Star Wars: Battlefront II Review – This is the Star Wars Game You’ve Been Looking For - Not So MMO -

1235

Comments

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Nashville, TNMember EpicPosts: 2,716
    Torval said:
    Torval said:
    Torval said:
    Heretique said:
    I want(ed) to play this game so bad, my head still spinning because DICE here (again) has made a great game. You get to play as the empire (a black female lead too) when they were dealt a huge blow, the story -just- has to be good.

    Then here comes EA again, creeping up ready to do no good and stand there to suggest that 'it's best for the community'. I just can't support a full priced game and micro-transactions on top of it, others shouldn't either (IMO) just to send a message to the big wigs that this is not acceptable.

    Unfortunately I know it won't change a thing, EA has been a plague on the gaming community for a very long time. It's pretty much what I'd expect hell to be like. Ran by EA, giving you AMAZING things but then saying "oh wait there is also this" then shooting you in the hands.
    If you skip a good game over rhetoric you're just screwing yourself over. Why not play and enjoy the game with whomever you want.
    How very presumptuous of you to act as if he didn't come to his conclusion based on his on consumer values and his own research into the game systems, and instead simply listened to others' "rhetoric" and based his decision solely upon the opinions of others.
    I did presume a bit because common sense says it's very unlikely that anyone arrived at this place in a vacuum.  Are you suggesting otherwise? It's very presumptuous of you to assume someone didn't.

    I never said he based his decision solely on what others have said. I implied that "noise" is an influencing factor and my position being that if so then he's the only one losing out. Talk about presumptuous and putting words in others mouths. You twisted my words to fit your agenda again.
    Your bias is showing.  It's not at all far-fetched to think he simply agreed with those who feel as if the monetization practices inflict harm on his gameplay experience.  You're the only one attempting to presume anything here; better if maybe you asked why he came to the conclusion?

    Your point here basically seems to amount to: "That opinion seems to be popular around here, so I'm assuming you're just parroting it and didn't assess the situation for yourself."
    I can explain my own points. I don't need or want your lame help. Once again you love to put words into my mouth. Why don't just speak for yourself. Do you even have your own point and opinion in this? I said and implied nothing of the sort, but you infer what you want to hear. You do that a lot, rephrase what other people say how you want it framed.

    So stop pretending like you know what I think and give an opinion why he shouldn't take that advice. I've already explained what I meant.
    I don't need to give him an opinion on why he should or shouldn't take any advice.  I trust he can make his own decisions like a big boy.

    You can backtrack all you like, what you can't do is act as if your post wasn't presumptuous in its tone.

    And the reason I chimed in is how incredibly hostile you got with other posters attempting to tell others how they should or shouldn't feel about the situation, only to chime in later in the same thread and imply someone's missing out, presuming (by your own phrasing) that they weren't coming to their conclusion based on their own assessment of the product's value to them, but based upon others' "rhetoric".

    Not everyone assesses a purchase the same way you do.  You're quick to point that out when you wanna berate someone else, but the point seems totally lost on you now.
    Slapshot1188GdemamiunfilteredJW

    image
  • DavodtheTuttDavodtheTutt Member UncommonPosts: 169
    I am simply never going to spend $60 on any computer game. But then, I think people are crazy for what they pay to watch sports live, too. Or the money some put into "F2P" games so they can have their virtual goodies, castles and empires. The whole world seems to be going crazy in a lot of different ways.
  • ConstantineMerusConstantineMerus LondonMember RarePosts: 1,267
    Sovrath said:
    I invite you all to chill, sit on my lap, and ...
    erm, have you been following the news lately? I wouldn't be asking anyone to go sitting on any laps ....
    You mean Santa too? I always knew that old man was dirty as hell. Telling me to sit on his lap, asking Rudolph if I had been a baaad boy or not!! 
    Have you ever noticed that their stuff is shit and your shit is stuff?
  • laseritlaserit Vancouver, BCMember EpicPosts: 4,954
    Sovrath said:
    I invite you all to chill, sit on my lap, and ...
    erm, have you been following the news lately? I wouldn't be asking anyone to go sitting on any laps ....
    You mean Santa too? I always knew that old man was dirty as hell. Telling me to sit on his lap, asking Rudolph if I had been a baaad boy or not!! 
    Santa with a woody?

