I'd like to believe its either an X-Wing revival, or at least the PS2 Starfighter games, but zero faith in neither Disney nor Electronic Arts.
If they dropped the name Lawrence Holland I'd give it a chance, but it'll be something average no doubt. Certainly not handing over £50+ for a dull game with Star Wars slapped on the title screen.
Well, given that Inferno Squadron were both ground troops and pilots--probably think something in that vein. Also worth noting that both Rebels and Empire forces shown on the leaked key art were starfighters surrounding transports(U-Wings for the Rebels and a TIE Reaper for the Empire).
This seemingly coincides with a "Project: Maverick" that Motive(responsible for Battlefront II) was hiring for a few years back which had "story elements, character designs, voice acting, and cooperative multiplayer aspects" as the key focus for hires.
Frankly, anyone complaining about Battlefront can move right on out of this thread. Far better support than people act like it got.
Well at least it's not another shooter. Still think a podracing game would be cool using next gen hardware. Much rather play that than gran turismo on ps5.
Microtransactions were gone after the first two months or so in Battlefront 2. They never even launched in BFV. Insisting on EA needing to do some kind of "rehab" is ridiculous while games like Overwatch, Call of Duty, and Gears of War still have them as a central element seemingly get a free pass.
Kanluwen wrote: Microtransactions were gone after the first two months or so in Battlefront 2. They never even launched in BFV. Insisting on EA needing to do some kind of "rehab" is ridiculous while games like Overwatch, Call of Duty, and Gears of War still have them as a central element seemingly get a free pass.
Erm , there is premium currency and a Shop mate in bfv.
Kanluwen wrote: Microtransactions were gone after the first two months or so in Battlefront 2. They never even launched in BFV. Insisting on EA needing to do some kind of "rehab" is ridiculous while games like Overwatch, Call of Duty, and Gears of War still have them as a central element seemingly get a free pass.
Erm , there is premium currency and a Shop mate in bfv.
None of the items within are required. It's only recently(within the past two or three weeks) that anything gameplay related has been added(the "Shortcut" packs, which do nothing but unlock weapons...of which most are unlocked by having bought the Year Two version of BFV). The shop covers items with both Battlefield Currency(which is the Premium Currency that they're literally now giving away in Weekly Missions and is for Elite skins[which have zero gameplay effect], certain cosmetics, and now the Shortcut Packs) and Company Coins(which are earned by playing the game).
When people like to say "microtransactions", it's them slyly winking and nudging you while handing a note saying "lootboxes". There are zero lootboxes in BFV.
Erm ,no mate and that Stuff is still an issue and abused by the industry regardless if it is a lootbox or not.
Aka microtransactions.
And whilest it is by far not as predatory as peak EA is , it's the Same baseline issue that cripples alot of their Games /resells of Games with another year numbers atached.
TL: DR allways wait a bit and See if the game is from EA. Or any Big AAA publisher with microtransactions tendencies Like activision etc.
Frankly, anyone complaining about Battlefront can move right on out of this thread. Far better support than people act like it got.
Then its going to be a very lonely thread!
Seriously, though. I would have bought the first game but there was no Clone Wars era. Second game it was "yeah, at some point maybe...". EA had the financial might of Disney behind them and couldn't deliver what LucasArts had back in 2004 with the very first Battlefront.
I'm a fan of the original trilogy films. I have X-Wing, TIE Fighter and X-Wing alliance (and the fantastic mods for XWA). Also really enjoyed Wing Commander III (not Star Wars, but similar game, and stars Mark Hamill). Although strangely I've never completed any of those games. I would love a X-Wing/TIE Fighter reboot/reimagining type game.
I'd settle for a graphical remaster with better controller (i.e. gamepad/HOTAS) support.
Unfortunately I've been disappointed with every Star Wars game since Battlefront II Classic back in 2005.
Star Wars, despite the fanboy and reviewers reactions, seems to be one of those franchises where almost everything tends to just miss the mark. Bit like GW video games, there's lots of them (mostly 40k), but very few (only one or two in fact) that are actually truly any good.
Of course. What I don't have is a modern version of Rogue Squadron
Amen to that!
Rogue Squadron was quite a fun game if I remember correctly. Was over the moon they had the World Devastators from Dark Empire and totally what I was hoping for with the Sequels...but nah. Sadly not.
GoatboyBeta wrote: Star Wars Squadrons you say?
**gets misty eyed remembering Rogue Squadron on the N64 with the 4mb expansion Pak**
But 2020 is gonna 2020, so its probably gonna be some kind of deck building phone app.
Don’t.....don’t take my Hope from me :(
For belated clarity, my reference to EA’s Microtransaction rehab was reflecting their wise decision to knock it off with BF2.
See, I’m a very casual gamer. In life, I simply don’t have the spare hours necessary to Git Gud. So I have to accept a certain level of ‘red headed stepchild’ experience. But add in Goons Buying Better Gear on top, and it’s a solid deal breaker.
Battlefront put me off because it was 100% online, so I didn’t even have a sandpit to learn the ropes, and just got the hell beaten out of me.
BF2 had its story mode, which I really enjoyed. And I’m hoping this one will have similar!
Didn't STAR WARS Jedi: Fallen Order end up being good? I get companies like EA and Bethesda drop the ball a lot and honestly I don't doubt they'll continue to do so but sometimes....just sometimes they do good or the companies under them do good. I mean Fallout 76 was fixed and they pulled a "No Man's Sky" level fix. That's all you really have to do to make gamers happy. Don't insult them and even if they are being jerks because your game wasn't up to par when it came out it doesn't mean the bridge is fully burnt if you can fix it and maybe give out an apology that the game wasn't quite ready yet.
Thing is, we know nothing about this game except for its name. We don't know whether it'll be a space combat sim like X-Wing (doubtful, imo, since the genre is largely dead at this time; but it is possible). Or if it'll be a more arcade-ish sim. Or if it'll be a collectible card game.
The reveal trailer is on the 15th. Assuming that it's not just a teaser, that's when we'll get a better idea of what's coming.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Didn't STAR WARS Jedi: Fallen Order end up being good? I get companies like EA and Bethesda drop the ball a lot and honestly I don't doubt they'll continue to do so but sometimes....just sometimes they do good or the companies under them do good. I mean Fallout 76 was fixed and they pulled a "No Man's Sky" level fix. That's all you really have to do to make gamers happy. Don't insult them and even if they are being jerks because your game wasn't up to par when it came out it doesn't mean the bridge is fully burnt if you can fix it and maybe give out an apology that the game wasn't quite ready yet.
It was pretty average, and 76 is.. not really all that fixed. Especially if you count all the anti-consumer nonsense they were and are still pulling for it.
Kanluwen wrote: Well, given that Inferno Squadron were both ground troops and pilots--probably think something in that vein. Also worth noting that both Rebels and Empire forces shown on the leaked key art were starfighters surrounding transports(U-Wings for the Rebels and a TIE Reaper for the Empire).
This seemingly coincides with a "Project: Maverick" that Motive(responsible for Battlefront II) was hiring for a few years back which had "story elements, character designs, voice acting, and cooperative multiplayer aspects" as the key focus for hires.
Frankly, anyone complaining about Battlefront can move right on out of this thread. Far better support than people act like it got.
You’re telling me to get out due to Battlefront 2? Pffftt, I never even got the second game I felt so burned after the first. What was it, 4 maps on an only multiplayer game for £40? I’ve never felt so let down by a game I was looking forward to ever. EA can kiss my fething arse if they think they’ll ever get a penny out of me again.
Too bad there wasn't a demo you could have played to see if you liked it first or some kind of product information that was easily found to see what the game was...
I did play the demo and liked it. That’s why I bought it. I was just a little shocked, like almost everyone that bought it, that when they released new maps, you had to buy a £40 add on if you wanted them. There was almost no content in the core game.
If you want to shill for EA though by all means, keep buying all the surprise mechanics or whatever stupid crap they call them, I’m done with them, and won’t support anything they do. feth them.
They literally made no secret of the Season Pass at the outset. They also sold the maps as 'packs', themed around a specific one(Outer Rim, Cloud City, Rogue One, Death Star) where it was just the maps that you couldn't get outside of the DLC.
You can keep trying to say I'm a shill or a white knight or whatever, but that's on you for not actually having a cursory understanding of how the product you bought worked. It's not like this stuff was hidden.
It's also why when Battlefront II came out, they made it so the maps were (shock! gasp!) free to avoid splintering the playerbase again. It's how they have done all their big titles since Battlefront/Battlefield 1.
You’re talking like I’m the only person to have noted the lack of content. It’s my fault that I didn’t exactly how little content there was in the game before release? Get real. I am fully aware of season passes, but they vary wildly in how important they are. I played a lot of The Division, had the gold pass for that, but it added little to the core game. EA makes a season pass, and it seems that without it you pretty much are left with a demo.
Your last line basically reaffirms why I was right to be annoyed (shock! gasp!) You don’t usually try to win an argument by backing up the other persons points, so well done there.
You keep emptying your wallet to EA every time they want to take you to the cleaners, I’ll just stay clear of their products and questionable business practices.
Isn't there a joke meme about every game series EA destroyed and all of those fans putting their hands into a group wanting to see EA burn? They killed command and conquer, the Sims, dead space, ruin star wars games and more. I think they do a little good but man between Bethesda, EA and maybe blizzard I don't know who is trying to piss off gamers more.
Kanluwen man EA had there chance with me with command and conquer and a couple other games. I liked cnc 3 but cnc 4 and the eventual murdering of the franchise wasn't cool. This story is pretty common with EA even without other shady bs EA does.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Didn't STAR WARS Jedi: Fallen Order end up being good? I get companies like EA and Bethesda drop the ball a lot and honestly I don't doubt they'll continue to do so but sometimes....just sometimes they do good or the companies under them do good. I mean Fallout 76 was fixed and they pulled a "No Man's Sky" level fix. That's all you really have to do to make gamers happy. Don't insult them and even if they are being jerks because your game wasn't up to par when it came out it doesn't mean the bridge is fully burnt if you can fix it and maybe give out an apology that the game wasn't quite ready yet.
I certainly enjoyed it, but was left wanting a bit more.
I mean, compare the hours and hours I can while away on GTA, Skyrim and Fallout 4 ( yes I’m aware opinions vary as to the relative quality of those games, but I enjoyed them plenty).
Fallen Order wasn’t as gloriously violent as God of War, and just a bit too linear for me. If they’d thrown in a bunch of side missions, I’d probably still be playing it.
As an individual, I’ve no real beef with EA and their chums, because I simply don’t play computer games terribly often. But I’m aware enough that Play To Win via Micro Transaction is a thing, and why it’s hated. Likewise, day one expansion content which is actually encoded on the disk can go get bent.
This one? Provided we get a halfway decent fighter sim, with notable strengths and weaknesses between the ships, I’ll be a happy camper!
Automatically Appended Next Post: Anyways, little over an hour until we get the reveal video. As it coincides with the end of my working day, reckon I’ll be tuning in.
In Star Wars: Squadrons, players will enlist as starfighter pilots, stepping into the cockpits of iconic starfighters from both the New Republic and Imperial fleets. They’ll plan skirmishes with their squadron in the briefing room before taking off for space battles across the galaxy. Players will engage in strategic 5v5 multiplayer space battles with the goal of demolishing the opposing flagship in Fleet Battles and will feel the rush of first-person multiplayer combat as they work with their squadron to defeat as many opponents as possible in Dogfights. Pilots will triumph as a team, adjusting the composition of their squadrons to suit their playstyles as they progress, crushing their opponents and completing objectives across known and never-before-seen locations, including the gas giant of Yavin Prime and the shattered moon of Galitan.
Star Wars: Squadrons will offer rich cosmetic and gameplay customization options with rewards and bonuses that are earned solely through gameplay. As players move up the ranks, they’ll earn components such as weapons, hulls, engines and shields to customize the performance of their starfighters; and gain cosmetic items to customize their cockpit, ship exteriors, and appearance of their pilot. In addition, players will be able to squad up with their friends and play against others, regardless of platform, as cross-play will be supported on Xbox One, PlayStation 4, PC, and VR.
Star Wars: Squadrons will also feature a single-player story that brings to life events following the Battle of Endor when the Rebel Alliance has successfully destroyed the Death Star II. Through the story, players will learn what it means to be a pilot as they battle from the alternating perspectives of two customizable pilots, one serving in the New Republic’s heroic Vanguard Squadron, while the other fights for the Galactic Empire’s fearsome Titan Squadron. The authentic story features a diverse cast of original characters, as well as some cameos from familiar faces in the Star Wars galaxy.
