Star Wars Battlefront II (Nov 17)

[XX]

The night map on Kashyyyk is almost unplayable as the republic. The droids are really hard to see when youre in a area with no lighting while you could spot the clones white armor from a mile away

Yep, and fighting them while looking into the sun as the republic isn't much fun either. They need to add small lights/flashlights to the droids if they are going to put them in night modes.

 

[Blitzkrug]

Battlefront 1 had that problem too. The rebellion was basically unbeatable on any Endor map because of how they blended in, but imperials stuck out like a sore thumb because of the bright white armor.

I played the access trial, thought it was an improvement over the beta and ended up buying it after i heard Disney pulled on EA's leash.

I absolutely love the revamped Heroes and Villians mode. My boy Lando is a one man army if played correctly. Space high noon, stun mine and a really hard hitting pistol. He's the one gun based hero that should not be approached 1v1

I just hope EA ****s off with the P2W stuff. I can't imagine they want to risk ticking Disney off again (likely because the backlash would return if they were to try) so hopefully it stays as is and they let DICE patch up the progression a bit.

 

[ColbyChaos]

Battlefront 1 had that problem too. The rebellion was basically unbeatable on any Endor map because of how they blended in, but imperials stuck out like a sore thumb because of the bright white armor.

I just hope EA ****s off with the P2W stuff. I can't imagine they want to risk ticking Disney off again (likely because the backlash would return if they were to try) so hopefully it stays as is and they let DICE patch up the progression a bit.

Dear god I bought the first EA battlefront on sale for super cheap a few months ago and Endor frustrated the living heck out of me with how hard it was for the imps. For BF1 I always found the shadow troopers to be a bit hard to spot on basically any night map too.


For the p2w stuff I doubt they would axe it entirely as another poster suggested they are probably waiting until more people buy it and then they will bring it back in which is sad to admit but is probably what will happen. If they planned on getting rid of buying crystals they probably would have changed the amount of credits gained per game, crate costs, and a few other things.

 

[Dolemite]

I have to say, the game itself is really fun. I haven't even touched the campaign yet, I'm gonna save that for a rainy day, but even playing multiplayer by myself is a blast.

Have you played the first one?

 

[KingBran]

Really glad they aren't ignoring the prequels with this one. IMO those stories don't get enough love in the SW universe.

 

[kingsboy11]

I was looking forward to this release, but from the reviews from a lot of people have turned me off. But I'm watching a walkthrough of the campaign and I'm liking the story so far.

 

[Commander Clueless]

If you remove the ability to jump the line via real money, it becomes more like a natural progression system, just without any real player agency. They mainly need to change dupes to crafting parts and up their gain overall so that players have a way to control what they get. The way it is designed now will give you what feels like a good 'base' of cards but you'll quickly realize that, as your income slows down, tier 3 and 4 cards are painfully out of reach.

I can't think of a game more blatantly designed to sucker someone in to that first 20 hours, hype them up, then leave them for dead. Most F2P games are not even that disingenuous about their grind.

The MT fiasco has people overlooking things like terrible maps and terrible class balance, so DICE has some smoke cover to improve things. This game badly needs a "we dun ****ed up" battlefield 4 level CTE effort to fix everything.

I think the biggest problem ive personally seen is that the star cards should not be giving extra health or aim assist. Those seem like too much.

I agree with hemsky. The biggest problem is the star cards are just objective upgrades, and for that matter the weapons are unbalanced as well. The more you play (or previously buy), the better you get. The rich get richer, while the more casual players get left in the dust....which is truly unfortunate in a game that was supposed to be accessible and more geared towards casual play.

I've played pretty casually and it's still fun, but I feel like this is a flaw that is counter-intuitive to the design of the game.

 

[x Tame Impala]

General progression systems are fine IMHO. Unlocking better guns/perks/etc...from actually playing keeps things interesting and isn't an unfair advantage. But when you can just fork over real money and have that advantage immediately over people who can't/won't spend more money is ridiculous.

Very happy to see EA rescind on this P2P stuff. Even if it's just temporary and only came about through gambling claims that Disney didn't want to deal with, it's still a great thing. EA had to publicly acknowledge that what they were doing was wrong and when you couple it with the bad reviews the game is getting it'll hopefully be discouraging to future game companies to include that crap.

 

[KingBran]

General progression systems are fine IMHO. Unlocking better guns/perks/etc...from actually playing keeps things interesting and isn't an unfair advantage. But when you can just fork over real money and have that advantage immediately over people who can't/won't spend more money is ridiculous.

Very happy to see EA rescind on this P2P stuff. Even if it's just temporary and only came about through gambling claims that Disney didn't want to deal with, it's still a great thing. EA had to publicly acknowledge that what they were doing was wrong and when you couple it with the bad reviews the game is getting it'll hopefully be discouraging to future game companies to include that crap.

The difference is they can try and get away with crap like that because it's Star Wars. The game will still sell well because it's Star Wars. It's still the 2nd most wanted PS/Xbox game on Amazon (behind CODWWII) because it's Star Wars. Nobody cares about these "gotcha" stories or EA pulling the micto-transactions except for the hardcore gamers.

Parents are still buying it for their kids... because it's Star Wars.

Any other game that doesn't have a high profile name attached to it like that probably wouldn't be able to get away with something like this as easily and they know that. So I would be surprised if it was ever tried in some NEW IP or something. That would just be horrible business / decision making though.

 

[x Tame Impala]

Nobody cares about these "gotcha" stories or EA pulling the micto-transactions except for the hardcore gamers.

No. Lucasfilms cares, stockholders in EA care, and all the people giving bad reviews of the game largely in part to the micro-transactions care.

Star Wars Battlefront 2 physical sales down 60% on Battlefront 1

Sales of SWBF2 are down 60% from the original game and it's almost unanimously because of this controversy. You've been wrong every step of the way in this thread.

 

[XX]

No. Lucasfilms cares, stockholders in EA care, and all the people giving bad reviews of the game largely in part to the micro-transactions care.

Star Wars Battlefront 2 physical sales down 60% on Battlefront 1

Sales of SWBF2 are down 60% from the original game and it's almost unanimously because of this controversy. You've been wrong every step of the way in this thread.

Considering Battlefront 1 had a really weak launch (only after the holidays did it claw out of the hole), ouch.

I agree with hemsky. The biggest problem is the star cards are just objective upgrades, and for that matter the weapons are unbalanced as well. The more you play (or previously buy), the better you get. The rich get richer, while the more casual players get left in the dust....which is truly unfortunate in a game that was supposed to be accessible and more geared towards casual play.

I've played pretty casually and it's still fun, but I feel like this is a flaw that is counter-intuitive to the design of the game.

I think the intention was to create a robust 'build your playstyle/class' style system, because a system comprised entirely of sidegrades wouldn't have enough cards. But the whole thing is balanced poorly. Adding a meter to your thermal detonator is not even in the same league as reducing all your cooldowns by 30%. The starfighter cards are the worst offenders.

 

[syz]

Can we throw everybody who works in marketing off of a f***ing bridge yet?

 

[XX]

Can we throw everybody who works in marketing off of a ****ing bridge yet?

The entire article where that is from is hilarious:

KeyBanc Capital Markets analyst Evan Wingren wrote in a note to clients Sunday. "Gamers aren't overcharged, they're undercharged (and we're gamers) … This saga has been a perfect storm for overreaction as it involves EA, Star Wars, reddit, and certain purist gaming journalists/outlets who dislike MTX."

"Quantitative analysis shows that video game publishers are actually charging gamers at a relatively inexpensive rate, and should probably raise prices."

Gamers are overreacting to EA's ‘Star Wars’ controversy, publishers should raise prices: Analyst

When shitposters go corporate

Dude is a complete nobody in the analyst world. It's like they went fishing for a contrarian.

 

[Dolemite]

Finally someone says it - Gamers are overreacting to what EA is doing. Thank you!

Gamers are overreacting to EA's ‘Star Wars’ controversy, publishers should raise prices: Analyst

 

[x Tame Impala]

"Analyst"

 

[Pilky01]

The analyst estimated cost per hour for a typical "Star Wars Battlefront II" player. He said if a gamer spent $60 for the game, an additional $20 per month for loot micro-transaction boxes and played around 2.5 hours a day for one year, it comes out to roughly 40 cents per hour of entertainment. This compares to an estimated 60 cents to 65 cents per hour for pay television, 80 cents per hour for a movie rental and more than $3 per hour for a movie watched in a theater, according to the firm's analysis.

 

[AKL]

Have you played the first one?

Yes I did a little bit. By the time I went to actually buy it for myself my friends had stopped playing it though, so I didn't buy it and didn't play too much.

 

[ColbyChaos]

Had my first graphics issue. While playing blast on hoth all of the both allies and enemies were invisible as if the texture was missing. Could only see the red health bar quickly left within 2 minutes only had that issue once however.

Anyone else experience any issues yet?

 

[KingBran]

No. Lucasfilms cares, stockholders in EA care, and all the people giving bad reviews of the game largely in part to the micro-transactions care.

Star Wars Battlefront 2 physical sales down 60% on Battlefront 1

Sales of SWBF2 are down 60% from the original game and it's almost unanimously because of this controversy. You've been wrong every step of the way in this thread.

Physical sales? When every year games are sold more and more digitally and with EA/Origin Access and tons more users of that since the first BF I am sure they are selling close to the same as the first. And even if not I didn't say bad pub wouldnt affect sales, I said the non-gamers wont see / care and still buy it for their kids.

The physical sales of ALL video games is down... a lot. Especially since 2 years ago.

There is nothing to be wrong about, its an opinion and the game is selling and the 2nd most wishlisted PS/Xbox game on amazon right now.

 

[x Tame Impala]

Physical sales? When every year games are sold more and more digitally and with EA/Origin Access and tons more users of that since the first BF I am sure they are selling close to the same as the first. And even if not I didn't say bad pub wouldnt affect sales, I said the non-gamers wont see / care and still buy it for their kids.

