Edwardowan
Sr Member
If this sort of thing existed in 1981 I would have never left my house! Like.... EVER!!!!
Star Wars: Battlefront
- Thread starter ghostryder
- Start date
It looks mindblowing. I agree. My hate was never directed at how the game will look apart from on rail At-ATs. I am more upset about EA/DICE's money grabbing with DLC and in game purchases. You'll see once you have to start paying more cash for levels and characters. Most gamers will agree there's alot of problems these days with DLC being abused and EA leads the pack. But yes it looks fantastic and I am excited for that fact.
Ben
It looks good, but they are losing features every time new info comes out. It would have been a 9/10 if they just remade Battlefield with SW. That's all they had to do. Perfect game then.
ROTJ E-11's on ESB Hoth? :unsure
Looks alright otherwise.
Looks alright otherwise.
JoMamma_Smurf
Master Member
Yall are nit picking. This is a game. Accuracy is nice.. since when did a game be so accurate that you could distinguish between ROTJ E-11's and any others?!??! Since never... You have to appreciate that level of detail!! You guys are missing the point. This game's goal is to immerse you in the Star Wars experience!! You should be happy for that!! Instead you bitch about the accuracy of a gun. Since when was a game not bought based upon the accuracy of a gun?? NEVER!! It's GAME play because it's a GAME.. Get off your high horses you idiots. This looks amazing and it's exactly what you all pissed and moaned about having... And now that we'll have it soon you **** about garbage. It's pathetic. Be happy!! This is an amazing looking game!!!
JoMamma_Smurf
Master Member
Not a direct reply.
Multiplayer Co-op mission gameplay: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lg_ht2GfQJU&feature=youtu.be&sf38633275=1
SB
SB
Looks great, sounds great...
EA still the publisher? Yes... so the "haters" say the same as they have always said.
DICE still make MP games where 3 people join a game server and end up on different teams, almost every single time. :facepalm It doesn't matter how pretty a game looks when the core functions are crap.
and that can't be done if it's accurate, gotcha................ :facepalm
So a historicallly correct WWII shooter with glocks and F-35's would be fine by your standards? :lol
Be sheep? No thanks.
EA still the publisher? Yes... so the "haters" say the same as they have always said.
DICE still make MP games where 3 people join a game server and end up on different teams, almost every single time. :facepalm It doesn't matter how pretty a game looks when the core functions are crap.
and that can't be done if it's accurate, gotcha................ :facepalm
So a historicallly correct WWII shooter with glocks and F-35's would be fine by your standards? :lol
Be sheep? No thanks.
Solo4114
Master Member
Looks nice in terms of graphics. Gameplay-wise, it's exactly what I expected, which is basically a port of the Battlefield mechanics to a Star Wars game. I'll wait for a demo, I think, or maybe an open beta.
Here's the thing, though. No matter how lovely the game looks, no matter how Star Warsy it looks, the problems that I'm more concerned about go back to the publisher's practices, and the developer's tendency to do half-hearted support for its games. In that regard, the leopard doesn't change its spots.
Here's the thing, though. No matter how lovely the game looks, no matter how Star Warsy it looks, the problems that I'm more concerned about go back to the publisher's practices, and the developer's tendency to do half-hearted support for its games. In that regard, the leopard doesn't change its spots.
cboath
Master Member
Read an article on it that said the gameplay was alpha or pre-alpha.
If so, take the graphics with a grain of salt. I remember the talk about Doom3 and the amazing graphics when it began. I played it's alpha version and it was much better than the released version from a graphics standpoint. It took ages to load and the rooms it could load with the highend models and graphics were on the small side. It was pretty amazing what they could do at that point, but having larger areas and dealing with less than stellar equipment did take it's toll in the end.
If they can get close to that though, it looks pretty sweet
If so, take the graphics with a grain of salt. I remember the talk about Doom3 and the amazing graphics when it began. I played it's alpha version and it was much better than the released version from a graphics standpoint. It took ages to load and the rooms it could load with the highend models and graphics were on the small side. It was pretty amazing what they could do at that point, but having larger areas and dealing with less than stellar equipment did take it's toll in the end.