    Damn it, you've been drinking again tonight ;)


    ConstantineMerusGorwe

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • RedempRedemp Absurdly HotlandMember UncommonPosts: 1,086
     I appreciate MikeB's balanced review here, it's good to support the titles you genuinely enjoy. That said at some point I  need to give up on certain things(games or otherwise) due to the nature of the company behind them. Luckily for me my distaste with EA was further backed up with the progression system and loot boxes in this title. I hope the game sales under perform and whomever is steering the "Let's milk them for all they are worth" push is replaced.. whether that be one or many. A FPS with not only the ability to pay to win but a progression system built from the ground up to steer people to swipe should never be acceptable.

    GdemamiShodanasd_20
  • ConstantineMerusConstantineMerus LondonMember RarePosts: 1,267
    laserit said:
    Sovrath said:
    I invite you all to chill, sit on my lap, and ...
    erm, have you been following the news lately? I wouldn't be asking anyone to go sitting on any laps ....
    You mean Santa too? I always knew that old man was dirty as hell. Telling me to sit on his lap, asking Rudolph if I had been a baaad boy or not!! 
    Santa with a woody?

    Damn it, you've been drinking again tonight ;)


    He said it was his good boy / bad boy detector! ;( 
    laseritGorwe
    Have you ever noticed that their stuff is shit and your shit is stuff?
  • HowryHowry springfield, ORMember UncommonPosts: 116
    Had I been able to buy the game and get the WHOLE game I would have purchased it. Microtransactions are meant for free to play games not games you pay a full price on.
    Gdemami
  • WarWitchWarWitch charlotte, NCMember UncommonPosts: 144
    Not going to support buy to win games at all. I don't mind Buy to look shiny like in gw2 mounbt packs at all because its adding nothing but looks.



  • Solar_ProphetSolar_Prophet Columbus, OHMember RarePosts: 1,708
    Saw the words, "Defect to the Republic", and immediately lost what little interest I had. If I wanted that crap I'd play just about any other Star Wars game available. I'm tired of playing as a bunch of terrorists. Screw the cliched bullshit, screw the microtransactions, and screw EA.

    I rooted for the Empire, and I cheered when Starkiller Base destroyed the New Republic. Just ONCE I'd like a game to give the point of view of the Empire / First Order the fair shake it deserves. I guess for now I'll just have to settle with playing through TIE Fighter again.
    GdemamiTorvalimmodium

    AN' DERE AIN'T NO SUCH FING AS ENUFF DAKKA, YA GROT! Enuff'z more than ya got an' less than too much an' there ain't no such fing as too much dakka. Say dere is, and me Squiggoff'z eatin' tonight!


    We are born of the blood. Made men by the blood. Undone by the blood. Our eyes are yet to open. FEAR THE OLD BLOOD. 


  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 14,734
    Torval said:
    Torval said:
    Torval said:
    Heretique said:
    I want(ed) to play this game so bad, my head still spinning because DICE here (again) has made a great game. You get to play as the empire (a black female lead too) when they were dealt a huge blow, the story -just- has to be good.

    Then here comes EA again, creeping up ready to do no good and stand there to suggest that 'it's best for the community'. I just can't support a full priced game and micro-transactions on top of it, others shouldn't either (IMO) just to send a message to the big wigs that this is not acceptable.

    Unfortunately I know it won't change a thing, EA has been a plague on the gaming community for a very long time. It's pretty much what I'd expect hell to be like. Ran by EA, giving you AMAZING things but then saying "oh wait there is also this" then shooting you in the hands.
    If you skip a good game over rhetoric you're just screwing yourself over. Why not play and enjoy the game with whomever you want.
    How very presumptuous of you to act as if he didn't come to his conclusion based on his on consumer values and his own research into the game systems, and instead simply listened to others' "rhetoric" and based his decision solely upon the opinions of others.
    I did presume a bit because common sense says it's very unlikely that anyone arrived at this place in a vacuum.  Are you suggesting otherwise? It's very presumptuous of you to assume someone didn't.

    I never said he based his decision solely on what others have said. I implied that "noise" is an influencing factor and my position being that if so then he's the only one losing out. Talk about presumptuous and putting words in others mouths. You twisted my words to fit your agenda again.
    Your bias is showing.  It's not at all far-fetched to think he simply agreed with those who feel as if the monetization practices inflict harm on his gameplay experience.  You're the only one attempting to presume anything here; better if maybe you asked why he came to the conclusion?

    Your point here basically seems to amount to: "That opinion seems to be popular around here, so I'm assuming you're just parroting it and didn't assess the situation for yourself."
    I can explain my own points. I don't need or want your lame help. Once again you love to put words into my mouth. Why don't just speak for yourself. Do you even have your own point and opinion in this? I said and implied nothing of the sort, but you infer what you want to hear. You do that a lot, rephrase what other people say how you want it framed.

    So stop pretending like you know what I think and give an opinion why he shouldn't take that advice. I've already explained what I meant.
    I don't need to give him an opinion on why he should or shouldn't take any advice.  I trust he can make his own decisions like a big boy.

    You can backtrack all you like, what you can't do is act as if your post wasn't presumptuous in its tone.

    And the reason I chimed in is how incredibly hostile you got with other posters attempting to tell others how they should or shouldn't feel about the situation, only to chime in later in the same thread and imply someone's missing out, presuming (by your own phrasing) that they weren't coming to their conclusion based on their own assessment of the product's value to them, but based upon others' "rhetoric".

    Not everyone assesses a purchase the same way you do.  You're quick to point that out when you wanna berate someone else, but the point seems totally lost on you now.
    It's a discussion forum. I made a comment to a poster about the thread topic. I'm not berating him and I certainly didn't talk down to him. I stand by that opinion. If someone likes a game and really wants to play it then they should and not let others influence that decision.

    And for anyone reading his post, or yours, I'd say if they listen to your rhetoric and miss out on a good game then they're only screwing themselves. What a waste to miss out because some else is offended by a game for a week or two.

    Do you play games like this, or play games at all?
    unfilteredJW
    The artist or album content may be offensive or controversial.
    Avatar Artist: The Plugz, The Burning Sensations
    Album: Repo Man Soundtrack
    Featured Tracks: Hombre Secreto [Plugz], Pablo Picasso [Burning Sensations]
  • adamlotus75adamlotus75 LeedsMember UncommonPosts: 372
    I just won't support a loot crate deathmarch game. I love Star Wars but won't be buying this.  Voting with my wallet against the loot crate model.
    Nilden
  • cameltosiscameltosis ipswichMember EpicPosts: 1,651
    I'm a big fan of Star Wars but I refuse to buy games from Electronic Arts in general as they are always a disappointment. With the lootbox / mt drama, there is even less chance with this game. 


    I also get curious about reviews like this. This was a very glowing review of the game, yet the majority of reviews I've read have basically called it mediocre rubbish. Whilst EA have given us a campaign this time and fleshed out some other bits, the core gameplay still seems to be over simplified and dull. The card mechanics introduced power gaps to a pvp game which is retarded. Levels that include heroes also seem to be shit as heroes are so imbalanced. I've also read on many sites that the levels themselves are crap - each seems to funnel everyone into one or two key areas, resulting in endless random killing as everyone just spams grenades and blind fires. 


    What confuses me even more is the review scores this game is getting. I played the last Battlefront on my brother's xbone. It was pretty mediocre. Sure, the maps look great and the graphics are pretty awesome, but the actual gameplay was dull and repetitive. It wasn't even as good as the original. 

    I can understand making the game for nostalgia's sake, but when you ignore a decade's worth of improvments to the FPS genre, it should not be getting high review scores. 
    Gdemamid_20Nilden
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Nashville, TNMember EpicPosts: 2,716
    edited November 15
    Torval said:
    Torval said:
    Torval said:
    Torval said:
    Heretique said:
    I want(ed) to play this game so bad, my head still spinning because DICE here (again) has made a great game. You get to play as the empire (a black female lead too) when they were dealt a huge blow, the story -just- has to be good.

    Then here comes EA again, creeping up ready to do no good and stand there to suggest that 'it's best for the community'. I just can't support a full priced game and micro-transactions on top of it, others shouldn't either (IMO) just to send a message to the big wigs that this is not acceptable.

    Unfortunately I know it won't change a thing, EA has been a plague on the gaming community for a very long time. It's pretty much what I'd expect hell to be like. Ran by EA, giving you AMAZING things but then saying "oh wait there is also this" then shooting you in the hands.
    If you skip a good game over rhetoric you're just screwing yourself over. Why not play and enjoy the game with whomever you want.
    How very presumptuous of you to act as if he didn't come to his conclusion based on his on consumer values and his own research into the game systems, and instead simply listened to others' "rhetoric" and based his decision solely upon the opinions of others.
    I did presume a bit because common sense says it's very unlikely that anyone arrived at this place in a vacuum.  Are you suggesting otherwise? It's very presumptuous of you to assume someone didn't.

    I never said he based his decision solely on what others have said. I implied that "noise" is an influencing factor and my position being that if so then he's the only one losing out. Talk about presumptuous and putting words in others mouths. You twisted my words to fit your agenda again.
    Your bias is showing.  It's not at all far-fetched to think he simply agreed with those who feel as if the monetization practices inflict harm on his gameplay experience.  You're the only one attempting to presume anything here; better if maybe you asked why he came to the conclusion?

    Your point here basically seems to amount to: "That opinion seems to be popular around here, so I'm assuming you're just parroting it and didn't assess the situation for yourself."
    I can explain my own points. I don't need or want your lame help. Once again you love to put words into my mouth. Why don't just speak for yourself. Do you even have your own point and opinion in this? I said and implied nothing of the sort, but you infer what you want to hear. You do that a lot, rephrase what other people say how you want it framed.

    So stop pretending like you know what I think and give an opinion why he shouldn't take that advice. I've already explained what I meant.
    I don't need to give him an opinion on why he should or shouldn't take any advice.  I trust he can make his own decisions like a big boy.

    You can backtrack all you like, what you can't do is act as if your post wasn't presumptuous in its tone.

    And the reason I chimed in is how incredibly hostile you got with other posters attempting to tell others how they should or shouldn't feel about the situation, only to chime in later in the same thread and imply someone's missing out, presuming (by your own phrasing) that they weren't coming to their conclusion based on their own assessment of the product's value to them, but based upon others' "rhetoric".

    Not everyone assesses a purchase the same way you do.  You're quick to point that out when you wanna berate someone else, but the point seems totally lost on you now.
    It's a discussion forum. I made a comment to a poster about the thread topic. I'm not berating him and I certainly didn't talk down to him. I stand by that opinion. If someone likes a game and really wants to play it then they should and not let others influence that decision.

    And for anyone reading his post, or yours, I'd say if they listen to your rhetoric and miss out on a good game then they're only screwing themselves. What a waste to miss out because some else is offended by a game for a week or two.

    Do you play games like this, or play games at all?
    Then you're telling them how they should assess a purchase, which is exactly what you berated others for doing.  You're just on the other side of it and trying to deflect from the idea that you are telling them how to assess it by insisting he did nothing but listen to "rhetoric".  It has the added effect of implying you think he didn't assess the value of the purchase on his own terms, but on someone else's.

    I play many games, and you know that from previous threads.  I don't purchase games for a solely singleplayer experience, so the monetization tactics of the multiplayer side and how it affects the experience is important to me (EDIT-, I should say generally here, as I do make exceptions for some RPG experiences such as Pillars of Eternity).  By all accounts, Battlefront 2 didn't need such predatory tactics to entice players to play.  I played Battlefield 4 for hundreds of hours, so I know how talented DICE is.  But I won't be playing Battlefront 2, because supporting such predatory tactics has shown to signal to publishers they can push the line a little further next time.  It's not something I'm interested in supporting, because it destroys the integrity of the multiplayer portion.
    Post edited by MadFrenchie on
    IselinGdemami

