Star Wars: Battlefront

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Paradigm**

I saw an article earlier (can't recall where) that the AT-AT will be 'on rails' during gameplay, so while you get to'drive' it, I imagine this will consist largely of picking targets and shooting while it marches forward. This almost bugged me, until I realised this was all they did (essentially) on the original games, the only difference being that you needed to make them walk forward...

So from that, I'd guess the 'walker assault' game type will be a case of the Rebels trying to take out the AT-AT before it reaches a certain point, and the Imperials trying to defend it until it does.

**Co'tor Shas**

RivenSkull wrote:
streamdragon wrote:
Silent Puffin? wrote:
I didn't, this is afterall a console game.

Just to clarify, it's console and PC.

It's a console game ported to PC, which means a big lack of user customization "FoV, various AA, god forbid if there is mouse acceleration). If a game is made for both console and PC, it means it has to have very simple control and mechanics to accommodate the consoles controls and hardware. I'm not holding any breath for PC to be able to have dedicated servers, and we'll probably be at the mercy of terrible "match making". And for a game that is the have big scale, I doubt there will be anything bigger than "20 something" vs. "20 something" for teams.

For all intent and purpose, this is a console game.

---

For me the fact that it's only original trilogy is understandable but really disappointing. Sure the prequels are pretty crappy movie wise, but the massive galactic scale war of the Clone Wars would have tons of opportunity for massive scale battles. The lack of that theater of war is a real shame. It's the lack of space battles that really shifts this from "worth buying near releases" to "wait for steam sale". I remember the maps with fighters on them from the first Battlefront, and they were either borderline useless or dominating depending on who was in them. The space battles were a great addon that while not perfect were still fun.

The lack of varied planets also means no Galactic Conquest mode. That mode gave the game longevity and made having space battles matter. Harking to Red Orchestra, that game has a conquest mode that has helped keep the community alive, and makes winning and losing matches matter more. For Battlefront 2, the GC mode gave me hours of play beyond what I would have done otherwise.

From the information that has been released, the upcoming game feel so much more like a downgrade from Battlefront 2. Lack of an entire war, lack of space battles, the focus on original trilogy timeline means there aren't enough heroes (lightsaber wielding ones anyways) for that hero assault mode in Mos Eisley. Yeah that assault mode and the Conquest needed a little bit better implementation, but removing those things just makes it feel like this is an incomplete game.

The really cynical part of me keeps saying that the reason these things aren't included is so that they can either be DLC or other games entirely; EA doing so to milk the consumer for greater profits.

Aside from those thoughts, I'm also a bit wary of this being anything more than a Star Wars reskin of Battlefield. The older games had a nice feeling that they accepted that the games were more towards the arcade-y end of the spectrum, but not over the top TF2 level of arcade-y. The Battlefield series has become an arcade-y series that tries hard to look realistic and what have you, while having all of the arcade mechanics. I don't expect Red Orchestra or ArmA levels of realism in every game, nor do I want them in every game. But don't try to portray that the game tries to be like them when the mechanics clearly aren't anything like it.

I don't know, BF4 on PC manages ~~64 vs. 64~~*. And it came out in 2013. They could do at least that, if not more now. And I never found any trouble with it, other that it make my laptop heat up like a nuclear reactor.

Edit: and there is not just matchmaking either, they do have a server list.

Edit: *never mind, it's 32 vs 32, but I'm sure they could write it to support it. PS2, which is a FTP game from SOE supports hunderds of players on a single server, so it can be coded, and Dice doesn't have to run huge servers. Just have the community run their own servers, so the tech requirement falls to big gaming groups and such.

**Commander Cain**

Paradigm wrote:
I saw an article earlier (can't recall where) that the AT-AT will be 'on rails' during gameplay, so while you get to'drive' it, I imagine this will consist largely of picking targets and shooting while it marches forward. This almost bugged me, until I realised this was all they did (essentially) on the original games, the only difference being that you needed to make them walk forward...

That makes sense actually as it seems like such an unwieldy vehicle with little in the way of weapons. I guess it will just serve as a spawn point like it did in the last game.

**Co'tor Shas**

accednetal post

**RivenSkull**

Co'tor Shas wrote:

I don't know, BF4 on PC manages ~~64 vs. 64~~*. And it came out in 2013. They could do at least that, if not more now. And I never found any trouble with it, other that it make my laptop heat up like a nuclear reactor.