Worth noting that this is dropping at $39.99 rather than the usual $59.99 for a game.
Eh. Multiplayer and squadron focus is off-putting.
Story elements are kind of interesting. New Republic vs Imperial Remnant, with the Imperial forces taking the role of the rebel forces from the old X-wing games (disrupting shipbuilding, conducting raids, and etc).
5v5, and it looks like it keeps capital ships around as objectives- I expect this will be similar to flying Overwatch, or League of Legends. Looks like you want your squadron to include different ships, probably with different roles.
"Through the story, players will learn what it means to be a pilot as they battle from the alternating perspectives of two customizable pilots, one serving in the New Republic’s heroic Vanguard Squadron, while the other fights for the Galactic Empire’s fearsome Titan Squadron."
... and then, after the first mission as Titan Squadron, your entire group will defect to the New Republic, because Disney Star Wars is like movies from the 1950's-60's, where the bad guys are never allowed to win!
[EDIT]: Hang on a minute...
"Star Wars: Squadrons will offer rich cosmetic and gameplay customization options with rewards and bonuses that are earned solely through gameplay. As players move up the ranks, they’ll earn components such as weapons, hulls, engines and shields to customize the performance of their starfighters; and gain cosmetic items to customize their cockpit, ship exteriors, and appearance of their pilot."
EA aren't Ubisoft, but what's the bet that everything in the above paragraph is 100% true, but also 100% a half-truth. Yes, you can earn everything in game and cannot purchase these items... but maybe you can purchase boosters to increase the speed at which you earn them. As I said, EA ain't Ubi, but it's not outside the realm of possibility.
It’s the cross platform play that’s really got my interest. Means me an interwebular chums can form a squadron of our own, without anyone having to pay for more than the software. Well, I say that, I’ll likely need a headset with which to taunt my opponents a second time....
GoatboyBeta wrote: Seems to be more X-Wing/Tie fighter than Rogue Squadron. Hmm.... I really sucked at those two games
I'd be patient and wait for more info. The genre that spawned X-Wing and TIE Fighter is still largely dead. I suspect that this game won't be as technical as those games. Plus, some adjustments to the setting will clearly need to be made since you can't have a 5 v 5 game that has Rebel (or New Republic) fighters on one side, and TIE Fighters on the other. The setting has long-established the TIEs are simply outclassed by the Alliance fighters. So a mechanism, or some tweaks, will need to be implemented to make people actually want to fly TIE Fighters.
While I enjoyed Rogue Squadron and own all 3 games I would rather it not be an arcade shooter. Give me a proper X-Wing/Tie-Fighter sequel please! Looking from the gameplay footage it does look more like a good proper Space Flight simulator I've been waiting for.
Finally an excuse to drop money on a new joystick.
I watched the new gameplay trailer and...I don't know. What's with those support ship things, what are they supposed to do, and I don't recall even seeing those ships before? Why is the TIE Fighter in there as the equivalent to the X-Wing? Why not have the B-Wing and TIE Defender, or will that be DLC?
And is this going to be the kind of online multiplayer where I don't really get to play the ship I want to play, but will be stuck with whatever the team needs? Like, if everybody else chooses fighter, will I have to be the one person with a brain and go with a bomber to actually accomplish the mission?
The different fighters probably work like different classes do in Team Fortress or Battlefield. Each with their own specialty and way to play which fits into the modern game design philosophy.
And yes, most likely if you want to take out a Mon Cal cruiser you'll have to fly a good old sluggish Tie Bomber. I don't think it'll work like the old X-Wing games where, in my boredom, after I had completed the mission and could hyperspace out I would hang around and single-handily take out the Star Destroyer for kicks.
Hopefully someone will try and Mod the old X-Wing and Tie-Fighter campaigns into the game.
I'd be surprised if they didn't include other ships and single player missions. There will at least be a lot of demand to fly the Ghost and Falcon.
Funadamentally, this kind of game is a lot simplier to develop than most other 3D engine games(we had Elite and Starglider long before even Wolfenstein 3D), so it really isn't expecting too much of them to throw in extra content down the road. Even X-Wing and Tie Fighter had expansion sets back in the day.
Well, It had one, Balance of Power which I own but honestly never played. By the time I had gotten it I was heavy into X-Wing Alliance which was what I always wanted in a space flight sim. Finally got to fly the Battle of Endor!
But yeah it'll probably focus on Multiplayer as most games do nowadays anyway. Having a strong multiplayer community keeps the longevity of the game going far beyond what a normal single player game lifespan does (with a few exceptions of course) as well and increases the potential profit of the game.
I mean there's a reason Rockstar keeps re-releasing GTA 5 afterall...
They didn't say "no" to possible ships down the road, but it is important to note that the ships are set up as classes/roles:
Fighters are the 'all-rounders' and are X-Wing and TIE Fighter at launch.
Interceptors are for going after the other squadron and are the A-Wing and TIE Interceptor at launch.
Bombers are for going after the capital ships in Fleet Battle mode and are Y-Wing and TIE Bombers at launch.
Support Ships are...interesting. They can come equipped with tractor beams, mines, or autoturrets and apparently can transfer power over to the other ships in their squadrons. These are the TIE Reaper(the 'dropship' for the Death Troopers in Rogue One's Scarif sequence) and the U-Wing(again from Rogue One, it's the Rebel ship with the swing-wings).
I'd imagine that we might be best served to look at the X-Wing tabletop game to get an idea of what might come down the pipe. I don't think we'll see more single player stuff unless they add new classes of ships though.
Power management and systems? This is starting to look more X-Wing-y all the time, which is impressive.
I fear the single player will be a bit like the single player in the original Battlefront games, or even Siege - just variations on multiplayer that are rather shallow and meant to introduce mechanics more than tell a story.
It's interesting that there are "classes" for the fighters. Makes the lack of B-Wing make more sense now. I guess if they wanted to introduce a "gunship" class, then the B-Wing could come into play for the Rebels and... I dunno... the TIE/d for the Imps?
H.B.M.C. wrote: Power management and systems? This is starting to look more X-Wing-y all the time, which is impressive.
I fear the single player will be a bit like the single player in the original Battlefront games, or even Siege - just variations on multiplayer that are rather shallow and meant to introduce mechanics more than tell a story.
