[XB1, PS4, PC] Battlefront II or how EA made me hate Star Wars

Purge
Purge
Hate is strong, but I had early access / 10 hour trial, and after playing the available single player levels, I was not impressed.

It feels like a low quality shooter, where things like shooting all the way down a hallway doesn't register the shots because it's outside your "active" area.

The flying sections were fun enough, but starting in a debris-filled space with darkened bits that you randomly smack into riiiigghhhtttt before you finish the mission...

That's beyond the pay-to-win MP, but since I'm a co-op guy more than a DM player, I find most of it uncompelling.

So what about you?

Comments

  • Bullwinkle
    Bullwinkle
    GT Member
    Your criticisms of the SP campaign are valid, though none of that really detracts from the play for me (the movement is a little skatey, too). Mostly it's because the story is compelling enough to make it interesting. I'm enjoying seeing the side of the Empire and seeing the logical way they'd view the enemy. It really drives home how easily you can convince yourself that what you're doing is right. Plus the moments it seems to be pulling out are good ones. I haven't finished yet (I hear it's very short, but unless the next two missions are the end of it, I'll be satisfied), but I look forward to it.

    I'm enjoying the multiplayer. A lot, actually. The beta had me convinced that they'd gone too far the other way to appease the people who thought it was simplistic. Personally, I loved the ease of play of the last one. Not every game needs to be CoD or Battlefront. Let me shoot stormtroopers in fan service locations, and I'll be happy. But it's less bothersome than I remembered from the beta.

    It does feel like I've been killed much more quickly by some than others, and that may be due to some pay to play unlocking, but I can't say for sure, since I'm fairly terrible at these games.

    Still, I think all the game modes have something to offer, and I've been having a good time. We'll see how I feel after trying to buy things...
  • Jimmy the Fish
    Jimmy the Fish
    GT Member
    I feel so torn on this. I cannot support EA's loot box nonsense by buying this game. I thought I would get it after they backtracked on the cost to earn hero characters but the consensus among mainstream review sites is that the game is still marred by the monetization scheme.

    I guess I'll pass for now to see how EA changes the game in the future. Once it goes on heavy discount I might pick it up. I am actually content to keep playing the first Battlefront.
  • Jimmy the Fish
    Jimmy the Fish
    GT Member
    Wow, that certainly was unexpected. Now I’m seriously thinking about getting the game tomorrow.
  • EngineNo9
    EngineNo9
    GT Member
    Except for all the people who already played and bought those things during the Deluxe Edition launch, and Origin Access time, right?

    If you want to speak with your wallet, though, still best to not reward them for not considering the player experience in the first place.
  • Travis
    Travis
    GT Member
    "The ability to purchase crystals in-game will become available at a later date, only after we’ve made changes to the game. We’ll share more details as we work through this."

    This still bothers me. It's a full priced game. There should be no need to add this back. I am *just* getting "okay" with DLC being the norm on full priced games. I say they should just throw it out and make the game fun for everyone who pays to buy the game. Clearly this was forced from top down so I have no doubt it won't be again once initial sales are done. They know the IP will sell tons and then can go on to screw everyone after the holidays.
  • Jimmy the Fish
    Jimmy the Fish
    GT Member
    Things are so bizarre. CNN posted a story about all the controversy. Then there is a story going around that Bob Iger, CEO of Disney Corp had a phone call with EA’s CEO hours before EA turned off in game purchasing. No proof that there’s a direct link between all this, but why else would Iger call EA?

    After thinking more about it, I guess I’ll continue to wait this all out. Bad enough EA initially forced microtransactions in the game but the back and forth has turned this into a total shit show.
  • Travis
    Travis
    GT Member
    I will add I don't care about micro transactions in games so to speak. In full on pay the price AAA multiplayer titles that then allow those micro transactions to give someone a competitive edge I am against it. It crosses a line competitive game design should not cross. I wouldn't want to set a precedent to where a company learns "it's cool. Ship the initial batch and add it once they bought it." I feel that's what they are going for here on an already awful front. It's a little of me sticking to "fool me once, shame on you...Fool me twice shame on me...."
  • Jimmy the Fish
    Jimmy the Fish
    GT Member
    The line EA, and other big game companies, is really trying to force is the notion that console/pc gaming should mirror the mobile game space. They’re all trying so hard to change the market paradigm since monetization is big business on mobile devices. But there is one huge difference though. Most of these mobile games are free downloads that are designed to be played for free but with a significant grind that entices people to pay for shortcuts. There is a real disconnect on the part of the game companies if they think people are okay with paying 60 dollars full price (more for deluxe or gold edition) for a game and then implement the mobile game model in the game’s basic mechanic.

    It’s a trend that isn’t surprising because it’s slowly seeped into traditional console gaming over the last 5-10 years. Battlefront just happens to be the most high profile game to be guilty of this. At what point do the game companies push the model so aggressively that gamers push back hard? Already the game press reviews are scoring lower as a result. No doubt the Metacritic score, which game companies seem to use as a factor in their business decisions, will be affected.

