So... Star Wars Battlefront?

Shiminay

No one seems to be talking about it?

I am a total Star Wars fanboy, I get goosebumps when I hear the intro theme , it's a really nice middle ground between Battlefield's "realism" (yea, I know, it's not even slightly, but work with me here) and CoD's quick-paced and more tightly focussed action.

The combat isn't bad, improved on the beta for sure. There's not a huge amount of stuff to unlock, guns and "cards" which are things like grenades or jetpacks etc.

I've played as the 3 Empire "Heroes" and Boba Fett was definitely the most interesting. Vader was fun and the Emperor was a little bit fragile, but with some support, could be devastating in a tight space (lightning).

Speeder bikes are a pain in the arse and I won't be using them much. The Fighter Squadron mode is amazing, but there doesn't seem to be any support for my HOTAS stick

Kylo Ren

They lost me at no single player campaign.

Lone Stone

Very little content for the price so I didn't Bother.

Sonics2k

Pendreds Fists of Fury wrote: »

They lost me at no single player campaign.

This is basically why I didn't buy it. I despise team based FPS games, honestly because I'm not particularly great at them, so I would have picked this up in a moment had there been an actual single player campaign.

Spear

There's a big enough thread on it in the Battlefield forum:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057151620

The lack of a single player campaign doesn't bother me. The point in Battlefield/CoD/Battlefront games is never the single player anyway.

I suspect this lacks longevity though. But given there's plenty of other distractions to play right now, that might not be such a bad thing.

ERG89

Spear wrote: »

There's a big enough thread on it in the Battlefield forum:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057151620

The lack of a single player campaign doesn't bother me. The point in Battlefield/CoD/Battlefront games is never the single player anyway.

I suspect this lacks longevity though. But given there's plenty of other distractions to play right now, that might not be such a bad thing.

Yeah I heard that there is a lot of content on the season pass....c'est la vie.
Actually bought this game yesterday. Still in the wrapper.
I wish it had a single player campaign. Even though Battlefield campaigns kinda suck.

Shiminay

But there was never a single player campaign in the previous Battlefront games back on the PS2, why were you expecting one this time?

.ak

Started playing it last night... It's got some real highs, but some glaring lows:

Pros:
It's absolutely stunning. Turn off the HUD for a minute appreciate how good it looks for a massive multiplayer fps.
Star Wars.
The level of detail is breath taking. Every single little Star Wars detail is perfect, from the uniforms to the sound effects etc
The engine is brilliant, physics and particles act really naturally and the moment is spot on. They've worked hard on this and it really shows.
Star Wars.
The weapons are all really unique in style and handling, despite them all being blasters...

Cons:
Content is fairly sparse at this stage.
You can't edit the HUD... It's far too distracting!
The game needs balancing; starter rebel rifle is over powered, spawn points and reload times need to be looked at - everything is too frantic and hard to employ any sort of tactic
Doesn't have any squad features
Needs different roles as opposed to the card system IMO
Don't like the way you have to find pickups for vehicles
The flight system needs a bit of work... Really odd feedback system makes it difficult to fly

The real positive thing for me though is all the cons above are easily fixable. They've already edited things heavily from the beta which have really improved the game, and knowing dice they'll continue to tweak.

The main thing is the gameplay and the engine are excellent. They've got that core right, which if they hadn't have they wouldn't be able to fix it.

No doubt they're be a load of expansions and maps added so I'm not worried about the content.

.ak

OSI wrote: »

Picked this up last night but didn't get a chance to play it. I've gone from high hopes hearing it was gonna happen, to low expectations hearing beta feedback, to hopefully optimistic that I'm gonna have a decent amount of fun shouting "die rebel scum!" down the mic in a shooter I can jump in and out of and find enjoyable without having to commit 4 weeks of my life to for fear of being left behind in noobland. It looks perfect for losing a couple of hours once or twice a week.

Yeah that's exactly what is. A good mix of arcade-y style action and a really solid engine makes it a real "I have an hour to kill or unwind" game. Anyone expecting a more complex thing will be disappointed

super_furry

It's nowhere near worth €70. I played through all 10 hours of the Xbox One trial that was more than enough for me. It's a shame really but while I enjoyed the time I spent with the game and think it really captures that feeling of Star Wars, I think the gameplay and gunplay are both too lightweight and that there's nowhere near enough content. The headline modes here and the reason people are interested in the game are Walker Assault and Supremacy - the big, epic battles that you want in a Star Wars games - well there's just four maps for them and that's simply not enough.

