me though
And yeah I get so many duplicates. And I was playing my colossus yesterday and got a legendary for a ranger. I always thought you were supposed to only get stuff for what you're playing. I've had bad luck with legendaries though, I got 2 so far, and I feel like i've been playing GM1 or 2 a LOT. Maybe I need gear with luck bonuses on it.
Necros wrote: And I was playing my colossus yesterday and got a legendary for a ranger. I always thought you were supposed to only get stuff for what you're playing.
went into one of the caves in freeplay with the interceptor, left with 2 mastercrafts for the storm.......
That just reminds me of all the people who said "Boycott" CoD MW2" after they heard it wouldn't have dedicated servers. They formed a steam group and everything.
LordofHats wrote: That just reminds me of all the people who said "Boycott" CoD MW2" after they heard it wouldn't have dedicated servers. They formed a steam group and everything.
They were all playing MW2.
The Division had similar boycotts if I remember right. I don't think they ever amounted to much.....
Right after I hit 30, I ran a few contracts on GM1 difficulty. I got nothing better than purple drops.
Then I switched over to my colossus, and dropped the difficulty (since I hadn't played it for a while, and the gear wasn't good enough for GM) back down to Normal. I got a Masterwork Grenade Launcher.
Eumerin wrote: Right after I hit 30, I ran a few contracts on GM1 difficulty. I got nothing better than purple drops.
Then I switched over to my colossus, and dropped the difficulty (since I hadn't played it for a while, and the gear wasn't good enough for GM) back down to Normal. I got a Masterwork Grenade Launcher.
^^;;
ye there is a very small chanse for masterworks from lv25 on easy and hard.
at GM1 the only reliable places to get mastercrafts is strongholds. you get 0-2 per completed run(in moust runs you get just 1, now and then you get a 0 mc run), but the RNG on their drops is up the wazhooo.
contracts is just to test builds, rep farm or get purples if you have just hit 30. i guess you get 1 MC in every 3-6 contracts, the droprate is in anycase low in contracts.
Necros wrote: The purple contracts always give 1 MW at the end. So I usually do all 3 of them, and come away with like 5 total
Uh...
I've never gotten a masterwork from a purple contract. The only thing that seems to differentiate the purple contracts and normal contracts is that you're guaranteed at least one legendary enemy in a purple contract. A regular contract doesn't always have one.
Necros wrote: The purple contracts always give 1 MW at the end. So I usually do all 3 of them, and come away with like 5 total
Uh...
I've never gotten a masterwork from a purple contract. The only thing that seems to differentiate the purple contracts and normal contracts is that you're guaranteed at least one legendary enemy in a purple contract. A regular contract doesn't always have one.
i have done so far 6-8 purple contracts, i have only recived 2 legendary items, and they dident even come from the contracts, they came from strongholds.
and purple contract does not allways give 1 masterwork, they have just a little better drop chanse then normal contracts.
all in all, finding masterworks is a very big boring grind of strongholds, only to get more mw duplicates then you get brand new ones.
Necros wrote: The purple contracts always give 1 MW at the end. So I usually do all 3 of them, and come away with like 5 total
Uh...
I've never gotten a masterwork from a purple contract. The only thing that seems to differentiate the purple contracts and normal contracts is that you're guaranteed at least one legendary enemy in a purple contract. A regular contract doesn't always have one.
Are you doing them on Grandmaster 1? Because what Necros is saying only applies there.
And really, a link to a GDC highlighting WoW on the front. Looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool.
Yes, because someone who worked on the loot and rewards systems in the largest MMORPG in the world, as well as the Reaper of Souls expansion for Diablo 3 which the playerbase loved for its changes to the loot system, talking about the mistakes made and fixes implemented would be no use at all to the team trying to find that balance of player rewards in their own game.
And really, a link to a GDC highlighting WoW on the front. Looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool.
If you bothered to even watch the video for even three minutes, WoW's development is often highlighted by the speaker for mistakes he and others made as developers. The only part of WoW he speaks well of is Legion, which he didn't even work on, and was easily the most well received piece of WoW content since Wrath. You've been a bit of a boi for awhile now, but now you're just being ridiculous.
It's an hour long video, but it's actually pretty good stuff from someone who has clearly gone through his career introspectively and has a lot of useful lessons learned. Watching it I can see some of the lines that caused me to quit Destiny 2, why the Division died within 3 months, and how Diablo has managed to maintain such a strong community for so long. Some of these are also relevant to criticisms that have already come up in Anthem. The devs might benefit from listening to the man and thinking about what he says that could work for them.
And really, a link to a GDC highlighting WoW on the front. Looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool.
If you bothered to even watch the video for even three minutes, WoW's development is often highlighted by the speaker for mistakes he and others made as developers. The only part of WoW he speaks well of is Legion, which he didn't even work on, and was easily the most well received piece of WoW content since Wrath. You've been a bit of a boi for awhile now, but now you're just being ridiculous.