It's interesting that there are "classes" for the fighters. Makes the lack of B-Wing make more sense now. I guess if they wanted to introduce a "gunship" class, then the B-Wing could come into play for the Rebels and... I dunno... the TIE/d for the Imps?
Would they bring back the assault gunboat for the Empire? It made it into the X-wing miniatures game so the gunboat must have passed some sort of muster with Disney.
I thought about the Assault Gunboat as the opposite for the B-Wing. It certainly makes more sense than my suggestion of the Defender (the Defender is a Space Superiority Fighter of which there is no equal on the Rebels side, IIRC). I just don't know if Disney (almost wrote GW... heh!) would bring it back in that capacity. At least the TIE/d showed up in a canon source (Rebels), bringing it back into Star Wars proper. I don't think the Gunboat has yet.
Then again, one of the upgrade options is a SLAM drive, which I believe first came about because of the Assault Missile Boat (please correct me if I'm wrong - TIE Fighter was a long time ago!), so who knows what they might have planning.
They may do a "Heavy Bomber" version and give us the K-Wing and the Missile Boat or TIE Scimitar!
"Through the story, players will learn what it means to be a pilot as they battle from the alternating perspectives of two customizable pilots, one serving in the New Republic’s heroic Vanguard Squadron, while the other fights for the Galactic Empire’s fearsome Titan Squadron."
... and then, after the first mission as Titan Squadron, your entire group will defect to the New Republic, because Disney Star Wars is like movies from the 1950's-60's, where the bad guys are never allowed to win!
I loved Command and Conquer, Colony Wars and other back in the day - you could win as good or bad guys.
With preorders you are committing your money before any reviews or feed back, and for months when you may find you need it more in the short term. Also, there could be hassle in delays or a refund.
I also got burned on Samus Returns when they announced a deluxe set for preorder, but the preorders sold out as soon as they went live!
Personally, I only do the weekly preorder for GW items. My supplier, Wayland, has always been reliable.
Amazon don’t charge until it’s post, and the £34.99 is the highest I’ll be charged, should it go up between now and release. And if it goes down, I pay the lowest advertised price since I placed.
They might be a tax dodging nightmare, but they do pre- orders right!
There are a lot of grim reminders of it- and a LOT of them are Star Wars games.
Pre-ordering is an odd relic of a completely different supply chain. In an era where the products are entirely digital, there isn't any purpose or benefit to customers.
The benefits are pre-loading large games (when it's an option), and pre-order bonus goodies. There are some cosmetics available as a bonus for pre-ordering this game.
Though lately Creative Assembly has been bypassing even that part of the pre-order inducement by offering the extra goodies for a week after launch (with TW3K).
I don’t pre-order many games any more, but when I do, I pre-order on Amazon as soon as they list them for the same reason Mad Doc stated. Some games I know I’m getting regardless of reviews, so I may as well get it as cheap as possible. I’ve also got a load of black library books at 60-80% of retail price the same way.
Eumerin wrote: The benefits are pre-loading large games (when it's an option), and pre-order bonus goodies. There are some cosmetics available as a bonus for pre-ordering this game.
Those aren't benefits of pre-ordering. They're bribes by the company to stampede customers into pre-ordering through fear of missing out. There is a significant difference. And a lot of companies (not just CA) are getting pushback on those practices and offer a sales window where you get those benefits for a week or two after release. So there isn't even a pretense that's actually a pre-order 'benefit.'
The old supply chain issue that justified preorders was that with books/games/whatever, if you didn't pre-order, it could mean that you go to the store on day 1 and the store is out of copies, and it could be weeks before they get new stock. That isn't really a thing anymore.
Dreadwinter wrote:
If people are not pre-ordering and reviewing the game, how are there reactions out in the world and how have people seen all the major issues?
Most companies provide free early press copies to a stable of youtubers/streamers to play and post prior to release. They've been doing it for years now, and don't have much control or censor gameplay, even when it turns up bugs and problems.
At worst they ask players to not show off cutscenes and major plot elements.
The reactions, analysis of gameplay, etc. happen without professional reviews, and there are generally hundreds of hours of content to get reactions, evaluate issues and for customers to make a much more informed decision than ever before.
Eumerin wrote: The benefits are pre-loading large games (when it's an option), and pre-order bonus goodies. There are some cosmetics available as a bonus for pre-ordering this game.
Those aren't benefits of pre-ordering. They're bribes by the company to stampede customers into pre-ordering through fear of missing out. There is a significant difference. And a lot of companies (not just CA) are getting pushback on those practices and offer a sales window where you get those benefits for a week or two after release. So there isn't even a pretense that's actually a pre-order 'benefit.'
Semantics.
They are a benefit. The fact that the publisher is offering them as an inducement does not make them any less so, much as an employer might offer non-salary benefits ("bribes", according to your parlance) in order to persuade someone to work for them. Whether you choose to call them a benefit or something more derogatory, they are a benefit. Also, pre-loading pretty much matches up with the old benefit of pre-ordering the game - namely, guaranteeing that you'll be able to play it at the earliest possible moment. Bigger games can take a while to download and install, even on a fast connection. If you've already got the game installed when the launch time arrives, then you don't need to deal with the hassle of a three hour download and install process after you get home from work on launch day.
Eumerin wrote: The benefits are pre-loading large games (when it's an option), and pre-order bonus goodies. There are some cosmetics available as a bonus for pre-ordering this game.
Those aren't benefits of pre-ordering. They're bribes by the company to stampede customers into pre-ordering through fear of missing out. There is a significant difference. And a lot of companies (not just CA) are getting pushback on those practices and offer a sales window where you get those benefits for a week or two after release. So there isn't even a pretense that's actually a pre-order 'benefit.'
Semantics.
Really not. A benefit is something inherent to the process, not an add-on to get you to even consider the process in any way at all..
If you have to functionally pay some one to buy it early, take a risk on it even being a worthwhile purchase, sight unseen, you are not giving someone a benefit, you're trying to take advantage of ignorance.
Also, pre-loading pretty much matches up with the old benefit of pre-ordering the game - namely, guaranteeing that you'll be able to play it at the earliest possible moment. Bigger games can take a while to download and install, even on a fast connection. If you've already got the game installed when the launch time arrives, then you don't need to deal with the hassle of a three hour download and install process after you get home from work on launch day
It doesn't even vaguely 'match up.' Downloading something after work after I change, get things done around the house and have dinner is completely unlike driving an hour to a store, finding I can't get what I want, driving another hour home, and repeating the process at some unknown later date. And no, I'm not exaggerating or engaging in hyperbole. I lived in multiple places where simple bookstores, shopping centers were an hour or more away (plus a couple years where a distant Post Exchange with a barely functional selection of American goods was the only option) .