Edit: and there is not just matchmaking either, they do have a server list.

Edit: *never mind, it's 32 vs 32, but I'm sure they could write it to support it. PS2, which is a FTP game from SOE supports hunderds of players on a single server, so it can be coded, and Dice doesn't have to run huge servers. Just have the community run their own servers, so the tech requirement falls to big gaming groups and such.

Yeah I looked into it after. They don't have dedicated servers, you just rent a server from Dice with little control over the server. Planetside 2 also is PC only.

It could be coded to have high numbers, but I really doubt it will. Everything I've been hearing has really turned me off from the game, and I'll just reinstall Battlefront 2

**Kanluwen**

Yeah, they took away the majority of player control for servers after the crap that server admins pulled on BF3.

Battlefront is slated to be 40 players.
They might have larger game modes added in later; but 40 players is about right for the majority of Battlefield 4's maps in my experience. The 64 player mode just gets too busy.

**Co'tor Shas**

Actually PS2 just got ported to PS4, so there is still some hope.

Edit: Although I'll probably just wait for the reviews as always.

**Morathi's Darkest Sin**

http://gamerant.com/star-wars-battlefront-offline-single-player/

..and that's all I need to know, will be preordering for sure, as long as I can play offline vs the computer when I want.. its good to go.

**Co'tor Shas**

Ooh, that's good news. My connections horrible at home, we still have DSL.

Also, is their any reward for pre-ordering currently?

**Paradigm**

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:
http://gamerant.com/star-wars-battlefront-offline-single-player/

..and that's all I need to know, will be preordering for sure, as long as I can play offline vs the computer when I want.. its good to go.

Yep, that's all that matters to me.

I really wish more games did this, and realised that a lot of us are just as happy playing the AI as playing online. If I could play Halo Death match or any other online game modes against an AI offline, I probably wouldn't bother with Live at all. The whole reason I didn't get things like Destiny and Titanfall is because of the online-only play.

**Kanluwen**

Co'tor Shas wrote:
Ooh, that's good news. My connections horrible at home, we still have DSL.

Also, is their any reward for pre-ordering currently?

As of right now, there is a bit of a discrepancy.

Vendors are listing Star Wars Battlefront: Deluxe Edition for $69.99. According to the press brief, the Deluxe Edition and its contents are Digital Only...but it might be a physical copy as well.
The deluxe preorder bonuses are as follows:
Instant access to 2 Emotes(Not sure why there are emotes in; it might be some kind of end-game "taunt" like Killzone: Shadow Fall has).
Instant access to the Blastech DL-44 Blaster Pistol(Han Solo's pistol.

Likely it is a late tier unlock if you do not preorder, so you are not missing out)
Instant access to the Ion Grenade(Likely the same deal as the pistol; late tier unlock instantly available)
Instant access to the Ion Torpedo(Same as above)

Early access to the Battle of Jakku DLC. ALL preorders get early access, with players being able to get the DLC on December 1st. Anyone buying after the preorder period gets the Battle of Jakku on December 8th.

**Co'tor Shas**

Ah, the mauser blaster, I always loves that. I love recognizing parts of props in the original series. Especially a new hope. It was made on am much smaller budget than the others IIRC, so there are more cobbled together props. A lot of old sci-fi has stuff like that.

**Sigvatr**

Commander Cain wrote:
Paradigm wrote:
I saw an article earlier (can't recall where) that the AT-AT will be 'on rails' during gameplay, so while you get to'drive' it, I imagine this will consist largely of picking targets and shooting while it marches forward. This almost bugged me, until I realised this was all they did (essentially) on the original games, the only difference being that you needed to make them walk forward...

That makes sense actually as it seems like such an unwieldy vehicle with little in the way of weapons. I guess it will just serve as a spawn point like it did in the last game.

Yarrr. My first thought also was "What? Limiting players AGAIN?!" but then reconsidered and well...how would you want to move them anyway? It would take MINUTES to even make a turn.

**eskimo**

Shredsmore wrote:
I'm glad that there isn't campaign, it allows the team to focus on the most important thing in any game: multiplayer. I also didn't really like the SW:BFII Space Battles, (I preferred BF 1's system) so this game seems awesome.

Oh, and another thing, I'm really excited about the lack of stupid clones and droids.

Wait, no droids?

I'm no die hard SWs fan, so does that mean none of this?

And also General Grievous?!

If so, i might as well stop following this game right now.

**ds9lord**

Ya battle of kashyyyk as clones in battlefront 2 was awesome. Holding the beach against these guys was my favorite part of the game.

Edit: I saw this on reddit comparing the two games thought I would post it here.

Spoiler:

**Pete Melvin**

EA's next gen triple A game:
Only Galactic Civil War -Seems sily to not include it but honestly myself, I don't care
No Space battles Space battles in BF2 were rubbish. Spawn bomber, strafe opponents battleship, repeat. Properly implimented space battles could have been great but if it was the same as BF2 its no loss
Only 40 players with no bots. Thats rubbish
Only 6 confirmed vehicles. AT-ATs aren't even playable. Only 6 confirmed so far. Its months and months away yet. ATAT was practically on rails anyway in BF2, there was no room to manuever it.
Only 4 planets Nothing to say there arent 5 or more maps per planet though
No Single Player Campaign Again, not bothered. The lack of the Galactic conquest mode is a bigger blow.

News so far= 7/10, not great but still looking forward to it.

**Doctadeth**

Ugh,

I preferred the clone wars vehicles, especially the AT-TE and the droid spider tank, jetpacks and ability to have stuff like Mustafar and so on.

No space battles is a huge disappointment. Could have been a big thing, Having huge ships slug it out, and being a single turret was fun. Or unloading on a droid fighter to have it spin into the side of a capital.

No bots means offline play is the dogs dinner. Large amount of players and large amount of bots meant epic battles.

I could count more than six vehicles from the normal universe, and they are ground vehicles as well. EA being stingy with the content.

Only four planets - Again, you could go to Dantooine, Tatooine, Corelliea, Nar Shaddar Even interiors of starships and it would be cool.

and campaigns and storylines are always cool, rather than...here's your battle.

Really, if thats all the content, then I'm not going to purchase.

**Co'tor Shas**

Having never played the original battlefront, I find a lot of the complaining on reddit and stuff a bit silly. The thing hasn't even been released yet, and we have most of a year before it does. Things may change,

Not only that, BF4 had like 6 different DLC packs, meaning what we get at the initial release, will probably not be everything we get. The packs themselves added weapons, vehicles, maps, equipment, ect.
Heck, they might even add a spacefight pack.

**gunslingerpro**

Co'tor Shas wrote:
Having never played the original battlefront, I find a lot of the complaining on reddit and stuff a bit silly. The thing hasn't even been released yet, and we have most of a year before it does. Things may change,

Not only that, BF4 had like 6 different DLC packs, meaning what we get at the initial release, will probably not be everything we get. The packs themselves added weapons, vehicles, maps, equipment, ect.
Heck, they might even add a spacefight pack.

Add on content is great! More than halving the initial content from a game released on PS2 to make it DLC? Not so much.

I agree time will tell. But we're talking a company with a poor reputation on content here and a beloved game franchise. People are going to be nervous.

**Sigvatr**

Also: inb4 space battle DLC.

**Co'tor Shas**

gunslingerpro wrote:
Co'tor Shas wrote:
Having never played the original battlefront, I find a lot of the complaining on reddit and stuff a bit silly. The thing hasn't even been released yet, and we have most of a year before it does. Things may change,

Not only that, BF4 had like 6 different DLC packs, meaning what we get at the initial release, will probably not be everything we get. The packs themselves added weapons, vehicles, maps, equipment, ect.
Heck, they might even add a spacefight pack.

Add on content is great! More than halving the initial content from a game released on PS2 to make it DLC? Not so much.

I agree time will tell. But we're talking a company with a poor reputation on content here and a beloved game franchise. People are going to be nervous.

My main concern is money related, that's the only sort of problems I've ever had with EA.

**Commander Cain**

I would be willing to pay for DLC content provided it was worth the extra money.

A space pack for example would have to include some epic dogfighting (which I am guessing they already have mastered) combined with some decent capital ship combat. Perhaps allowing us to control them personally, think AC Black Flag ship combat in spaaace. Now that would be worth a whole lot of money in my opinion!