At a time when Halo 5 and Black Ops 3 are both out with full co-op campaigns numerous different maps and modes in multiplayer and in Black Ops case a full second Zombies mode, Battlefront's four locations just feels anaemic and not good value for money.

death1234567

Lone Stone wrote: »

Very little content for the price so I didn't Bother.

From the reviews the general consensus is there's about 10 hours of gameplay in it and then you're done.

super_furry

death1234567 wrote: »

From the reviews the general consensus is there's about 10 hours of gameplay in it and then you're done.

Which, happily is the same length as the EA Access trial on Xbox One. Even if you never use it again, it's well worth that €4 to 'rent' the game.

Lone Stone

charging 70 euro for a fps multiplayer mode only, seems a bit crazy i played the previous ones on pc but they were far far less than 70 euro so it was never an issue, also it would have been good to have a star wars story mode ffs its been so long since we had anything star wars based not counting lego ****e. I dont think i could ever pay that price when all you get is what you would get along side a normal battlefield game it's half the content for the full price. i would happily pay for mutliplayer fps at that price if they had a crap tone of maps and modes to make up for the lack of a campaign mode.

Sonics2k

Shiminay wrote: »

But there was never a single player campaign in the previous Battlefront games back on the PS2, why were you expecting one this time?

I'm sure Star Wars Battlefront 2004 had a campaign mode too?

Shiminay

You're right, I just looked it up and technically it did, but that was "play a game of the multiplayer against bots" with some over-arching "galactic conquest" thing tacked on.

As it stands, the single or co-op survival mode makes for a more engaging experience I think.

Also, price: the 4 items of content for €50 season pass is a total rip-off and is typical EA bullsht. But who on earth is paying €70 for any game? Is that what they're trying to charge console people?

TetraxShard

Shiminay wrote: »

But there was never a single player campaign in the previous Battlefront games back on the PS2, why were you expecting one this time?

Battlefront II had a full single-player campaign, focused on the 501st Legion.

Penn

Played a few hours of it today. Mostly Blast mode, but one Supreme whatever (with heroes).

Really enjoying the game so far. Seems very well balanced in terms of game play, looks fantastic, seems to have a relatively simple progression system. Got to play as Luke for a bit as well which was good fun.

I'm also doing quite well at it, which is surprising given I'm normally mediocre at best in COD/Battlefield etc

shreddedloops

death1234567 wrote: »

From the reviews the general consensus is there's about 10 hours of gameplay in it and then you're done.

I've already put about 9 hours in since launch with no sign of slowing down.

I don't get the whole 'no content' argument. Yes it sucks that you're paying full price for what is essentially just multiplayer but I'm finding the majority of the game types really fun and it's quite a change jumping from one to the other.

Gameplay wise there are definitely some annoyances but nothing game breaking.

In a nutshell; this is one for Star Wars fans,not FPS fans.

mise

I was very hyped for this game, and it looks and sounds incredible, but there's something about the shooting that doesn't feel great to me.

I rarely but games day one, and I was sure this would be one, but after a few hours of ea access trial, I think I'll be waiting for this to go on sale, or hit the vault.

Demios

Correct me if I'm wrong, but was Titanfall not exactly the same with its limited features/maps while demanding full price and a subsequent season pass?

This is hardly new territory fro EA.

Kylo Ren

Evolve as well as Titanfall went the no single player campaign route. Both died out pretty quickly.

SeantheMan

Not gonna give EA 110 euros for a game.
This crap has to stop

5uspect

The whole decision on the inclusion of a single player modes in recent games is becoming frustrating.

Battlefield does not need a single player campaign. The ones they included in BF3 and 4 were awful and a complete waste of time.

A Star Wars game should really include a single player mode. We're weeks from a major Star Wars release and this game will attract more than just Battlefield fans. DICE are clearly well aware of this since they lobotomised the Battlefront aspects of the game.

Then again can we really trust DICE to make a conpelling single player story any more?

.ak

5uspect wrote: »

The whole decision on the inclusion of a single player modes in recent games is becoming frustrating.

Battlefield does not need a single player campaign. The ones they included in BF3 and 4 were awful and a complete waste of time.

A Star Wars game should really include a single player mode. We're weeks from a major Star Wars release and this game will attract more than just Battlefield fans. DICE are clearly well aware of this since they lobotomised the Battlefront aspects of the game.

