Star Wars: Battlefront (2015)
Discussion
kowalski655 said:
Anyone know if it is availible to pre load on Origin on PC yet?Or when?
Got mine from CDkeys and they say they normally have it 2 days before,but not in stock yet
Oh the antici..................pation </Dr Frank N Furter>
Cant pre load without the key sadly. I still have the Beta installed on Origin but I doubt its any use.Got mine from CDkeys and they say they normally have it 2 days before,but not in stock yet
Oh the antici..................pation </Dr Frank N Furter>
CDKeys sent my Fallout code at 5pm on the 7th (release date 10th) to give you an indication of when we should get it - hopefully within the next 24 hours
cant wait for a game tonight!A lot of reviews are out and they are all basically saying the same thing. Very pretty to look at and fun for about 10 hours but very shallow so it gets old really quickly. I sort of got this feeling from the beta but was hoping the full game would offer more. I am quiet disappointed tbh as the BF games have previously always had incredible depth. It's a shame DICE felt the need to dumb down this version.
Guvernator said:
A lot of reviews are out and they are all basically saying the same thing. Very pretty to look at and fun for about 10 hours but very shallow so it gets old really quickly. I sort of got this feeling from the beta but was hoping the full game would offer more. I am quiet disappointed tbh as the BF games have previously always had incredible depth. It's a shame DICE felt the need to dumb down this version.
Hmm yes having read the reviews, perhaps I wont go out and buy it. Especially as Xbox live will cost me on top of that as i dont currently have it.Guvernator said:
A lot of reviews are out and they are all basically saying the same thing. Very pretty to look at and fun for about 10 hours but very shallow so it gets old really quickly. I sort of got this feeling from the beta but was hoping the full game would offer more. I am quiet disappointed tbh as the BF games have previously always had incredible depth. It's a shame DICE felt the need to dumb down this version.
Never trust reviews. Some even came out saying Fallout wasn't that great. Some people just have nothing good to say about anything.Guvernator said:
A lot of reviews are out and they are all basically saying the same thing. Very pretty to look at and fun for about 10 hours but very shallow so it gets old really quickly. I sort of got this feeling from the beta but was hoping the full game would offer more. I am quiet disappointed tbh as the BF games have previously always had incredible depth. It's a shame DICE felt the need to dumb down this version.
I agree with the reviews really. If it wasn't set in the Star Wars universe it would be as good as battlefield hardline. The Star Wars universe though to me still makes it a great game to play. What made battlefield fantastic is the ability to jump into a variety of vehicles (with other players) this has a few as power up vehicles but only the ones in the beta plus the speeder bike on endor. It's got split screen modes also which are a good addition.
I'm definitely going to get it (for my son)
based on the full game I played on EA Access. If you like star wars and battlefield, it's great. If you don't like Star Wars, perhaps it's not going to be so fun for you. Guvernator said:
A lot of reviews are out and they are all basically saying the same thing. Very pretty to look at and fun for about 10 hours but very shallow so it gets old really quickly. I sort of got this feeling from the beta but was hoping the full game would offer more. I am quiet disappointed tbh as the BF games have previously always had incredible depth. It's a shame DICE felt the need to dumb down this version.
That applies to all fps multiplayer games though in truth,once you learn maps and the various skills ,you are doing the same thing over and over .The challenge is improving against other players .franki68 said:
That applies to all fps multiplayer games though in truth,once you learn maps and the various skills ,you are doing the same thing over and over .The challenge is improving against other players .
To an extent but the depth in previous Battlefield games came from a few things that mixed up the fps genre a little.Playing in squads, coordinating and trying different tactics, Battlefront doesn't have squads.
Classes and customisation of your load-out to fit your play style, Battlefront doesn't have these.
Vehicles which you can hop in and out of, with your squad mates in tow. Battlefront doesn't have these, only on rails vehicles or power ups (wtf)
Shooting mechanics that required skill to aim and shoot with each gun handling differently giving you lots to learn and improve. Battlefront doesn't have this, most of the guns are very similar spray and pray affairs.
It just seems like BF-lite, I can understand they want to try to draw in the casual crowd but a Star Wars Battlefield game would already pull big numbers, there really wasn't a need to dumb it down, this was purely a marketing decision. I can see the meeting now. "Battlefield is too hardcore, we need to make the Star Wars version appeal to EVERYBODY, even people who don't like playing games to maximise our revenue!"
I'll still probably get it but not in a rush now, I'm not as excited about it as I should be. I also don't expect to be playing it 6 months to a years time like I have with previous BF games.
Guvernator said:
To an extent but the depth in previous Battlefield games came from a few things that mixed up the fps genre a little.
Playing in squads, coordinating and trying different tactics, Battlefront doesn't have squads.
Classes and customisation of your load-out to fit your play style, Battlefront doesn't have these.
Vehicles which you can hop in and out of, with your squad mates in tow. Battlefront doesn't have these, only on rails vehicles or power ups (wtf)
Shooting mechanics that required skill to aim and shoot with each gun handling differently giving you lots to learn and improve. Battlefront doesn't have this, most of the guns are very similar spray and pray affairs.
It just seems like BF-lite, I can understand they want to try to draw in the casual crowd but a Star Wars Battlefield game would already pull big numbers, there really wasn't a need to dumb it down, this was purely a marketing decision. I can see the meeting now. "Battlefield is too hardcore, we need to make the Star Wars version appeal to EVERYBODY, even people who don't like playing games to maximise our revenue!"
I'll still probably get it but not in a rush now, I'm not as excited about it as I should be. I also don't expect to be playing it 6 months to a years time like I have with previous BF games.
I admit it does seem a little COD like in it's set up and I was very disappointed by the lack of a campaign (see future DLC/standalone game). Playing in squads, coordinating and trying different tactics, Battlefront doesn't have squads.