The physical sales of ALL video games is down... a lot. Especially since 2 years ago.

There is nothing to be wrong about, its an opinion and the game is selling and the 2nd most wishlisted PS/Xbox game on amazon right now.

Yeah you keep saying that...

Amazon.com Most Wished For: Items customers added to Wish Lists and registries most often in Video Games

1. Super Mario Odyssey
2. Legend of Zelda
3. Mario Kart Deluxe

4. COD WW2 (XBOX)
5. COD WW2 (PS4)

A bunch of Pokemon and Nintendo games...

13. Skyrim
14. Assassin's Creed Origins (PS4)

16. SWBF 2 (PS4)
17. SWBF 2 (XBOX)

So even if for whatever arbitrary reason you ignore Nintendo Switch games, it's still behind COD, Skyrim, and Origins. Everyone is entitled to opinions, but opinions can be wrong, and all of yours have been the last week or so

 

[Sarcastic]

I swear I'm drunk, there are people actually defending EA and pay to play practices.

 

[Commander Clueless]

General progression systems are fine IMHO. Unlocking better guns/perks/etc...from actually playing keeps things interesting and isn't an unfair advantage. But when you can just fork over real money and have that advantage immediately over people who can't/won't spend more money is ridiculous.

Yes and no. Progression systems have a very important purpose as you said, but if the stuff you unlock just destroys the default stuff than I think it's a bad progression system. Anyone joining in "late" is at a very unfair advantage...especially in a game like this where enemy starfighters can just straight up do 50% more damage than you can, as an example.

Previous Battlefield games had a great progression system in my opinion, and while there were always balance issues to work out, the unlockable guns weren't significantly better than the starters depending on your play style. In BF4, I used the default Engineer gun up until one of the last unlocks, as an example.

Yes, there were still some objective improvements, but I think Battlefront II has gone too far and the fact that it's an RNG loot system makes it even worse IMO.


That said, you can still play as a noob and have fun and compensate with skill (if you have it, unlike me ), but it can also get frustrating at times.

 

[x Tame Impala]

Halo did it the best IMHO. You leveled yourself up towards a finite, achievable yet still very difficult goal, and still had a relatively equal start to each and every game.

 

[Bjorn Le]

They're right about the undercharged part when we consider how expensive games were in the 1990s (basically the same as they are now, at least in the United States). The stagnation of base prices definitely plays a roll in the push for microtransactions and online focus, as with blockbuster movie-esque marketing budgets, these post-release transactions could be the difference between huge profit and a big loss.

Halo did it the best IMHO. You leveled yourself up towards a finite, achievable yet still very difficult goal, and still had a relatively equal start to each and every game.

Halo progression system (at least the old one, I haven't really played the new ones) was great but it's also really hard to model. Halo has a great matchmaking system based on skill, where people in the higher tiered ranked matches were amazing at the game and a single person in those games would crush everyone in lower tiered matches. Halo to me is far more skill based than Call of Duty, which is a twitch shooter where reflexes, not ability dictate how good you are.

 

[KingBran]

Yeah you keep saying that...

Amazon.com Most Wished For: Items customers added to Wish Lists and registries most often in Video Games

1. Super Mario Odyssey
2. Legend of Zelda
3. Mario Kart Deluxe

4. COD WW2 (XBOX)
5. COD WW2 (PS4)

A bunch of Pokemon and Nintendo games...

13. Skyrim
14. Assassin's Creed Origins (PS4)

16. SWBF 2 (PS4)
17. SWBF 2 (XBOX)

So even if for whatever arbitrary reason you ignore Nintendo Switch games, it's still behind COD, Skyrim, and Origins. Everyone is entitled to opinions, but opinions can be wrong, and all of yours have been the last week or so

Wow. Read much? I said PS/Xbox and at the time I first posted it, it was true. So AC:O (only on PS4) jumped passed it. Doesn't really change anything. Still top 3 PS/Xbox game wanted.

Nintendo stuff was ignored because BF2 isnt on any Nintendo system. So there can be no sales of the game for any Nintendo system. Sad that even has to be explained to you. Also, read better. It's like you are mad that hundreds of thousands of people and I am enjoying BF2 keep crying.

I swear I'm drunk, there are people actually defending EA and pay to play practices.

I dont think anyone is defending EA and the progression system they made for BF2. Just about everyone here (including myself) says its garbage. But theres lots of lies about how long it takes to unlock characters and TONS of overreaction about it. Like how you cant be competive because people will just pay real money to buff their characters. Well, EA took that away and they are still whining about it. It's really simple, the game is fun for people who like Star Wars and DICE games.

And now that people cant pay real money to buff their dudes its like a lot of other online shooters, play more, get better stuff. There is still the problem of unlocks and crates being random and getting buffs for characters you never play or dont care about. So its still a shitty system but everyone is on a more level playing field and it's a lot of fun!