    This is going to be an interesting case study on the future of gaming.
  • Travis
    Travis
    GT Member
    Yeah. Coming from someone who already is challenged with paying a $60 price tag I just can't fathom spending more just to really play a game on an even level of competitiveness. I think cosmetics are fine, but actual shortcuts to winning (in multiplayer) are not.

    After adding multiplayer to the above comment I remember single player games doing the same. Sierra made very obtuse puzzles back in the 80's to sell hint books. That also crippled game play and design.
  • Bullwinkle
    Bullwinkle
    GT Member
    It's more than the price, frankly. The free-to-play model works on mobile because those are generally quick hit games. The sessions last a couple of minutes at best and there's a disposable feel to the whole thing that makes tossing a quick buck or two at the game to speed up progress palatable. If they were to have released Battlefront II as free-to-play, it would still sour the experience, in my mind.

    There are a ton of free-to-play games on consoles already. I've dabbled in some, but they rarely hold my interest for long. Are these doing well enough to have an impact on the market? Honestly, I don't know. I don't really hear about them. They do better on PCs, I guess. But are they doing mobile numbers? I doubt it.

    They're trying to make us take their apples as oranges, and it's never going to be appealing in the same way, even without the cost factor. I understand they want to "change the paradigm" or whatever, but they need to see the differences and use them instead of trying to make them the same.
  • Bullwinkle
    Bullwinkle
    GT Member
    On a personal note, I am still enjoying the game. Mostly because it's Star Wars, and that always gives it an advantage for me. But also, it's really pretty good in all other respects.

    The bonuses I got for buying the deluxe version were mostly just excuses to justify getting to play the game early. I'm still happy I got to do that. However, I'm not $20 happy, so I hope they make amends to us in some fashion, eventually. I fully expect that they will.
  • Jimmy the Fish
    Jimmy the Fish
    GT Member
    How do you think the game will hold up over time? Is there enough in it to keep people engaged?

    Interestingly, I watched an IGN video where they bought $100 of loot boxes and the conclusion was that, outside of the in game economy of progression being totally messed up, the stuff they gained from the boxes had minimal impact on their progression.
  • Bullwinkle
    Bullwinkle
    GT Member
    It's too early to tell, really, but there does already seem to be a lot of content so far as maps. Playing the new CoD, I found myself saying, "Again?" on map rotation almost immediately. In BFII, I've been surprised to see new maps come up again and again.

    Of course the big difference is that if you plop me down in Mos Eisley, I'm going to go looking for the cantina, grin when I find it, and ignore whatever map objectives I'm supposed to be doing, whereas if you drop me on the Normandy beach, I'm just going to find the least deathy route to the bunkers.

    The options to play are maybe more limited (like there's no Kill Confirmed or CTF), but the variety might be a little greater. You've got the large map, multiple objective Galactic Assault, the smaller objective based Strike, the kill the target based Heroes vs Villains (where everyone is an iconic character), straight DM Blast, and objective based Starfighter Assault. They all feel very different to me, and I like them all.

    I will say that I was spending time unlocking spacebucks in the many, many objective categories they'd set up. For example, they had one for playing 10 minutes as each class, but that also unlocked individual goals for playing each of the classes. And each class has its own subgoals. Plus you could get bonuses for playing each gametype. For assisting on shots. For using certain weapons. I don't know how this will all change now that they're dropping the spacebucks. I assume it'll translate to XP or something, but it was nice to have things to shoot for. I hadn't even spent any of it yet. I just like having checklists.

    I do think the progression is a big part of what compels you to keep playing, and only time will tell how that evolves.
  • Purge
    Purge
    GT Member
    least deathy

    I LOL'd.

    I'm torn between buying this for my son (digitally with the 10% discount on EA Access) for Christmas, or waiting for the game to be added to the vault (for myself).

    Since my home console is his "home" I'd have access to it. ;)
  • uxFOOL
    uxFOOL
    GT Manager
    I finished the campaign last night, and while I didn't think it was great, I did think it was good, and enjoyed playing a narrative adventure in the Star Wars U (something I have been starving for)

    I hopped into a handful of multiplayer matches and had some fun. Looking forward to doing more.

    Mike Dunn
    Executive Producer & Editor-at-Large
    GAMING TREND

  • Dante Rising
    Dante Rising
    GT Member edited November 20
    You can forget about fighting the loot box initiative. It is akin to scooping water from the ocean with a spoon. The major publishers have all said they are making buckets of money from the gaming community.

    Instead, enhance support to companies like CDprojekt (The Witcher) who have come out and said loot boxes are put into games by greedy bastards. Of course, we shall see if they can hold out from the temptation, as other publishers and developers printing money.
Sign In or Register to comment.