    image
  • SlicksnoopySlicksnoopy Member CommonPosts: 1
    An 8.5??? Are you high? I unfortunately bought the deluxe addition and have been able to play over the past few days. Yes the game looks great, yes the game sounds great. The campaign is 4 hours long and no conclusion, the multiplayer is 100% pay2win, and if that's not bad enough they locked how many credits you can earn in arcade mode behind a time wall because EA felt that it could be exploited. So to sum it up playing the game and earning your credits and progression is viewed as bad, but pulling out your credit card and buying your advantage 100% ok. Go fuck yourself EA and this shit review.
    Gdemami
  • CazrielCazriel San Francisco, CAMember UncommonPosts: 228
    "The objective reality is that they’ve already changed the way games are designed and released, and that’s going to impact reviews and the critical discussion around each game."

    And there's the rub. You're no longer buying a game. You're buying a shell wherein you then get to buy the rest of the game. It won't destroy gaming, but it will entirely change the way we game and the games we choose to play. Studying how a game is monetized will be more important than the game itself because it will define the gameplay.
    Nilden
  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCMember LegendaryPosts: 10,152
    Cazriel said:
    "The objective reality is that they’ve already changed the way games are designed and released, and that’s going to impact reviews and the critical discussion around each game."

    And there's the rub. You're no longer buying a game. You're buying a shell wherein you then get to buy the rest of the game. It won't destroy gaming, but it will entirely change the way we game and the games we choose to play. Studying how a game is monetized will be more important than the game itself because it will define the gameplay.
    And it is also an extremely important consideration in reviewing games if the reviewer cares about keeping a connection with their audience and the credibility they live or die by.

    GdemamiNilden
    Ah, you've been with the professors and they've all liked your looks
    With great lawyers you have discussed lepers and crooks
    You've been through all of F. Scott Fitzgerald's books
    You're very well-read, it's well-known
    But something is happening here and you don't know what it is
    Do you, Mr. Jones?
  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Chicago, ILMember EpicPosts: 5,964
    I am simply never going to spend $60 on any computer game. But then, I think people are crazy for what they pay to watch sports live, too. Or the money some put into "F2P" games so they can have their virtual goodies, castles and empires. The whole world seems to be going crazy in a lot of different ways.
    I think everyone has something.  For some people it's gambling, traveling, or collecting clothes, shoes, cars, or like you said, sports.  Even with a high end PC and getting the latest games, gaming isn't all that expensive compared to some other hobbies people have.

    "Change is the only constant."

  • beebop500beebop500 IndianaMember UncommonPosts: 154
    I have been a Star Wars geek for most of my life, and still am, but honestly (IMHO) feel that the franchise is terribly watered-down now.  I didn't think the last two movies were very good at all, and doubt the next one will be much better.  I just think there's too much of it, and when you start to let Everyman write books, scripts, shows, etc, you just thin the pot too much.  I do still love the franchise but haven't been seeking anything Star Wars related for several years now.
    d_20
    "We are all as God made us, and many of us much worse." - Don Quixote
  • NildenNilden Canada, NBMember RarePosts: 2,262
    Image result for star wars not the droids gif

    It's funny how the Star Wars game we have been looking for had to have Disney call EA to shut down it's loot box microtransactions...
    d_20Gdemami

    "classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
    Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer


  • d_20d_20 SeoulMember RarePosts: 1,591
    Iselin said:
    Cazriel said:
    "The objective reality is that they’ve already changed the way games are designed and released, and that’s going to impact reviews and the critical discussion around each game."

    And there's the rub. You're no longer buying a game. You're buying a shell wherein you then get to buy the rest of the game. It won't destroy gaming, but it will entirely change the way we game and the games we choose to play. Studying how a game is monetized will be more important than the game itself because it will define the gameplay.
    And it is also an extremely important consideration in reviewing games if the reviewer cares about keeping a connection with their audience and the credibility they live or die by.

    I don't think many people come here for the reviews.

    image
  • TheDarkrayneTheDarkrayne UKMember RarePosts: 3,366
    I'm waiting to see what they come back with once micro transactions are enabled again before deciding whether or not I should buy it. I definitely wasn't going to buy it before.

    No more debates or opinions, the ball is in EA's court now and the whole online gaming community is watching. It's pointless talking about it and reviewing it now until we see what's next but I think if you haven't bought it yet, you should wait.
    I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
  • WizardryWizardry Ontario, CanadaMember EpicPosts: 13,108
    Gamer's tend to be very competitive,that is why micro transactions can flourish,players will do whatever it takes to get ahead.
    I believe the business side most certainly should factor into the scoring because these tactics turn me right off ,so they turn a game from whatever to a 0/10 for me,meaning no way am i playing their business  model,not a chance in hell.

    The analogy would be like ,do you want to pay 100k for a new Corvette knowing that if you want the key it is another 20k,tires,another 20k,Flex fuel +20k,a stereo +20k and so on and so on,people would be like screw that no way, your car is worth nothing with those added costs.

    Devs are in essence double and triple dipping on costs to buy and play these games as intended.This is  very similar to devs who were charging 15 added bucks a month ,then charging you again for an expansion pack that used the same engine,menus,formulas,sub programs and often same textures/tiles ,assets etc etc,knowing the 15 bucks a month was MORE than offsetting their server costs and was easily paying for their staff to add content to support that added 15 bucks,only now devs have found they can get more than 15 a month.

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCMember LegendaryPosts: 10,152
    d_20 said:
    Iselin said:
    Cazriel said:
    "The objective reality is that they’ve already changed the way games are designed and released, and that’s going to impact reviews and the critical discussion around each game."

    And there's the rub. You're no longer buying a game. You're buying a shell wherein you then get to buy the rest of the game. It won't destroy gaming, but it will entirely change the way we game and the games we choose to play. Studying how a game is monetized will be more important than the game itself because it will define the gameplay.
    And it is also an extremely important consideration in reviewing games if the reviewer cares about keeping a connection with their audience and the credibility they live or die by.

    I don't think many people come here for the reviews.
    Maybe you and I don't. But I quite often go to sites that I don't visit often after clicking the "read full review" link on Metacritic for a game I'm interested in.

    It's a good way to generate new traffic.
    d_20
    Ah, you've been with the professors and they've all liked your looks
    With great lawyers you have discussed lepers and crooks
    You've been through all of F. Scott Fitzgerald's books
    You're very well-read, it's well-known
    But something is happening here and you don't know what it is
    Do you, Mr. Jones?
  • OldKingLogOldKingLog Member CommonPosts: 9
    I'm waiting to see what they come back with once micro transactions are enabled again before deciding whether or not I should buy it. I definitely wasn't going to buy it before.

    No more debates or opinions, the ball is in EA's court now and the whole online gaming community is watching. It's pointless talking about it and reviewing it now until we see what's next but I think if you haven't bought it yet, you should wait.
    I'm just not bothering to buy the game at all. Most people seem to have been annoyed by the pay to win element of the game. Its the progression system itself that they built the game around to entice players towards the cash shop that ruins it for me. Even if the microtransactions never return that system is still going to be in place making the game feel like more of a grind and less entertaining than it could be.
  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCMember LegendaryPosts: 10,152
    I'm waiting to see what they come back with once micro transactions are enabled again before deciding whether or not I should buy it. I definitely wasn't going to buy it before.

    No more debates or opinions, the ball is in EA's court now and the whole online gaming community is watching. It's pointless talking about it and reviewing it now until we see what's next but I think if you haven't bought it yet, you should wait.
    I'm just not bothering to buy the game at all. Most people seem to have been annoyed by the pay to win element of the game. Its the progression system itself that they built the game around to entice players towards the cash shop that ruins it for me. Even if the microtransactions never return that system is still going to be in place making the game feel like more of a grind and less entertaining than it could be.
    If they go to cosmetic loot boxes, there would no longer be a need to make the progression super grindy to drive players to the shop.

    There's an article at Venturebeat that talks about how at one point in development cosmetic loot boxes was what they were planning. 

    So there is a way to fix it if they really want to do it. 
    MadFrenchie
    Ah, you've been with the professors and they've all liked your looks
    With great lawyers you have discussed lepers and crooks
    You've been through all of F. Scott Fitzgerald's books
    You're very well-read, it's well-known
    But something is happening here and you don't know what it is
    Do you, Mr. Jones?
Sign In or Register to comment.