That was not a singular rare experience for me back in the day, which was why pre-orders were once useful. A delay of maybe hours of a direct install vs a 'pre-load' a game isn't in the same reality, and I find the assertion rather sad. Especially given how long Steam or other systems take to 'unlock' preloads and finish downloading. The gain is usually insignificant, especially if I'm using the time constructively.
Voss wrote: Really not. A benefit is something inherent to the process, not an add-on to get you to even consider the process in any way at all.
If they announce it and offer it, it's inherent to the process of purchasing the game. If they later put the game on sale, and I purchase it during that sale, there's a benefit to me. Both are equally inherent to the process of purchasing the game. The only difference is the specific benefit being offered. I'm not sure why you think differently.
Also, pre-loading pretty much matches up with the old benefit of pre-ordering the game - namely, guaranteeing that you'll be able to play it at the earliest possible moment. Bigger games can take a while to download and install, even on a fast connection. If you've already got the game installed when the launch time arrives, then you don't need to deal with the hassle of a three hour download and install process after you get home from work on launch day
It doesn't even vaguely 'match up.' Downloading something after work after I change, get things done around the house and have dinner is completely unlike driving an hour to a store, finding I can't get what I want, driving another hour home, and repeating the process at some unknown later date. And no, I'm not exaggerating or engaging in hyperbole. I lived in multiple places where simple bookstores, shopping centers were an hour or more away (plus a couple years where a distant Post Exchange with a barely functional selection of American goods was the only option) .
That was not a singular rare experience for me back in the day, which was why pre-orders were once useful. A delay of maybe hours of a direct install vs a 'pre-load' a game isn't in the same reality, and I find the assertion rather sad. Especially given how long Steam or other systems take to 'unlock' preloads and finish downloading. The gain is usually insignificant, especially if I'm using the time constructively.
Contrast your experience with mine of stopping at the game store on the way home from work and picking up the game I'd reserved (an extra 20 minutes tops) versus downloading a particularly big game that takes three hours to download, and that I can only start downloading when I get home from work. Yes, particularly big games - such as the free CoD WW2 and Battlefront II that PSN is offering this month - do take that long to download on a perfectly normal connection.
So while battlefront 2 eventually turned out ok and after the mess of the last battlefield il be damned if I’m getting this on release.
If by some small chance EA have learned from their mess of a business model of releasing games that are not even a third finished on release, and the reviews turn out ok then perhaps il get it.
As someone whose been playing battlefield since the first one that was released on the Xbox 360 I couldn’t believe the way battlefield v was handled. Yeah it wasn’t a star wars game but damn I’m not in a position to hand them money at a drop of a hat anymore.
Back in the day you knew something good was coming with EA , now ah not so much. Still fingers crossed they have learned and it turns out to be a bloody good game.
If so then il be sure to grab a copy, time really will tell on this one.
Then what was the point of bringing up Battlefield V in this statement?
As someone whose been playing battlefield since the first one that was released on the Xbox 360 I couldn’t believe the way battlefield v was handled. Yeah it wasn’t a star wars game but damn I’m not in a position to hand them money at a drop of a hat anymore.
And frankly, Battlefront II was a solid game at launch. People didn't like a mechanic (the boxes) and people latched onto the usual hypernegative "reviewers" that brought up crap like "YOU NEED TO DROP A BAJILLION DOLLARS TO GET DARTH VADER AND ALL OF HIS UPGRADES" while ignoring people telling them that was not actually required, it was just the quickest way to do it.
My point was that I don’t think Ea have handled their last couple of games very well, while i also think that battlefront 2 wasn’t that great on release but had got better over time and now don’t really trust EA to put a finished product out on release, they hit the nail on the head with the likes of Bad company2 and such.
But hey that’s just my view and won’t be dropping money on this Star Wars game straight away.
EA president has also made it clear he really REALLY doesn't want to license outside franchises. So part of the reason battlefield ended up the way it did is because he wanted to just get the games out that they were contracted to do. That way he could dump Star Wars off to someone else and focus on their own franchises they have complete control over.
Then the backlash on BF2 was so bad that EA had to go back and basically rebuild the whole game.
So yeah, while I'll be watching this I doubt I'll be dropping any money on it anytime soon even though a Star Wars Space sim is all I've wanted from a Star Wars game in the last 20 years.
Eumerin wrote: The benefits are pre-loading large games (when it's an option), and pre-order bonus goodies. There are some cosmetics available as a bonus for pre-ordering this game.
Those aren't benefits of pre-ordering. They're bribes by the company to stampede customers into pre-ordering through fear of missing out. There is a significant difference. And a lot of companies (not just CA) are getting pushback on those practices and offer a sales window where you get those benefits for a week or two after release. So there isn't even a pretense that's actually a pre-order 'benefit.'
The old supply chain issue that justified preorders was that with books/games/whatever, if you didn't pre-order, it could mean that you go to the store on day 1 and the store is out of copies, and it could be weeks before they get new stock. That isn't really a thing anymore.
Dreadwinter wrote:
If people are not pre-ordering and reviewing the game, how are there reactions out in the world and how have people seen all the major issues?
Most companies provide free early press copies to a stable of youtubers/streamers to play and post prior to release. They've been doing it for years now, and don't have much control or censor gameplay, even when it turns up bugs and problems.
At worst they ask players to not show off cutscenes and major plot elements.
The reactions, analysis of gameplay, etc. happen without professional reviews, and there are generally hundreds of hours of content to get reactions, evaluate issues and for customers to make a much more informed decision than ever before.
That would be fantastic if it happened! Instead we get more and more paid reviews and such over and over again. It has been an ongoing thing with the industry. It has been an ongoing thing with professional reviews and critics in general. A lot of people do not trust those professional people. Not sure about that second thing you said, are you saying the people getting these press copies are not professional reviews? Or that people posting their personal reviews of the game after it comes out is more prevalent?
That would be fantastic if it happened! Instead we get more and more paid reviews and such over and over again. It has been an ongoing thing with the industry. It has been an ongoing thing with professional reviews and critics in general. A lot of people do not trust those professional people. Not sure about that second thing you said, are you saying the people getting these press copies are not professional reviews? Or that people posting their personal reviews of the game after it comes out is more prevalent?
I'm honestly not sure what world you live in- it seems to be the 1990s rather than 2020 (or even about 2005 onwards). I'm not talking about professional reviewers or critics. I'm talking about people with youtube channels that get early press copies. The ones I watch don't get paid, because they're required to disclose that* They aren't even posting reviews for the most part, they just get early copies and play the game- most of them with no cuts or interruptions- you just see everything in the game with no editing. Sometimes there are time limits, but its generally open gameplay.
If you can't form your own opinion from extensive unedited gameplay footage, and whether it appeals to you, I don't know what to tell you. But its out there for just about every PC game. For free.
*I have seen sponsored let's play videos, but they're comparatively rare, short and usually involve smaller studios desperately trying to get some attention to they're crappier games. They're generally unnecessary because youtubers want views and studios want exposure. Letting the game be played in the week or two up to release usually gives both parties exactly what they want.
That would be fantastic if it happened! Instead we get more and more paid reviews and such over and over again. It has been an ongoing thing with the industry. It has been an ongoing thing with professional reviews and critics in general. A lot of people do not trust those professional people. Not sure about that second thing you said, are you saying the people getting these press copies are not professional reviews? Or that people posting their personal reviews of the game after it comes out is more prevalent?
I'm honestly not sure what world you live in- it seems to be the 1990s rather than 2020 (or even about 2005 onwards). I'm not talking about professional reviewers or critics. I'm talking about people with youtube channels that get early press copies. The ones I watch don't get paid, because they're required to disclose that* They aren't even posting reviews for the most part, they just get early copies and play the game- most of them with no cuts or interruptions- you just see everything in the game with no editing. Sometimes there are time limits, but its generally open gameplay.
If you can't form your own opinion from extensive unedited gameplay footage, and whether it appeals to you, I don't know what to tell you. But its out there for just about every PC game. For free.
*I have seen sponsored let's play videos, but they're comparatively rare, short and usually involve smaller studios desperately trying to get some attention to they're crappier games. They're generally unnecessary because youtubers want views and studios want exposure. Letting the game be played in the week or two up to release usually gives both parties exactly what they want.
Those press copies with limitations to gameplay? Sure, the videos are uncut with no interruptions. But the copies they are getting are not really the full thing. On top of that, those reviewers are looking for views. Which means they are going to say what they think will get them the most views, show you things that get them the most views.
I live in 2020 where this sort of thing has been happening for almost two decades now. It isn't really shocking at all. I know, it is terrible if people form their own opinions on games through their own experiences.
Kanluwen wrote: Then what was the point of bringing up Battlefield V in this statement?
As someone whose been playing battlefield since the first one that was released on the Xbox 360 I couldn’t believe the way battlefield v was handled. Yeah it wasn’t a star wars game but damn I’m not in a position to hand them money at a drop of a hat anymore.
And frankly, Battlefront II was a solid game at launch. People didn't like a mechanic (the boxes) and people latched onto the usual hypernegative "reviewers" that brought up crap like "YOU NEED TO DROP A BAJILLION DOLLARS TO GET DARTH VADER AND ALL OF HIS UPGRADES" while ignoring people telling them that was not actually required, it was just the quickest way to do it.
care to back that bajillion narrative up, or have you forgotten that there have been literal spreadsheets for the chances and how much time you'd need to unlock?
And we now have a first impression, courtesy of Eckhart’s Ladder on the YouTubes.
Well this is looking very, very promising. I’m a big fan of the drift manoeuvre he explains in the vid. Not only does it look hella cool, but it suggests excellent (if not necessarily realistic) physics in the game.
Being skill based is also interesting, as is just flying at Capital Ships being a bad idea in general.
I for one am really, really looking forward to it.
This is one of the few games i've pre ordered in recent memory. This game is shaping up to deliver on exactly what it's intended to be. Plus after seeing the customization of pilots I couldn't resist. My favorite part of the recent battlefront games was the starship battles as well.
The only complaint I have about this game is the graphics look a tad stylized/cartoonish. I kind of prefer the darkness of space or black backgrounds of the space battles in the movies. Whereas in this game it's all colorful and in nebulas and all this clutter going on. It would have been nice to see some maps that looked inspired by the movies.
So even though I’m still going to wait until after release to look to pick this up , I’m guessing in theory that you’ll be able to play this on the new Xbox series x using the backwards compatibility.
Wonder how much of a boost this will get in looks and performance.
Indeed it is but I can't imagine buying the VR set for just one game, same as on PC. All the reviews I've seen of it have been very positive about the VR experience for the game even saying it is the best way to play. One also said it made them realize what a claustrophobic death box the Tie Fighter is.
Indeed it is but I can't imagine buying the VR set for just one game, same as on PC. All the reviews I've seen of it have been very positive about the VR experience for the game even saying it is the best way to play. One also said it made them realize what a claustrophobic death box the Tie Fighter is.
You buy the VR set for Beat Saber and proceed to fail to use it for anything else because once its on your head you realize you could just play more Beat Saber.
Impressions after a few hours today: it's a good'un. Flight feels great even on controller, very responsive and the ships feel pretty unique. As a nice-to-have feature, there's tons of freedom to customise your controls to your preferred setup and every button can be remapped.
Combat is far more involved than BF2's space battles, both in terms of the complexity of the actual dogfighting and the mission structures. As a whole, it feels much bigger in scale and more varied in terms of the 'maps' than BF2, rather than just that game's space mode cut out and sold separately. That said, it's not so complicated as to be inaccessible, the tutorials are pretty well done and the story missions ease you in with flybys and picking off turrets before throwing you into a dogfight.
Speaking of. the story content is higher effort than expected, with a solid voice work and animations in the cutscenes. Already there are tons of Easter Eggs and references to SW content both new and old, and some familiar faces (some more expected than others) making a very welcome appearances Graphics are both varied and superb, and the sound design and score are full of the SW classics.
All in all. high'y recommended. So far, it's a great example of a game that knows exactly what it wants to be, promises that and then delivers on it with style and aplomb.
Had a decent fiddle with my copy, and I agree entirely.
So far, I’ve flown a TIE Fighter, an X-Wing and a TIE Interceptor (TIE Interceptor was just a pootle about in the practice arena). Each one definitely feels distinct so far. TIE Fighter is definitely nippier than an X-Wing, and there’s a definite speed difference in the Interceptor.