Classes and customisation of your load-out to fit your play style, Battlefront doesn't have these.
Vehicles which you can hop in and out of, with your squad mates in tow. Battlefront doesn't have these, only on rails vehicles or power ups (wtf)
Shooting mechanics that required skill to aim and shoot with each gun handling differently giving you lots to learn and improve. Battlefront doesn't have this, most of the guns are very similar spray and pray affairs.
It just seems like BF-lite, I can understand they want to try to draw in the casual crowd but a Star Wars Battlefield game would already pull big numbers, there really wasn't a need to dumb it down, this was purely a marketing decision. I can see the meeting now. "Battlefield is too hardcore, we need to make the Star Wars version appeal to EVERYBODY, even people who don't like playing games to maximise our revenue!"
I'll still probably get it but not in a rush now, I'm not as excited about it as I should be. I also don't expect to be playing it 6 months to a years time like I have with previous BF games.
That said, I am so excited I'm like a little schoolgirl.
Guvernator said:
To an extent but the depth in previous Battlefield games came from a few things that mixed up the fps genre a little.
Playing in squads, coordinating and trying different tactics, Battlefront doesn't have squads.
Classes and customisation of your load-out to fit your play style, Battlefront doesn't have these.
Vehicles which you can hop in and out of, with your squad mates in tow. Battlefront doesn't have these, only on rails vehicles or power ups (wtf)
Shooting mechanics that required skill to aim and shoot with each gun handling differently giving you lots to learn and improve. Battlefront doesn't have this, most of the guns are very similar spray and pray affairs.
It just seems like BF-lite, I can understand they want to try to draw in the casual crowd but a Star Wars Battlefield game would already pull big numbers, there really wasn't a need to dumb it down, this was purely a marketing decision. I can see the meeting now. "Battlefield is too hardcore, we need to make the Star Wars version appeal to EVERYBODY, even people who don't like playing games to maximise our revenue!"
I'll still probably get it but not in a rush now, I'm not as excited about it as I should be. I also don't expect to be playing it 6 months to a years time like I have with previous BF games.
Have you never played any of the other BF games? As none of the above is new. I had a great time playing the beta with mates, the fact that it wasn't set up to be as series as battlefield made it even more fun (my mates are very competitive and do bPlaying in squads, coordinating and trying different tactics, Battlefront doesn't have squads.
Classes and customisation of your load-out to fit your play style, Battlefront doesn't have these.
Vehicles which you can hop in and out of, with your squad mates in tow. Battlefront doesn't have these, only on rails vehicles or power ups (wtf)
Shooting mechanics that required skill to aim and shoot with each gun handling differently giving you lots to learn and improve. Battlefront doesn't have this, most of the guns are very similar spray and pray affairs.
It just seems like BF-lite, I can understand they want to try to draw in the casual crowd but a Star Wars Battlefield game would already pull big numbers, there really wasn't a need to dumb it down, this was purely a marketing decision. I can see the meeting now. "Battlefield is too hardcore, we need to make the Star Wars version appeal to EVERYBODY, even people who don't like playing games to maximise our revenue!"
I'll still probably get it but not in a rush now, I'm not as excited about it as I should be. I also don't expect to be playing it 6 months to a years time like I have with previous BF games.
h a lot if it goes wrong).I am a little annoyed there will not be a server list with custom game types as it wouldnt be too hard to do a hardcore mode. I just hope they do some form of space combat/ship boarding cross over (like the old Unreal Tournament games managed) in the early 2000's.
It is understandable that Battlefield comparisons will be drawn. DICE have been brought in using the same game engine, loading screens, menus and feel. Unsurprising given that Battlefield is what DICE do and of course, they were hoping that some of the (perceived) magic would rub off/easy marketing.
But Battlefront is, well, Battlefront. It has historically been nothing like Battlefield. The first two games were developed by Pandemic if memory serves. Not DICE. A fantastic developer (Full Spectrum Warrior, anybody!?) that implemented lots of features which were nothing like Battlefield. One of these was third person view as the default. Having played the beta, well whaddaya know?! The third person view is much better. This is in keeping with the series.
Direct comparisons to Battlefield is a bit silly, IMHO. Battlefront was never deep. Fun though. I'm glad it has stayed true to form (based on the beta). Not played the finished game so fully prepared for it being st in its own right.
Now. If only the postie had delivered a day early. Shopto. You've let me down for the first time.
But Battlefront is, well, Battlefront. It has historically been nothing like Battlefield. The first two games were developed by Pandemic if memory serves. Not DICE. A fantastic developer (Full Spectrum Warrior, anybody!?) that implemented lots of features which were nothing like Battlefield. One of these was third person view as the default. Having played the beta, well whaddaya know?! The third person view is much better. This is in keeping with the series.
Direct comparisons to Battlefield is a bit silly, IMHO. Battlefront was never deep. Fun though. I'm glad it has stayed true to form (based on the beta). Not played the finished game so fully prepared for it being s
t in its own right. Now. If only the postie had delivered a day early. Shopto. You've let me down for the first time.
Oh man, loving this.
Just a constant hail of plasma and shrapnel. COD feels very robotic in comparison.
And the maps... beautiful. I find myself getting distracted by the visuals, especially on the Walker Assault maps.
Almost rank 15 and a K/D 1.34 but steadily rising after getting to grips with it again.
Just a constant hail of plasma and shrapnel. COD feels very robotic in comparison.
And the maps... beautiful. I find myself getting distracted by the visuals, especially on the Walker Assault maps.
Almost rank 15 and a K/D 1.34 but steadily rising after getting to grips with it again.
Gassing Station | Video Games | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff