StarDestroyer.Net BBS

It sure looks pretty

No gameplay, the video claims it's all in engine but... I'm not buying it in the slightest until I see a hud and a killfeed. I want some in game things to show me what the game WILL look like. Until a Tie Fighter lags into a tree and some twelve year old calls my mother a whore I won't believe it's legit footage.

Apparently there is no PT era battles, no space battles, no campaign. Gameplay wise, this seems to be a downgrade from BF 2.

It's weird i read an article saying that DICE had access to the complete Lucasfilm archive of sounds and then I watch the trailer and thinks the sounds are all wrong - the AT-AT guns doesn't sound as they should and neither does Vader's lightsaber or a whole host of other sounds.

Is it just me, or does that AT-AT look awfully small?

ray245 wrote:Apparently there is no PT era battles, no space battles, no campaign. Gameplay wise, this seems to be a downgrade from BF 2.

This is what pisses me off. I could have fun with battlefront 2 even when I didn't have reliable high-speed internet or lots of online friends to play with. This is multi or nothing.

Yeah, I'm not likely to get this anytime soon now. The lack of a dedicated campaign is a major turn off for me really, since I've never much cared for online multiplayer outside Halo and old Medal of Honor when Gamespy was still around.

The space battles were pretty boring to me, DICE hasn't made a campaign worth playing since Bad Company 1 anyway, and to me, no Prequel stuff is no great loss. Still, I'll reserve judgement until we see actual gameplay.

Skywalker_T-65 wrote:Yeah, I'm not likely to get this anytime soon now. The lack of a dedicated campaign is a major turn off for me really, since I've never much cared for online multiplayer outside Halo and old Medal of Honor when Gamespy was still around.

I don't even care about a campaign. Just give me instant action with bots. Just give me some way of enjoying the game if my internet shits out or my friends all quit playing.

Darksider wrote:

Skywalker_T-65 wrote:Yeah, I'm not likely to get this anytime soon now. The lack of a dedicated campaign is a major turn off for me really, since I've never much cared for online multiplayer outside Halo and old Medal of Honor when Gamespy was still around.

I don't even care about a campaign. Just give me instant action with bots. Just give me some way of enjoying the game if my internet shits out or my friends all quit playing.

Well, yes, that too.

Darksider wrote:

ray245 wrote:Apparently there is no PT era battles, no space battles, no campaign. Gameplay wise, this seems to be a downgrade from BF 2.

This is what pisses me off. I could have fun with battlefront 2 even when I didn't have reliable high-speed internet or lots of online friends to play with. This is multi or nothing.

I actually preferred BF1 to BF2. Something about BF2 didn't feel like Star Wars the way the first game did. And the lack of a campaign is no great loss. How much time did you spend in BF2's campaign?

The space battles were broken anyway. Capital ships were useless and literally all of the combat focused on fighters. While that is arguably more fun, it was still too limited to be effective. I would rather see someone else later come up with a dedicated space combat game for SW than have one game do both it and ground combat worse(BF2's lack of air support was dissapointing). I liked the firepower the Y-wings were packing, it definitely felt better than the repeated bombing runs it took to defeat AT-ATs in the first game(via add on maps that featured X-wings vs AT-ATs, it took close to a dozen attack runs).

EDIT: I wonder if it will feature playable Jedi like BF2 or unplayable heroes like BF1?

They also seem to be on the DLC bandwagon in full force, no surprise for EA. I wonder if space battles might be DLC? They somewhat did this for Battlefield 4. It would allow the space battle that leads to the wreckage we saw in the new Force Awakens trailer.

Hmm, I was kind of hoping for the combined ground and space battles that were planned for the cancelled BF3... it would have been awesome if the Y-Wings had come from players who were engaged in a space battle, and flew down to the planet to briefly help out.

Tribble wrote:Hmm, I was kind of hoping for the combined ground and space battles that were planned for the cancelled BF3... it would have been awesome if the Y-Wings had come from players who were engaged in a space battle, and flew down to the planet to briefly help out.

There actually is a game mod for BF2 that does this. Unfortunately this would lead to lessened system resources for everything else. This is likely why it was dropped, the emphasis is on creating a proper ground combat game at the moment. It's not like BF2s space combat was very good anyway. If they have an effective dogfight system with effective anti-air turrets, adding space combat as a DLC bonus wouldn't be that hard.

I do not believe that trailer at all. No way is that going to play out like that in an actual game without requiring a significant investment in hardware.
The only way I see a Star Wars game working to add all of the Air / Space and Ground is if they tried to get into a game like the Arma simulation series and those games run like utter shit in short order because of how intensive it is.

Made by EA - Sorry, no. Fuck that company because it will end up being micro-transaction bullshit with gear grinds and endless worthless DLC. Throw in that it's Star Wars so you can expect even more vicious milking of every bit of money or things they can scrounge off the new movies to sell. Quickly see this game tanking badly once the nostalgia / hype over the new films wears off.

Pretty, but I'm also not buying it. And is this thing not going to have a PC version?

PREDATOR490 wrote:I do not believe that trailer at all. No way is that going to play out like that in an actual game without requiring a significant investment in hardware.
The only way I see a Star Wars game working to add all of the Air / Space and Ground is if they tried to get into a game like the Arma simulation series and those games run like utter shit in short order because of how intensive it is.

The trailer didn't indicate anything that Battlefield doesn't already do except hero characters. (well, and jetpacks and deployable shields but those are just fancy class abilities).

So y'know, it's Battlefield in Star Wars clothes, which is basically exactly what everyone wants it to be anyway.

Elheru Aran wrote:Pretty, but I'm also not buying it. And is this thing not going to have a PC version?

Why on Earth would you jump to that conclusion? Origin already has it available for preorder, so obviously it's coming out for PC.

Darksider wrote:I don't even care about a campaign. Just give me instant action with bots. Just give me some way of enjoying the game if my internet shits out or my friends all quit playing.

I have a hunch that the classic idea of "bot versions" of multiplayer FPS matches are basically over. I'm no expert, but my worthless guts speculate that a) it's really, really hard to make decent bots, and b) why go to the trouble at all when humans make much better opponents with zero cost?

Is it me or does the Rebel on the right look like Robert Duvall?

Footage looks amazing...but there's no way the framerate would be that good at that high of a quality. They probably used the in-game engine to generate the effects then stitched them together as a trailer movie file.

That said, the poor rebel who survived the AT-AT explosion just to come face to face with Vader...he's fucked.

Mr Bean wrote:It sure looks pretty

No gameplay, the video claims it's all in engine but... I'm not buying it in the slightest until I see a hud and a killfeed.

It says "Game Engine Footage" not "in-game footage." Unreal engine tech demos show ridiculous shit as well and little of that can make it into an actual video game. Really, only the character models looks like something you could run on a current console.

20 vs 20

A DICE spokesperson said that they felt that 40 players works best for Battlefront, where as 64 players worked best for Battlefield 4 and other Battlefield titles.

DICE wanted to give Battlefront “an identity of its own”, instead of just copying things over from the Battlefield series.

I'm tired of small-scale bullshit. The market is flooded with 12-18 MP games. I want my 64 vs 64 battles back. We did that shit on dial-up and 128k DSL. It's 2015: get it together.

Pass. I'd rather die of old age waiting for another Jedi Knight game than piss money away on what's shaping up to be another disappointing EA and/or Star Wars game. I haven't looked, but what's the day-one DLC going to be? You know it has some. EA can't release a game without it.

TheFeniX wrote:I'm tired of small-scale bullshit. The market is flooded with 12-18 MP games. I want my 64 vs 64 battles back. We did that shit on dial-up and 128k DSL. It's 2015: get it together.

Nobody else actually wants those though.

See, the problem with super large scale battles is that you basically don't get to feel like you did anything relevant to winning. 20 is already kinda pushing it for the ability for one player's individual contribution to make a difference to the outcome of a match, and if you didn't make a difference by being there why bother?

You say nobody wants them... yet Planetside 1 was popular enough to be a subscription game for years. BF2's modded 128 player servers were very popular and outside the Battlefield series has anyone reached higher than 32 players?

We've been stuck at 8 on 8 for over a decade thanks to the limits of the PS3 and Xbox 360 so when you say "no one wants them" I challenge you to find me one of these games that tried 60+ servers and failed.

Mr Bean wrote:You say nobody wants them... yet Planetside 1 was popular enough to be a subscription game for years. BF2's modded 128 player servers were very popular and outside the Battlefield series has anyone reached higher than 32 players?

To further the point, M&B Warband had modded servers that allowed 200+ (vanilla max being 64). Planetside 2 was still going strong with its 800 gajillion player continents last I checked a few months ago, though I stopped playing when SOE got sold off to the corporate chopping block.

Brother-Captain Gaius wrote:

Mr Bean wrote:You say nobody wants them... yet Planetside 1 was popular enough to be a subscription game for years. BF2's modded 128 player servers were very popular and outside the Battlefield series has anyone reached higher than 32 players?

To further the point, M&B Warband had modded servers that allowed 200+ (vanilla max being 64). Planetside 2 was still going strong with its 800 gajillion player continents last I checked a few months ago, though I stopped playing when SOE got sold off to the corporate chopping block.

Planetside 2 had basically a New Game Content like another SOE game, Star Wars Galaxies where in they fully changed the game balanced, redid handling and changed a bunch of things to make it more access to a console audience.

Which was promptly shat on by the entire community because it took was had been an interesting MMOFPS and tweaked it so everything either handled like mud or was much slower and doubled the average TTK.