Gee, it's almost like there's been nonstop swooping and pooping from people on a game that just came out with completely irrelevant garbage. Excuse me for not wasting an hour of my life listening to an ex-Blizzard employee talk about how a bunch of games he worked on sucked and then got better.
It's an hour long video, but it's actually pretty good stuff from someone who has clearly gone through his career introspectively and has a lot of useful lessons learned. Watching it I can see some of the lines that caused me to quit Destiny 2, why the Division died within 3 months, and how Diablo has managed to maintain such a strong community for so long. Some of these are also relevant to criticisms that have already come up in Anthem. The devs might benefit from listening to the man and thinking about what he says that could work for them.
Players would also benefit from actually paying attention to the devs and chilling the hell out as well.
Kanluwen wrote: Gee, it's almost like there's been nonstop swooping and pooping from people on a game that just came out with completely irrelevant garbage.
The trends that come up in that video relevant to almost any game with a loot system. I find it useful, giving some terms and shape to feelings I've had in a number of games I've enjoyed and others I enjoyed but lost enthusiasm for.
And if you don't want to spend an hour watching it, that's fine. It's a freaking hour long video. I wouldn't blame you.
I will however point out that it's really silly to not watch video, have no idea what the speaker even says in it, and then wave your banner denouncing it in ways that make it really obvious you haven't watched the video and have no idea what the speaker even says in it. Don't watch it fine, but there's a huge irony here with you bashing something with no idea know whats in it after jumping down the throat ("swooping and pooping" as you term it) of anyone whose opinion doesn't line up with your apparent sense of enthusiasm for products that haven't come out or have and are really early in their lives.
Grow up.
Players would also benefit from actually paying attention to the devs and chilling the hell out as well.
People payed attention to the Devs back in MEA. You know, when the game was shut down for not being an immediate success rather than soldiering through failure (not uncommon, but a few notable games sucked before their makers soldiered through failure and ended up being quite good).
Kanluwen wrote: Gee, it's almost like there's been nonstop swooping and pooping from people on a game that just came out with completely irrelevant garbage.
The trends that come up in that video relevant to almost any game with a loot system. I find it useful, giving some terms and shape to feelings I've had in a number of games I've enjoyed and others I enjoyed but lost enthusiasm for.
And if you don't want to spend an hour watching it, that's fine. It's a freaking hour long video. I wouldn't blame you.
I will however point out that it's really silly to not watch video, have no idea what the speaker even says in it, and then wave your banner denouncing it in ways that make it really obvious you haven't watched the video and have no idea what the speaker even says in it. Don't watch it fine, but there's a huge irony here with you bashing something with no idea know whats in it after jumping down the throat ("swooping and pooping" as you term it) of anyone whose opinion doesn't line up with your apparent sense of enthusiasm for products that haven't come out or have and are really early in their lives.
Grow up.
Sure, I should have watched it. But by that same vein, one might remember that Diablo required a whole separate game purchase for RoS and at its launch? It STILL HAD THE SAME PROBLEMS WITH LOOT AS THE BASE GAME. It wasn't until they started doing the Seasons that things really started turning around for them, and that was years on.
Anyways, you're trying to bash me for not finding relevance in the experiences of someone who worked at a company that has had virtually no competition in one market(MMORPG) for quite some time to the point where their "failed projects" still have a bank to fall back on.
Players would also benefit from actually paying attention to the devs and chilling the hell out as well.
People payed attention to the Devs back in MEA. You know, when the game was shut down for not being an immediate success rather than soldiering through failure (not uncommon, but a few notable games sucked before their makers soldiered through failure and ended up being quite good).
No actually, people didn't pay attention to those devs. If they had--they would have ignored the nonsensical whining from the Early Access PC players and the constant memes over weird graphical glitches that were fixed within days of the game's launch.
A particularly relevant part, which ties into the reddit complaints with regards to loot drop rates, is at the around 40 minute mark.
Here, the developers felt that the level of loot drops for higher tier loot was what they were aiming for. Then the metrics showed that only the hardcore players were really reaching that, so they decided to increase the drop rates. Then they doubled that drop rate for the anniversary event, initially only meaning for it to be temporary. However they then realised that it would be terrible to take this away from the players, who felt that this drop rate was great, so they kept this increased drop rate which was around 4 times higher than what their maths had initially suggested would be a good drop rate. Later this drop rate could increase to up to 15 times that initial drop rate aim.
Basically, these kinds of games need to feel good for the players. It doesn't matter if the developer maths says that the current drop rates are fine if they don't feel fine to the players. It doesn't matter how perfect your maths is if the end result is frustrated players.
He summarises it thus:
No design is perfect, we will always have problems to solve. It's better to solve the problem of players having everything they want than trying to solve the problems caused by players being frustrated with stingy reward systems.
And if you were paying attention to the devs, they've already said that they're not happy with the loot drop rates when scaled versus difficulty.
It's why they have opened up Hard and Normal MW "loot drops"(which were supposed to be limited to just weapons at the outset) to also include MW Components for Javelins as well, since they currently feel that Grandmaster 2+ isn't worth the effort vs drop rates.