If they can get close to that though, it looks pretty sweet
Solo4114
Master Member
Even at a lower level, those graphics would still be fine if the gameplay held up.
The gameplay looks closer to the Battlefront games than the Battlefield games, insofar as the crosshair doesn't spread, reloading doesn't seem to be a factor, and you don't really use iron sights. We'll see how the inevitable unlocks are handled, and how heroes enter the game.
Likewise, we'll see how support and DLC are handled.
The gameplay looks closer to the Battlefront games than the Battlefield games, insofar as the crosshair doesn't spread, reloading doesn't seem to be a factor, and you don't really use iron sights. We'll see how the inevitable unlocks are handled, and how heroes enter the game.
Likewise, we'll see how support and DLC are handled.
I wish it was just like Battlefield with a SW makeover. They already mentioned too many lackluster features (no AT-AT control, no sights, only 40 players, etc. I definitely won't be buying it on release.
:facepalm
Last edited by a moderator:
crabra comander
Master Member
What's the context of that facepalm? Some people seem salty no matter what the game turns out to be
OldKen
Master Member
Nothing will ever be as awesomely balanced and such a huge step forward as battlefield 2.
None of you could hang with me in it.
I'm getting a ps4 anyway... I will have this on release.
Walkers on rails.........
Really?
Your complaining about THAT?
You guys SAW empire, RIGHT?
Looks pretty boring being an AT-AT driver....
You would have kids trying to walk up mountain ridges and looking like morons instead of going point a-b objective straight line boringness...
You are the General Veers of the situation.
Go forward... Go forward.... Go forward some more......
TARGET, MAXIMUM FIRE POWER!!!
Yep, sounds like they nailed it.
None of you could hang with me in it.
I'm getting a ps4 anyway... I will have this on release.
Walkers on rails.........
Really?
Your complaining about THAT?
You guys SAW empire, RIGHT?
Looks pretty boring being an AT-AT driver....
You would have kids trying to walk up mountain ridges and looking like morons instead of going point a-b objective straight line boringness...
You are the General Veers of the situation.
Go forward... Go forward.... Go forward some more......
TARGET, MAXIMUM FIRE POWER!!!
Yep, sounds like they nailed it.
Solo4114
Master Member
At a guess:
- It's pretty much all infantry most of the time.
- Vehicles and heroes are treated as power-ups, rather than respawning vehicles a la the Battlefield (or even previous Battlefront) games.
- You get "cards" that give you different equipment, which sounds like it removes the defined classes, but may just supplement them.
I dunno, it all sounds...fine...to me. Nothing ZOMGAMAZEBALLS, but also nothing awful. I didn't have particularly high expectations for this, though.
At a guess, they're trying to make this more broadly appealing to a wide variety of gamers, including those who may not be steeped in the traditional approach to games like COD and Battlefield. It sounds more simplistic than those games (I hesitate to say "arcadey" because those games are pretty arcadey to me as it is).
--EDIT--
Yes, the interviewer was really annoying.
- It's pretty much all infantry most of the time.
- Vehicles and heroes are treated as power-ups, rather than respawning vehicles a la the Battlefield (or even previous Battlefront) games.
- You get "cards" that give you different equipment, which sounds like it removes the defined classes, but may just supplement them.
I dunno, it all sounds...fine...to me. Nothing ZOMGAMAZEBALLS, but also nothing awful. I didn't have particularly high expectations for this, though.
At a guess, they're trying to make this more broadly appealing to a wide variety of gamers, including those who may not be steeped in the traditional approach to games like COD and Battlefield. It sounds more simplistic than those games (I hesitate to say "arcadey" because those games are pretty arcadey to me as it is).
--EDIT--
Yes, the interviewer was really annoying.
Similar threads