I’m interested to see how the skills curve and online matching works out. I don’t have the best reactions out there, so whilst I don’t mind a tough match, I don’t want to feel like I’m so outclassed there’s no point in playing.
But given how sparky the rest of the game is, I’m confident they won’t have fallen at that hurdle.
Being as my days of enduring PuGs and deathmatches are far behind me, do you reckon that it's worth it for the single player?
I absolutely loved all of the original X-Wing games and just want to zoom around, shooting fighters and the odd capital ship. Plus, digging out the old joystick would be fun.
I’m enjoying the single player thus far. The story structure is.... kind of awful but the gameplay is fun. It copies a lot from X-Wing and TIE Fighter with some minor simplifications for consoles. Even the story structure has a bit of the classic LucasArts “click on the character who talks at you” kind of thing. The gameplay is way closer to those games than the more 2d Rogue Squadrons. If you have fond memories of those, I think it’s worth checking out.
Been having a blast playing it so far, it can be pretty challenging at times. Hopefully they consider dlc for it (none has been planned). Just cause the B wing happens to be my favorite craft. I think a B wing would be more an assault fighter category, the imperial match for that could be the tie heavy/brute from the Solo movie.
I didn't realize it came out, half done downloading it now Glad it's only $40 but I bet there's gonna be lots of extra stuff they want you to buy over time
Chillreaper wrote: Being as my days of enduring PuGs and deathmatches are far behind me, do you reckon that it's worth it for the single player?
I absolutely loved all of the original X-Wing games and just want to zoom around, shooting fighters and the odd capital ship. Plus, digging out the old joystick would be fun.
So far, it's absolutely been worthwhile.
Also worth mentioning that Fleet Battles does have a 'vs AI' mode that you can play either solo or cooperatively with other players. Even on the easy setting, the AI does not screw around.
Necros wrote:Glad it's only $40 but I bet there's gonna be lots of extra stuff they want you to buy over time
You would be wrong, as of this moment. Every rank up(doable via PvP or Fleet Battles vs AI) you get 2 Requisition Points(used for unlocking upgrades for the ships. Some upgrades are universal for the faction, some are specific to that specific ship. Upgrades do not cross factions.) and 200 Glory(usable for purchasing Pilot or Fighter cosmetics).
The only cosmetics that you cannot purchase via Glory?
They're tied to a thing called "Operations", which are from you completing Daily Challenges, or from placing into specific brackets via the 'Ranked' Fleet Battles system.
The ranked cosmetics are very 'meh'. It's the usual silver+gold stuff from COD and Battlefield.
LunarSol wrote: You buy the VR set for Beat Saber and proceed to fail to use it for anything else because once its on your head you realize you could just play more Beat Saber.
Oh my god, yes, so much. Someone finally put it into words!
...admittedly I've played through Half Life: Alyx, but not spent more than a couple hours at most on anything else.
I'm really hoping that Squadrons will buck that trend - I'm only an hour in so far, but it's been a great hour! The sensation of being able to look out of the side windows over your own wing into empty space is amazing.
Chillreaper wrote: Being as my days of enduring PuGs and deathmatches are far behind me, do you reckon that it's worth it for the single player?
I absolutely loved all of the original X-Wing games and just want to zoom around, shooting fighters and the odd capital ship. Plus, digging out the old joystick would be fun.
So far, it's absolutely been worthwhile.
Also worth mentioning that Fleet Battles does have a 'vs AI' mode that you can play either solo or cooperatively with other players. Even on the easy setting, the AI does not screw around.
Ooh. Sold!
I wonder if it would ever be possible to mod the game to recreate the old games, but I figure that there would be a few issues:
1) Might be totally impossible to mess with.
2) Would be an insane amount of work, but hey, there are some very talented and dedicated people out there.
3) Might be heavily overdrawn at the bank of nostalgia on this one. It's possible that replaying the originals would be sadly disappointing.
Dug the old joystick out of the loft. Not the smoothest action on it anymore - think that the shaft might need greasing.
The nostalgia doesn't need any more help, in my opinion. The old 'H' shaped bulk freighters are in as are the triple pad space stations.
I finished the story last night, on "story" difficulty. It definitely was a fun playthrough. The only downside, IMO, is that the endgame reward for "story" difficulty was one already obtained via playing the Fleet Battles Tutorial.
I don't know if there are more crossovers like that, but that felt slightly "womp womp womp" for me.
Necros wrote: I'm about to give up, i just can't play this game :( can't get used to the controls at all
I had to mess with the controls a lot before finding something useful. Have you tried changing buttons?
What are you using to play (joystick, gamepad, keyboard, otherwise) - and what kind of games do you normally play? If you're anything like me and you're more familiar with shooters, you're going to find yaw a LOT more useful than roll.
Kanluwen wrote: The nostalgia doesn't need any more help, in my opinion. The old 'H' shaped bulk freighters are in as are the triple pad space stations.
I finished the story last night, on "story" difficulty. It definitely was a fun playthrough. The only downside, IMO, is that the endgame reward for "story" difficulty was one already obtained via playing the Fleet Battles Tutorial.
I don't know if there are more crossovers like that, but that felt slightly "womp womp womp" for me.
How many hours you reckon are in the story mode?
Tempted to grab this, but likely won't play much past the story mode, not much of a multiplayer gamer these days.
Also, for anyone playing in VR, is there a recommended entry level these days? The Quest 2 seems promising, but it's a bit weird how it connects via USB instead of directly to the GPU, I imagine that creates some lag or performance loss.
I think it depends on the difficulty you're playing it at? I basically played it as my only game over the course of all Friday and Saturday, so maybe 16 hours or so? Finished it around 1130 on Saturday so that sounds right.
I played it on "Story" difficulty(which is effectively "Easy"), mostly because I wanted to get a feeling for the controls first before diving in on anything heavier.
Again worth mentioning that "Fleet Battles" has a vs AI mode that can be played solo with AI teammates and enemies.
And said mode is nothing to be scoffed at, on Normal I still have yet to win a Fleet Battle either solo or in co-op, and that's having not had too much trouble with the campaign on Pilot difficulty or the dogfight mode. Which isn't to say I'm any good, I have yet to do better than break even on K/D in a Dogfight match, but compared to the ease of flying against the AI in Battlefront II Squadrons has really upped its game in terms of AI deadliness.