It's why they also adjusted the scale on gearscores for items as they weren't dropping correctly.
No actually, people didn't pay attention to those devs. If they had--they would have ignored the nonsensical whining from the Early Access PC players and the constant memes over weird graphical glitches that were fixed within days of the game's launch.
They never fixed the main issue I had with the game, its writing.
"My face is tired"
Flirting option with Peebee: "What does someone have to do to get you to flirt with them?"
Upon first meeting the Angara there is no option to ask how they know your language or a language which can be translated in real time by the translation software available. This was completely nonsensical for a game about exploring a new galaxy and first contact situations.
Sure, I should have watched it. But by that same vein, one might remember that Diablo required a whole separate game purchase for RoS and at its launch? It STILL HAD THE SAME PROBLEMS WITH LOOT AS THE BASE GAME. It wasn't until they started doing the Seasons that things really started turning around for them, and that was years on.
He covers that. He literally gives a play by play of development progression, talking about the thought processes that led them to various design decisions, what about those decisions was bad, what about those processes was flawed, and what parts he thought worked and could be refined further.
There's also a really humorous QA bit at the end where he's talking about his "difference of opinion" with the guys design Battle for Azaroth where there's an obvious between the lines comment that the people designing BfA learned nothing from previous development in WoW and he's slying telling them to stop XD Well I found it humorous.
Anyways, you're trying to bash me
Criticism != bashing.
for not finding relevance in the experiences of someone who worked at a company that has had virtually no competition in one market(MMORPG)
He's part of the team that brought Diablo III back from the brink of death, the franchise that put "looters" on the map, and you don't see how it might be relevant to a looter game?
If they had--they would have ignored the nonsensical whining from the Early Access PC players and the constant memes over weird graphical glitches that were fixed within days of the game's launch.
A moot point, given the publisher dumped the game in a hot minute and its life was so short it's failure and unpolished state at release is all that will ever be remembered of it.
Know what other game released in a horrendously unpolished state, filled with glitches, and soldiered through to massive success in spite of it? World of Warcraft. Unfortunately, EA now has the reputation for folding when the launch money dries up, and players aren't just going to forget that because of a nice inforgraphic when the game in front of them has problems.
If they had--they would have ignored the nonsensical whining from the Early Access PC players and the constant memes over weird graphical glitches that were fixed within days of the game's launch.
A moot point, given the publisher dumped the game in a hot minute and its life was so short it's failure and unpolished state at release is all that will ever be remembered of it.
Because people did nothing but spread the negative crap, amplifying that nonsense to the point where everything else was ignored.
Know what other game released in a horrendously unpolished state, filled with glitches, and soldiered through to massive success in spite of it? World of Warcraft. Unfortunately, EA now has the reputation for folding when the launch money dries up, and players aren't just going to forget that because of a nice inforgraphic when the game in front of them has problems.
Money where your mouth is in the future then: don't buy the game at launch.
Additionally, it boggles the mind that we're in 20fricking19 and people still don't understand that games like Anthem will have multiple teams working on them. The people working on the problems you're having now? They're not the ones who are working on the forthcoming content drops.
It really does feel like MEA all over again. You lot couldn't separate the MP side of things from the SP side, whining about new characters dropping for MP as though it was taking away from the SP side of things.
Kanluwen wrote: Because people did nothing but spread the negative crap, amplifying that nonsense to the point where everything else was ignored.
So said every failed "genius" angry that the world didn't understand their hidden brilliance.
The game was crap. It died.
Money where your mouth is in the future then: don't buy the game at launch.
I've bought few games at launch in the past few years. The ones I did buy I've generally been pleased with. Some of them got better (Grim Dawn you amazing knock off you). Even if they gradually broke down later on and I stopped playing, I've usually gotten my money's worth so w/e. Certainly I've already stated my position on EA games, and EA can blame themselves for that. Have crappy customer service and customers are going to crap on you.
Additionally, it boggles the mind that we're in 20fricking19 and people still don't understand that games like Anthem will have multiple teams working on them.
I don't know why you think people wouldn't understand this.
On the topic actually, this is something a lot of live service games I think suffer from, because the development team often seems to leave the service team with all the buck and none of the meat. Destiny 2's first few months literally played out like there were no notes, no communication, and no coordination between the dev team and the live team. The first few patches literally read like the people maintaining the game were trying to figure out what they were working with. Anthem's actually playing out in a similar way in some areas, like the back and forth on how loot rewards are being rewarded.
The people working on the problems you're having now? They're not the ones who are working on the forthcoming content drops.
I doubt the player cares who fixes the problem. They just want it fixed. I'm not sure what your point is.
It really does feel like MEA all over again.
Given that the game can be humorously described as "Mass Effect Jet Pack Boogaloo" I'm not sure that would be unexpected.
I think the similarities end at the aesthetic level though. MEA was an entry in a story driven franchise with a mediocre story, bad writing, and glitches so numerous and egregious it boggled the mind coming out of a AAA developer. Anthem to its credit doesn't have that problem. Anthem has more typical problems of the looter shooter genre and while I think it's worth pointing out that they could have looked at Destiny and The Division to see where the pitfalls were and either 1) didn't, or 2) didn't have time to address them, I doubt that'll make or break the game.