Then again can we really trust DICE to make a conpelling single player story any more?

Like, when this was announced people were expecting Star Wars battlefield... So why were people expecting a campaign?

dreamers75

Love Battlefield and hate COD.

Battlefront seemed like a piece of a game, a game not fully ready so they released the parts that were. It it without doubt a cracking star wars game but i dont see anything in it that suits me.

Tbh its the perfect console star wars game, there is no depth to this game other than pew pew on star wars locations.

I bought the new COD and it has a meaty SP campaign, a well populated and mixed MP and Zombie mode. Some free run thing too. So as an all round package it has quite a lot of content. Battlefront seems like a packet of sweets that has no sweets inside it.

aaronjumper

The Heroes vs Villains gametype looks like good craic.
Anyone here had a go of it yet?

brianregan09

Have had it since release and just stumbled upon the best part Supremacy went from one minute controlling a tie fighter to five minutes later controlling Boba Fett immense stuff and I usually hate online multiplayers like COD and Battlefield can't get enough of this though

Somnus

I do really want to pick this up but am a bit concerned about the amount of content. I don't want to get f*cking gouged with DLC in order to flesh out the game. Unfortunately I didn't get a trial so I can't tell how much I'd enjoy it. I love Star Wars so could get really into it, but don't wanna cash out for a game that might run out of steam very quickly.

Have they announced what the content for the DLCs will be yet?

ERG89

.ak wrote: »

Like, when this was announced people were expecting Star Wars battlefield... So why were people expecting a campaign?

Because Battlefield has campaigns albeit **** ones.
Would be cool to play out scenes from the movies in non lego games. Especially with the production values of this.
My first real go at online multipllayer since Gears.
I enjoy it anyway, played Drop Zone & Hero Hunt. Was the hero 3 times, twice as Luke & once with....Princess Leia. I'd criticise the lack of playable Heroes and Villains but I'm sure there is more in the season pass

.ak

The best balanced game modes are walker assault and supremecy, after the imbalances of the beta they really got it nailed. It's almost always goes down to the wire in walker assault and players are using proper tactics now. Still needs a squad function tho! Also the walker assault on endor seems impossible for the imperials...

Speaking of which, I've never played as rebel on Hoth WA, or Endor WA, and I've never played as Imperial on Sullust WA or tattooine WA... It's really weird, and I've played hours! I thought the map rotation would change it up, anyone else experiencing this?

Penn

I'd love to see Blast with Heroes enabled. Hopefully in the future.

Dcully

Heroes should have their own game mode [I know they have but they shouldn't be in other modes],they ruin supremecy and walker assault ie the only modes worth talking about.
More than anything the grenade spam is just a total joke,its at the stage now where players encounter an enemy the first thing they do is chuck an impact grenade for guaranteed kill, its beyond idiotic at this stage.

Penn

Dcully wrote: »

More than anything the grenade spam is just a total joke,its at the stage now where players encounter an enemy the first thing they do is chuck an impact grenade for guaranteed kill, its beyond idiotic at this stage.

Yeah I've gotten a fair few kills that way. Have my finger on R1 ready to throw one while going round tight areas.

lertsnim

.ak wrote: »

Like, when this was announced people were expecting Star Wars battlefield... So why were people expecting a campaign?

Battlefield has a campaign.

johnny_ultimate

lertsnim wrote: »

Battlefield has a campaign.

And it is one of the most worthless, inane pieces of nothingness I have ever played through. I genuinely found it depressing that so much effort, programming talent and money went into it. Battlefield 4 would be no worse with its exclusion, TBF.

I truly believe that unless a campaign is very strong there's no extra worth in including it. A mediocre or substandard single player campaign adds nothing to the game (the opposite is true as well with bolted on multiplayer) - if anything, makes it less enticing and raises the possibility valuable resources could have been better allocated elsewhere. Obviously the ideal is superior campaign and multiplayer suites, but few studios have the resources or indeed talent to do both well simultaneously.

I'm glad games like Battlefront and Titanfall have dispensed with the campaign modes TBH, I believe it makes for leaner, more focused and ultimately more enjoyable games. Dissecting the game for season pass purposes is another thing entirely, but generally gaming needs more titles that do their own thing and don't waste developer and player time on other areas just to tick some imaginary checklist of what a AAA game in 2015 should be.