None of this buy a few costumes'skins nonsense though. The Force Unleashed games did this a lot and it did not add to the game experience in the slightest.

But yeah, I would certainly pay for vehicles, guns, maps and whatnot, anything that actually lengthens the play time or opens up new ways to play is worth it in my books.

**Paradigm**

Agreed, I'd probably buy space combat/Clone Wars DLC if the price wasn't insane, or if an all-DLC-included edition appears later on (like Skyrim's 'Legendary edition'). That said, however, I would rather have Battlefront just do planet side combat and get it absolutely right than try and do too much.

Dice and others have multi-year/title contracts/licences for Star Wars, though, so I'd be just as pleased with an out-and-out SW flight sim further down the line.

**Kanluwen**

Paradigm wrote:
Agreed, I'd probably buy space combat/Clone Wars DLC if the price wasn't insane, or if an all-DLC-included edition appears later on (like Skyrim's 'Legendary edition'). That said, however, I would rather have Battlefront just do planet side combat and get it absolutely right than try and do too much.

DICE doesn't do "All-DLC-Included" editions as something you can buy later on. There might be an edition that comes with the Premium service, if they do one, but I can't say for sure.

My understanding is that DICE doesn't want to touch the Clone Wars era. They feel that the original trilogy and the forthcoming films have more than enough stuff to play with. They're also working with Lucasfilm/Disney to look at planets/locales that weren't explored in the earlier Battlefront games.

For example, look at the fact that the launch planets includes Sullust. One of the DICE devs in discussing it mentioned that Sullust was the planet which was used as a testing grounds for the AT-AT during its development, and the levels will reflect that.

Dice and others have multi-year/title contracts/licences for Star Wars, though, so I'd be just as pleased with an out-and-out SW flight sim further down the line.

Supposedly, there is one in the works.

Not sure who's doing it though. I know Visceral is doing an "adventure" game of some kind

**Commander Cain**

I want to see a 1313 type game show up again. Uncharted with laser pistols? Yes please!

**Kanluwen**

Okay, so we got some more details about Battlefront's maps yesterday!

There are 12 maps at launch, spread across 4 planets(Hoth, Endor, Tatooine, and Sullust).
Some maps will support the 20v20 "Walker Assault" game mode, while others will be primarily infantry or infantry+vehicles.
The map count does not include the cooperative game modes.

More maps/planets will be coming as DLC later on.

**Paradigm**

That'll do me, especially combined with offline maps and multiple game types. If it's 3 maps a planet, then I'd guess the free Jakku DLC will also have 3, bringing it up to 15 within a month of launch. Not bad.

**gunslingerpro**

Kanluwen wrote:
Okay, so we got some more details about Battlefront's maps yesterday!

There are 12 maps at launch, spread across 4 planets(Hoth, Endor, Tatooine, and Sullust).
Some maps will support the 20v20 "Walker Assault" game mode, while others will be primarily infantry or infantry+vehicles.
The map count does not include the cooperative game modes.

More maps/planets will be coming as DLC later on.

Cooperative game modes you say?

Just give me Mustafar and Yavin at some point pretty please

**Kanluwen**

gunslingerpro wrote:
Kanluwen wrote:
Okay, so we got some more details about Battlefront's maps yesterday!

There are 12 maps at launch, spread across 4 planets(Hoth, Endor, Tatooine, and Sullust).
Some maps will support the 20v20 "Walker Assault" game mode, while others will be primarily infantry or infantry+vehicles.
The map count does not include the cooperative game modes.

More maps/planets will be coming as DLC later on.

Cooperative game modes you say?

Just give me Mustafar and Yavin at some point pretty please

I have a feeling that the "cooperative game modes" are going to be similar to what we saw in Battlefield 3, where they have a loose story connecting them and you have 'tiers' of difficulty with rewards for multiplayer weapons/equipment being possible.

However, I will be super disappointed if this cannot happen in Echo Base:

Spoiler:

**Swastakowey**

Man, I love battlefront 1 and 2. As a kid I played them a lot. The bot armies still make for fun moments today.

Uniquely, its the only game series I like both games for. Most games I find the squeals ruin it for me.

Well I dont think I will be buying this. Everything sounds disappointing. Well except that the rebels have a lot of aliens on their side if the video is to be believed that they released.