I suspect Anthem will make or break with it's first few content drops, and how that content shakes up the game dynamic. Hopefully they don't delay much needed changes (Looking at you D2), and hopefully they realize that just dropping a few new levels will not be enough to keep the game alive.
Bad loot drops aren't the same as the horrific and bizarre bugs that went on in MEA...
I played MEA on release and tried, TRIED to soldier on to completion. I still haven't beaten it, though maybe someday I'll go back and finish. It was so horrifically buggy on the PC release that it was not uncommon to come across bugs that made the game unwinnable, forcing you to regress through saves and autosaves to find out where the bug happened.
can some1 give me a purple build for the ranger that works please.
i cannot understand the ranger, to me it is more fragile then interceptor with more or less zero skill dmg no matter what combo i try.
when i did hard, yes the dmg was very high when i was blue, but when i passed 425 and do GM1, there is no dmg and i am 2 shot at anythign that looks at me.
Melissia wrote: I really don't see how this can "feel like MEA".
Bad sloot drops aren't the same as the horrific and bizarre bugs that went on in MEA...
I played MEA on release and tried, TRIED to soldier on to completion. I still haven't beaten it, though maybe someday I'll go back and finish. It was so horrifically buggy on the PC release that it was not uncommon to come across bugs that made the game unwinnable, forcing you to regress through saves and autosaves to find out where the bug happened.
Because the combat is exactly the same, plus flying. Run and gun with shields and a small set of slottable 'powers.' The bullet physics are the same, the weapon types are largely equivalent (less stat/performance variety and fewer skins in anthem, amusingly enough) and the character models/skeletons are largely identical and interact with the environment in the same way, down to the stutter-step movement.
None of which is surprising, since anthem is an iteration of the same engine.
-----
and I'll be honest, I played the PC version of ME:A from beginning to end, and my experience was nothing like what you describe. I had almost no bugs, certainly nothing that made things unwinnable (a few mid aid spawns for enemies and very mild facial animation quirks). I don't even recognize the game you're bashing from your complaints about it. Andromeda got stomped because of facial glitches and being a spin off, not for gameplay bugs.
Voss wrote: Because the combat is exactly the same [snipped for size]
So... your objection to it is "it's a shooter game!" basically? Maybe you should look outside of the FPS or 3PS genres for games then?
No.
I am not objecting to it with that description (I'd actually say 'its like MEA' is the most positive feature of anthem)
I'm answering -your question- about why people are describing it like MEA.
The answer is: Because it plays like MEA, being the same combat system and an iteration of the same engine.
I've been playing slow and doing whatever I feel like. But I don't see how you could "beat the game in 10 hours" without skipping the dialog and sidemissions. It may not be a long game, but so far it feels like there's a lot to do.
Also, it seems by the way everyone talks, that all they do is spam one activity (usually one dungeon). Why? You can get the same loot (albeit at different drop rates) from *any* activity (at GM1 or harder). So why not change it up? Why not just play what you feel like playing?
It hasn't gotten repetitive for me yet, and I'm probably at 30-40 hours.
I've been playing slow and doing whatever I feel like. But I don't see how you could "beat the game in 10 hours" without skipping the dialog and sidemissions. It may not be a long game, but so far it feels like there's a lot to do.
Also, it seems by the way everyone talks, that all they do is spam one activity (usually one dungeon). Why? You can get the same loot (albeit at different drop rates) from *any* activity (at GM1 or harder). So why not change it up? Why not just play what you feel like playing?
It hasn't gotten repetitive for me yet, and I'm probably at 30-40 hours.
Less optimal. Find something safe and easily repeated so you can run out of fun things to do faster is my general assumption based on past MMO experience.
I suspect that the Path of Valor is an attempt to get players out of their comfort zones. It'll work for the short term, but I've no idea if it'll affect the long-term.
I've been playing slow and doing whatever I feel like. But I don't see how you could "beat the game in 10 hours" without skipping the dialog and sidemissions. It may not be a long game, but so far it feels like there's a lot to do.
Also, it seems by the way everyone talks, that all they do is spam one activity (usually one dungeon). Why? You can get the same loot (albeit at different drop rates) from *any* activity (at GM1 or harder). So why not change it up? Why not just play what you feel like playing?
It hasn't gotten repetitive for me yet, and I'm probably at 30-40 hours.
simple, even at pure purple, you will struggle at gm1. you either are 2 hit kill with avrage dmg or you can take some hits but your dmg is non existent. you need thouse masterworks to get the hp and dmg going, and since mw drop is realy, realy low, anything that does NOT give guaranteed mw when you have 10 purple items, is basicly a pure waste of time.
and the only source of guaranteed mw is strongholds. at gm1 you get usualy just 1 per run, 2 or 3 if your luck is realy high.
so that means you have only 3 strongholds to choose from and that gets realy repetative realy fast. free roam is pointless as there is no gps marker for the global events so you spend more time flying then farming loot chests from global events, and regular contracts has a horrible low mw drop rate.
anthem is a looter game, yet it is a game that does not give enugh of the loot that is needed for gm1+. it is like the devs dident even bother to see where diablo 3 and division 1 failed when they made anthem, and both of thouse games had to increas their drop rate significantly over time.