For everybody looking for a single player Star Wars game, Uncharted writer Amy Hennig is working on an SW game somewhere at EA so hopefully that will be its SP thing the same way Battlefront is its own MP thing

Shiminay

If EA was run by Gamers and not money hungry cnuts, they'd have realised that making Battlefield a multiplayer only experience and the now dead (one could fairly argue 'brutally killed through ineptitude') Medal of Honour franchise as a story driven and highly developed single player experience along the lines of Spec Ops or the likes would have been the best way to maximise revenues, expand IP franchises and keep players happy.

Shiminay

Shiminay wrote: »

If EA was run by Gamers and not money hungry cnuts, they'd have realised that making Battlefield a multiplayer only experience and the now dead (one could fairly argue 'brutally killed through ineptitude') Medal of Honour franchise as a story driven and highly developed single player experience along the lines of Spec Ops or the likes would have been the best way to maximise revenues, expand IP franchises and keep players happy.

Actually you might be surprised to find that bar a deep experience like Fallout, the average FPS gamer is only interested in MP and finds that the resources going into SP are wasted and would be better in MP.

What I don't like about this as someone with 900 hours in BF, is the map layout and content.
All they needed to do was to apply the BF formula of land, sea and air and add the Star Wars twist.
Conquest focused game with plenty of urban mixed with open space. Just too much open space in this.

Shiminay

I'd agree re: what FPS players want (Quake is what got me into more serious gaming), but I think there is a market there for good and engaging first person stories with heavy gun-play which is subtly different to FPS with a story mode tacked on - the Bioshock games for example come to mind.

I don't know if a re-skin of Battlefield (I've a couple of hundred hours on BF4 myself, I think it was a fantastic game) with Star Wars appropriate weapons and vehicles etc would have worked - this does appear to have been built from the ground up with Star Wars in mind rather than as a re-skin. Certainly people would be very critical of the team if that's all it was .

The other thing with the Star Wars name is you've got the huge number of "corporate caretakers" at various levels of management in Disney and Lucasfilm who have to sign off on everything and any one of them may have found something problematic about the direction DICE might have taken things that they might've said "no way!" to

CraigM84

got this the other day, quite enjoyable

would anyone be up for some co op missions?? (playing on pc)

SouthTippBass

Il pick this up for Christmas 2017, when its for €30 with all DLC and properly patched. If theres anyone still playing at that point that is.

copeyhagen

great craic, mostly playing walker assault, think im about level 22. Im enjoying it.

would agree about endor for imperial is very tough. and also agree about heroes ruining the walker assault, way to oop, cant even run away from the bstards!!

eggy81

Got this for 46€ on ps store. It's decent at that price IMO. Fun game. Not as good as destiny but better gameplay than blops 3 IMO.

And it's only 35€ now on psn.

SeantheMan

Please don't buy it either way, people should be protesting against EA's practices.
And the only way to do that is boycott the game, instead of just giving them your money.

You say ONLY 35 for the game on PSN.....how much for the DLC that you will need ?

eggy81

SeantheMan wrote: »

Please don't buy it either way, people should be protesting against EA's practices.
And the only way to do that is boycott the game, instead of just giving them your money.

You say ONLY 35 for the game on PSN.....how much for the DLC that you will need ?

I'm not with you. What do they do with dlc that activision or bungie or all the rest don't do.

RedXIV

Anyone got some definitive info on the dlc. Got given the game by family and don't know much about it. Just wondering if I'll gain a lot from buying dlc/season pass?

SeantheMan

Well when DLC is released, many/most servers will incorporate the new maps etc into their server rotation.
Over time with the release of more DLC...it will just become more like this.

So those without the DLC will either get kicked for not having the new map, or won't be able to join the servers to begin with.

dazza161989

Is there a way to mic chat with team members during multiplayer games on PS4 like halo on Xbox etc?

Temptamperu

This game is tripe and should be ignored.

dazza161989

Temptamperu wrote: »

This game is tripe and should be ignored.

Thanks for the useful info in relation to my question!

Temptamperu

dazza161989 wrote: »

Thanks for the useful info in relation to my question!

Also the DLC is overpriced ****e and the player base is bleeding players.

The game is tripe and not worth 110 euros or whatever the season pass costs.

dazza161989

Temptamperu wrote: »

Also the DLC is overpriced ****e and the player base is bleeding players.

The game is tripe and not worth 110 euros or whatever the season pass costs.

Bought game for €20 with free season pass from GameStop!