I've not finished the story yet, but it's 14 missions, I believe, and each is maybe 25-40 mins to complete, with an additional 5-10 mins of time for pre/post mission dialogue, customisation, loadouts ect. The value's definitely there and it's all very easily replayable (which should be a given, but I've been playing Avengers for the last month and thus the idea of campaign missions you can actually do more than once is weirdly novel... ), but if you're just in it for the story then I'd maybe wait and see if it comes to closer to £25 than £35 in a few months.
As for controls, I found that while putting pitch and roll on the same analogue stick and inverting pitch is more 'authentic' in terms of replicating an actual flight stick's motion, a non-inverted setup with pitch and yaw together has me flying and fighting much better, as it puts the lateral and vertical movement you're using for aiming on the same stick.. Have that on the right stick, and it's much closer to what you're used to from a shooter title. (I have a feeling the default scheme is close to this, I can't remember)
The main issue I'm having with difficulty is information overload. I can fly and I can shoot straight, but it's remembering to balance power, track targets, keep my loadout and ammo count in mind, angle shields and play the objective is just way more than I'm used to tracking in most games this fast-paced. Which isb't to knock it at all, but I do think the learning curve is as much learning to process all that as it is to master the controls themselves.
I'm on the default difficulty, on xbox. I lowered the sensitivity for my controller and it helped, but I just can't do the missions. I'm at the story mission where you have to defend an imperial star base that has these towers with munitions in them. There's just rebel scum everywhere blowing me away and I can't do anything. I got to this point mostly by targeting something and directing my squad to attack my target, and getting a few lucky/easy kills here and there. I'm in a tie interceptor and just getting torn apart, when i'm not crashing into things. If I want to hit any target I have to pretty much fly far away, turn around and then stop, if not everything just moves by way too fast. I guess you're supposed to do that turbo drift thing all the time to spin around? Maybe my old people reflexes just aren't good enough. When I think I might be getting the hang of it, I go into a multiplayer game just to remember what it's like to have someone I can't see fly in circles around me and blow me to bits.
VR on the PC is stuttery and unplayable. That was with the recommended spec and low settings.
But, that was before the day-2 patch, to fix the EA account errors for Steam users.
I tried using an XBox gamepad, which I usually do not like much. It needs the controlls messing with, as the sticks are the wrong way around for me. I'll dig out the HOTAS later and try that instead.
The game itself though, I do like it. It is a lot like the original 90's games, but with a bit of the recent Battlefront type gameplay for the AI missions.
I'm doing a bit better now. I switched to the southpaw controller layout and that seems to be working better for me for some reason. I also changed over to tie bombers and Y wings and set them both up with the same stuff, so I have ion lasers for knocking out people's systems, and I can follow that up with a multi missile combo, and then I also added photon torpedos to use on the big ships. I can target multiple enemies with the missiles so when I fire them chances are at least one of the other guys won't counter them in time. It's those pesky little A wings that I just can't hit with lasers though, they're like 1 pixel tall.
Yeah, the Ion weapons are really good for that. I have been having a fair bit of success with the Y-wing's guided rotary cannon and the auto ion turret, the latter holding the targets in a straight line long enough for the former to spin up and put in the damage. The guided laser technically does less DPS than the non-guided variant, but I find that's easily made up for by the increased accuracy and a really long sustained burst with power switched to weapons.
I'm also experimenting with an X-wing loadout for fleet battles that goes Ion Cannons and the both Proton and Ion torpedoes, then all the upgrades that boost durability and straight line speed. Not quite got the hang of it yet, but the theory is that I don't need to get too close in to the capital ships and frigates due to the torpedoes' higher lock range, which should in turn mean less threat from the turrets... Just need to get into the habit of keeping my distance, and remembering that this setup is absolute garbage against anything that's not a frigate, Raider or Star Destroyer.
Still yet to beat the AI on a Normal fleet battle, though I did come a lot closer earlier.
After reading the posts form you guys and various reviews I think I’m going to have to pick this one up.
Question is do I get it now or wait for the Xbox series x and jump in to it on that platform . Even if it just to take advantage of the extra power in the looks department.
If you have an xbox now you may as well get the game now but if you know you're getting a series X in a few weeks, may as well hold off
It's actually starting to feel a little stale.. there's only 2 multiplayer game modes and 4 ships per side, and they're fun but it's starting to feel repetitive now. I'm hoping the have some DLCs coming with more ships and more game modes to play.
There are no plans for any updates or DLC for the game at this time. It is nice to not have to worry about missing content but on the other hand a few new maps over time would have been nice too.
Ahtman wrote: There are no plans for any updates or DLC for the game at this time. It is nice to not have to worry about missing content but on the other hand a few new maps over time would have been nice too.
Well, that is a definite shame. It is missing some ship types that I imagine fans would have been wanting to see (B-Wing, for example, and of course a certain Corellian freighter)
Magnificent news. Haven't touched Squadrons in a bit due to AC Valhalla, but looking forward to the new ships when I dive back in. Interested to see what this new Boost component is, I'm loving the SLAM engines on X-Wings and TIEs for always having a drift in the tank even with power elsewhere, so if it's similar to that then I can definitely see it being a fun addition.
Given what they've previously said about this being a release-and-done game, I wonder if this was planned all along and they were just being tight-lipped, or whether it's leftovers/cut content being added back in due to the very positive reception. Great news either way through.
I wondered why they hadn't included the B-Wing from the start. And my fav SW fighter is the TIE Defender.
Nice that they're being added.
Kanluwen wrote: It's not like this should come as a surprise.
Given the way AAA publishes act these days, it is 100% a surprise. And I especially like how you named a couple of "Live Service" games in your little defence. EA ones at that! In-fething-credible.
Thrilled about the new ships, wish we were getting more than 1 new map though. I think this will bring the total up to 6, but really 9 maps total would have been ideal. I definitely think they did the smart thing by not selling this at full price. It was very fun for a couple weeks but got a bit repetitive for me.
Two freebie skins as "thank yous" to the Star Wars game community. If you own both Squadrons and Jedi: Fallen Order or Battlefront 1/2, signing in before January 10th will net you these two skins.
Kanluwen wrote: Two freebie skins as "thank yous" to the Star Wars game community. If you own both Squadrons and Jedi: Fallen Order or Battlefront 1/2, signing in before January 10th will net you these two skins.
Grrr. I have both, but on different platforms and logons.