I'm gonna disagree that it plays like MEA, except insofar as it is a shooter. MEA at its core was still a cover-based shooter, just with a mobility option in the form of high jumping, dashing and air-dashing-- and frequently, cover-based fighting was still more effective than them. Anthem plays off of your mobility, instead, with no cover mechanic aside from the usual "disrupt line of sight", and the ability to literally fly around the battlefield as needed. Or more bluntly, I don't avoid damage by ducking behind a waist-high wall, but by flying in to the air and away from the biggest source of damage.
They're in the same genre and share plenty of similarities don't get me wrong... but that's like arguing that doom plays "just like" whatever the latest call of duty is.
"simple, even at pure purple, you will struggle at gm1. you either are 2 hit kill with avrage dmg or you can take some hits but your dmg is non existent."
Started GM1 on a Storm. 2 Blues, lower-lvl Weapons (awesome inscriptions, so better for this build than lvl30 weapons - as most of my damage is from gear). No MW (to start).
Only got 2-shotted by Legendary enemies. Like a Legendary Ursix did me in. That's fair.
I was *very* fragile. But I'm one Storm. I'm fighting an *army* (or three). I shouldn't be able to tank the world.
Even basic Elites took 2-3 rounds of combos to kill, though. With purple gear. Non-elites didn't seem so scary, though.
That seemed very reasonable for a fresh 30 in mostly-purple.
" you need thouse masterworks to get the hp and dmg going, and since mw drop is realy, realy low, anything that does NOT give guaranteed mw when you have 10 purple items, is basicly a pure waste of time."
Did 2 Legendary contracts and some freeplay. Got 2 MW Components. Just equipping the first one (bad rolls not a great component, but great stats) made me quite durable in GM1. Haven't equipped the second (dropped in the second contract). Doesn't seem unreasonable.
"and the only source of guaranteed mw is strongholds."
Leg. Contracts seems quite reliable for MWs...
" at gm1 you get usualy just 1 per run, 2 or 3 if your luck is realy high. "
I'd prefer to play contracts/Freeplay a bit. Been getting quite a few upgraded Purples. MWs will drop eventually, but GM1 is fine without them (so far).
"so that means you have only 3 strongholds to choose from and that gets realy repetative realy fast."
3 Strongholds, 3 rotating/randomish Leg Contracts. And that's just for high-prob. MW drops.
" free roam is pointless as there is no gps marker for the global events so you spend more time flying then farming loot chests from global events,"
Or just screw around and have fun. Freeplay on GM1 has been fun, so far. And purple is good enough.
"and regular contracts has a horrible low mw drop rate." Haven't tried yet. But there's a lot of purple upgrades I need yet.
MW aren't necesary unless/until you want to push GM2+. They are super useful in GM1, but not necesssary. Which means you don't actually need them to see any "content", just harder versions of the content.
So I can have fun, and am having fun. And expect to have more fun. Even if I don't get any upgrdes.
Which brings me to anther point. Once you've played for a nontrivial time, if the drop rate and quality remains constant, the rate at which you get upgrades should be the same log function *regardless* of drop rate/quality. Because what determines if a drop is an upgrade is a function of "has a better piece dropped previously". So the odds getting an upgrade in, say, an hour of playing after playing for N hours, should be the same whether MW drops once a minute or once a week. So upping the loot frequency won't help.
Upping the loot frequency just feels like it's "raining loot". Purples feel bad because you've come to expect better things than purples. If the MW frequency had been the current-Purple frequency, and the Leg frequency haad been the current-MW frequency, it'd feel exactly the same.
"anthem is a looter game, yet it is a game that does not give enugh of the loot that is needed for gm1+."
I'm bad at shooters. It gave me enough loot for GM1+ within three hours of being 30.
" it is like the devs dident even bother to see where diablo 3 and division 1 failed when they made anthem"
That's a reasonable point.
", and both of thouse games had to increas their drop rate significantly over time. "
Or at least the illusion of increased drop rates. What really happens is:
1) Loot inflation. Better stuff is available, so upgrade frequency doesn't fall off exponentially with time. But then, that super-awsome-BiS piece you got early on is now trash. I like being able to get things that are *actually* good.
2) Loot variety. Yesterday you were looking for +Dmg. today you're looking for +crit. Tomorrow you're looking for +Shields. By having different stats have different values for different builds, you provide a wider stable of "good gear" options. By having too many build options and stat preferences for any player to track all at once, you get a player to revolve through their gear. That would be cool. I hope they add this. Currently, weapons are "+Dmg or go home". MW Components are "who cares, it's garbage". Some items always want charge speed or charges. Other items always want +dmg. There is some competition between +dmg and +armor/+shields. And there's some value to +crit over +dmg. But most inscriptions or comparisions or straight better/worse (at least as currently perceived).
3) Scaling difficulty increasing drop rates. You can't get most MWs before GM1. But once you can do GM1, you can increase your MW frequency a bit. However, GM2 and GM3 only slightly increase drop frequency (MW or otherwise), while drastically increasing difficulty, and even worse, drastically increasing the time it takes to kill everything - so you get gear faster in GM1. I hope they fix this too.
4) Huge gap between Purples and MW. A smaller gap would smooth the curve between full-purple and a couple MW. Which would be ideal. Even if it meant Purples could drop at many different item levels at 30. Hopefully not the "Light Level" style drops (where your current gear *directly* decides the power of any new gear). But even level 30 content dropping purples of random iLvl anywhere between their current iLvl (38) and MW iLvl would soften the curve, and give pre-MW players greater breadth for upgrades.
I hope they implement 2, 3, and 4. But just upping the drop rate is bad. Chasing the current powerlevel is bad. "Light Level" design is bad. Hopefully they fix it right.
the stat gap between mw and purp is very big, that is true.
on my colossus, (correct me if im wrong here cuz im doing this from memory) each purple colossus component gives 2000 armor. so that is 10000 armor for all 5 purple component slots.
1 single colossus mw component gives 10000 armor...... aka 1 single mw component gives about the same armor as 5 purple components.
and it is alot worse for the non class spesific components to the point where you begin to wonder, apart from the non class ultimate component that actualy has some use, why are the rest of them even in the game....
and it do not help that mw gear geats additional bonuses while purple do not. aka colossus dont get any self heal unless you find the mw version of the siege artillery, cuz that version restores 30% armor for each enemy hit.
they have some work ahead of them in regards to endgame, gear stat adjusting and loot drop adjusting, but if they sort it out the right way, this can be a fun game.
diablo 3, division 1 and destiny games dident become "playable" until 1 year or longer after their release.
Melissia wrote: I'm gonna disagree that it plays like MEA, except insofar as it is a shooter. MEA at its core was still a cover-based shooter, just with a mobility option in the form of high jumping, dashing and air-dashing-- and frequently, cover-based fighting was still more effective than them. Anthem plays off of your mobility, instead, with no cover mechanic aside from the usual "disrupt line of sight", and the ability to literally fly around the battlefield as needed. Or more bluntly, I don't avoid damage by ducking behind a waist-high wall, but by flying in to the air and away from the biggest source of damage.
They're in the same genre and share plenty of similarities don't get me wrong... but that's like arguing that doom plays "just like" whatever the latest call of duty is.
No, it is not. Doom's engine physics, hit boxes and weapons are quite distinct from Call of Duty's. ME's and Anthem's are not distinctive in this way.
De-emphasizing cover for mobility is a design choice, but while it can alter player behavior, it doesn't move it into another genre or alter the game engine in any significant way. Flying (or jump dashing) into the air and moving away from the biggest damage source was/is a perfectly valid and sensible strategy in either game.
It also doesn't change the fact that basic rifles in both game have very much the same behavior profile, bullet drop, bursts, and reload pacing, or that gun time is effectively a punctuation between power recharge cooldowns.
If bioware was to do a 'jump suit' style armor for Anthem, and slap a ME skin on it, the difference in functionality would be minimal at best, and combat areas wouldn't need to change. (Getting to some of them might)
I dunno if it was just bad luck matchmaing or they cranked up the difficulty, but suddenly it feels like GM2 is impossible. I've been doing contracts on GM2 lately with my colossus, it would be difficult but we'd always win in the end. Last night though, every game I played we were just getting slaughtered. Maybe I need to go back to GM1, don't really notice any difference in the amount of masterworks you get between the 2 anyway. Never even tried GM3, don't think I'd want to waste my time without a good group where we can all work together and stuff, rather than a PUG
There's a reasonable chance that people who'd normally be farming GM1 are trying to do GM2 for better drops, since they upped the loot in GM2.
No idea if GM2 is worth it over GM1 (and don't really care), though.
Just started playing my Collosus recently - I'm already at-least-half MW on all the other Javs. I've gotten a decent number of components while playing him - but only one of them has been Col-specific. And only two gear drops: Blue Railgun and Purple Railgun. So his abilities suck and he has no health. He's fun, but not ready for GM yet.
If you can get them, my favorite MW weapons on the colossus are the Voltaic Dome and the Best Defense. The dome is the ordinance weapon and it shocks everything around you and after it shocks them it freezes them. Then the Best Defense is the siege gun, you blast your newly frozen enemies and get tons of combo damage from them, and then every enemy you hit with it also heals you 30%, so if you're hurt you can blast a few critters with your canon and you're back to full health. I happened to find one that has a 100% charge perk on it, so I can shoot it twice, but then it takes twice as long to fully recharge.
I think I'm using Voltaic Dome currently. But it's blue. And ilvl22. And my highest-level gear for the slot...
I really want Best Defense or Emergency Power (or both). Having no self-healing makes it hard to play aggressively - as you only have shields when you're blocking.
I think I just need a few more purples before he's ready for GM1 freeplay. With all the other classes, it's a lot easier to be useful at lower gear (Storm is a godsend even without lvl 30 gear - so much status they can do!). But the Colossus really needs components for HP so he can stay in the fight.
i've mostly just been playing the colossus, I managed to find a legendary for my ranger (while playing my colossus) so I started playing him and he's just so weak and wimpy I can't get used to it. I love being able to hulksmash things. I've been trying my interceptor a bit though, on easier settings.. a lot more fun than the ranger was, zipping around slicing things to shreads
Ranger is actually my favorite, and the one I play the most. Gun things down. Support/status from one gear piece, detonate/finish with the other. Melee to prime something big or chump something small.
Typical engagement, I use both gear pieces, my gun, and melee at least once every ~10 seconds. Gotta get distance from some things, close in on others. It's the generalist suit; and for those of us looking for a generalist playstyle, it *really* works.
Or at least it did, until I got Last Argument, and associated Blast components, while not getting the weapons or Impact/Gun components. My Ranger is currently kitted to Blast/Ult things. Last Argument, Argos Mace, etc. Does a ton of damage. Ults regularly. But I want to go back to a more balanced play style - once I get the right gear pieces.
The Ranger isn't as beefy as the Colossus, but is beefier than Storm/Intercepter. He's not as fast as the Interceptor, but he's faster than the Storm/Colossus. He's the "basic soldier" suit. Which does *not* mean "boring".
I've got one heck of a jab. I've got missiles. I've got grenades. And I'm really good with a gun. I'm not some slowpoke unmoveable object. I'm not some lightweight that can't take a hit. I'm not some space wizard hiding in the back. I'm awesome.
This is one of the things Anthem truly nails: all four Suits are amazing, but in very different ways.
Yeah, I think that's why I love the colossus.. it's just big and heavy and feels so stompy, it really is a walking tank. To me it feels more like piloting a mech, the other suits just feel more like armored soldiers. Which is fine, for me I just like the more mechy feeling. Just something about flying over a bunch of bad guys, and dropping in the middle of them with a slam and killing everything around you, then whipping out your shield and steamrolling everything in your path.
Colossus is immensely fun, yeah. And I think it has some of the best abilities, too (the super-shotgun and the railgun are both top notch, the mortars are also great).
"Just something about flying over a bunch of bad guys, and dropping in the middle of them with a slam and killing everything around you, then whipping out your shield and steamrolling everything in your path."
I tried that twice.
First time, Full-to-dead in 3 seconds.
Second time, there was a legendary Escari, another legendary Scar, and two more Elites just over the ridge I didn't see before dropping in... didn't even last until I recovered from the drop...
You're making me really *really* want to play my Colossus now... Must get good gear....
(the only level-30 gearpiece I have is the Railgun, so I'm limited on skills to use atm)
i main colossus tank and you realy realy realy need colossus spesific MW internals to increase your hp pool and Best Defence for that higly needed self heal IF you want to be a tank.
you allso have Demolition Tribute BUT it gives only armor on mele kill, so it is not a primary heal source, but it helps when you go rampant on the trash or if you are a dps colossus.
I have a few MW Colossus components, so stepped into MW1 Legendary Contracts last night. Did all 3.
Got 2 'Universal' Components, and no MW beyond the given 3...
I feel like I have a reasonable amount of health, but my only way to get HP back right now are repair/ammo drops from mobs. So I can tank for a bit, but then I need to hide and wait for some orbs to show up.
The only damage I seem to do is with my gun (Divine Favor - not what I'd look for, but the best option for the Col I have for now). So I mostly stand back and shoot, only getting aggressive and playing like a Col. when there's a lot of orbs on the ground already.
Can't wait to find Best Defence or Emergency Power. Either will be a gamechanger for me. But I also can't wait to spend more time on my Ranger. Or Interceptor. Or Storm. But I'll probably stick with the Col until he's at least on par with those 3, gear wise. Oddly, I had no trouble kitting those other 3 out for GM1 - two Hard mode contracts/missions/freeplay gave me all the Purple I needed. But the Col gets almost no purple for some reason.
I switched back to my ranger last night and did a little better. I think my issue is that I try to play it like my colossus since that's what I'm used to. And also his ultimate comes back much faster than my colossus, but I don't expect to have it back so fast, so I don't use it as often and forget about it. Even on my colossus I usually save it for when I need it to hit something real hard rather than blowing away trash mobs as soon as it's ready. I kinda wish there was some kind of "Ultimate Ready!!2" message that would pop up on the screen so you know it's ready to go, don't always notice the meter in the bottom corner when I'm in the thick of battle.
Necros wrote: I switched back to my ranger last night and did a little better. I think my issue is that I try to play it like my colossus since that's what I'm used to. And also his ultimate comes back much faster than my colossus, but I don't expect to have it back so fast, so I don't use it as often and forget about it. Even on my colossus I usually save it for when I need it to hit something real hard rather than blowing away trash mobs as soon as it's ready. I kinda wish there was some kind of "Ultimate Ready!!2" message that would pop up on the screen so you know it's ready to go, don't always notice the meter in the bottom corner when I'm in the thick of battle.
yea, both of them has an internal that increase ulti charge, but colossus has its increased on use of the actual ulti, ranger has its increased ulti charge on a granade ability.
i run ulti build on my ranger and it is crazy how fast it builds the charge if you allso have a granade cd internal.
I skipped about 70% of the story dialog, Listened to Brin, Dex and a couple people in the bar.
for GM2 I feel like you needs your gear to be sync'd, which mine isn't currently.
I like doing stuff on hard an being a super hero and can carry the team if need be. The ten or so times I played solo on GM1 there was always either full teams of storms or interceptors that just felt new to GM1, and down'd too many times.
Has anyone had a couple of bad games, where there were people just AFK in the back, one dude was playing candy crush with his mike on.
The thing that drove me away and towards Division were the load times, I should be able to browse reddit while going from town, forge, matchmaking. Ill come back after some more fixes.
Has anyone had a couple of bad games, where there were people just AFK in the back, one dude was playing candy crush with his mike on.
They'd don't have an autokick feature for AFK? I have thought Bioware would have learned that lesson when they had to institute it back in 2012ish for ME3. Sure, there are ways around it but I'm surprised it's not automated.
Never had that. Did have someone who was shouting at me in Russian, but he was playing the game. (Pretty sure he was asking me to revive him cause he died all the damn time and I basically never died).
There's always one of those "Well, he's dead again" guys in the GM2 games I play. That becomes me when I play anything besides my Colossus
I finally finished the challenge of valor last night. It gives you a red skull vinyl, but it covers up the whole body and doesn't look so good. Would have rather it be something on a shoulder pad .. would be cool if they would have a way to place your vinyls wherever you want and resize them.
Maddok_Death wrote: I skipped about 70% of the story dialog, Listened to Brin, Dex and a couple people in the bar.
for GM2 I feel like you needs your gear to be sync'd, which mine isn't currently.
I like doing stuff on hard an being a super hero and can carry the team if need be. The ten or so times I played solo on GM1 there was always either full teams of storms or interceptors that just felt new to GM1, and down'd too many times.
Has anyone had a couple of bad games, where there were people just AFK in the back, one dude was playing candy crush with his mike on.
Well, yes it even says so in the description for gm2, the fokus there is more about the gear + skill synergy and teamplay then your ability to just play the game, unlike how it is in gm1. Might even consider to make and use some of the consumables when you do random gm2s.
Allso the recommended gearscore for gm1-3 is either too low or the jump between the difficultys is too high, cuz even if you are 10-50 score above the recommended, you die in 2-3 hits and you do very little dmg with your abilitys regardless if you go from hard to gm1 or gm1 to gm2.
If people die fast in gm1/2 their are either lazy carrys, or they have just reached the gearscore recommended to play gm1/2 and are in the transition stage. sadly you will never know.
The only place i see afk people are in temple of scar cuz the instance is bugged to hell. if you are the last person to leave the first room or the 3rd big combat room, the purple wall goes up infront of you and the game refuces to tp you to the next rooms.
btw, has any1 noticed the increased drop rate in gm2? i just recently did my first full run gm2 stronghold and all i got was 2 MWs. i expected atleast 3-5 since 1-3 is what i get in gm1.
it still feels as gm1 is the only option for effective mw farming.
I noticed this week, playing mostly just GM2 I've gotten 3 or 4 legendaries, but not so many MWs. Before that I only had like 1 legendary ever.. might just be lucky though
It was not long after I first brought my Ranger into GM1 - on Freeplay. Terribly geared.
Took forever to catch up to the two randos who were doing events in this Freeplay session.
I caught up to them, and saw the Chest icon - so I missed the event. Too bad, no lewt for me. Figured I'd still pop in on them so I'd be with them as they moved to the next event.
They didn't pop the chest until I landed for some reason.
Legendary.
The only Legendary I've gotten. And I didn't even show up for the event that dropped it!
That was awfully decent of them. But I don't have a mic, so couldn't tell them or thank them.
Also, the drop had a +200% damage and a +150% damage. Wow!
However, it was Seeker Munitions. While Damage is the best you can get on it, it's still junk.
Same thing happened to me kind of .. someone was just farming monsters in an area, by the time I got to where he was, there was suddenly no one around, like he must have just quit.. but there was a big yellow diamond just sitting there on the ground. Score!
Necros wrote: I noticed this week, playing mostly just GM2 I've gotten 3 or 4 legendaries, but not so many MWs. Before that I only had like 1 legendary ever.. might just be lucky though
Hard to say for me, i dident transition into gm2 until this week, but in 6 purple contracts, i have gotten 3 yellow drops.
Perhaps that is the loot difference, that gm2 is not ment to give more MWs but start giving legends...
