Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
I had fun, but a few drawbacks
Consequence
Member UncommonPosts: 358
Overal i think its a pretty simple yet fun design. But, it will get old fast in its current state.
I am worried because EA is notorious for NOT putting money into games after release. They will need to expand on weapons, vehicles, maps, etc... over time and I just dont know if EA will do that.
My only other knock is the weapon balance. Some weapons are dramatically more powerful than others. Its not a highly twitch based combat system, which is ok no big deal, but skill wont matter at all the way the game is right now. Being in a good position, like behind cover, wont help you if the guy shooting at you has 1 of the superior weapons and you dont.
I dont want to sound all negative because the game can be a lot of fun. I had some moments in beta where I laughed my ass off. I just dont know if it is a game that will hold attention for long. It seems to me to be more of a sidekick game that you play a few minutes here or there with a buddy between sessions of another game that you prefer.
Comments
I hope you are wrong that they will not put effort into this game after release. This is a subscription based game so i do not think that will happen.
This is not an EA game, its made by RTW, EA is just the distributor partner.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
EA has DAoC and as old as it is it saw and expansion not that long ago, UO even as old as it is it saw an expansion not that long ago. War and constant work has went into it. Even there single player games see money and further development DA, Mass effect, Mass effect 2, etc.
So the fact that they continue to sink time and money in there other MMO's even well after launch and do the same with there single player games.... I don't see how you came to the conclusion you have? How are they notorious for this?
EA is the publisher. Being the publisher, EA is responsible for distribution as well as funding RTW to allow them to expand on the game.
^^ What he said. How did you come to that conclusion? Do you have proof or are you just talking out of your ass?
Whether or not they will implement upgrades improvements continue to give great support, expansions all depends on players like yourself in a way. As long as subscriptions remain at a healthy level, and they are getting the sufficient revenue they feel they need from the game, they will continue to give it attention and have a working dev crew on the game. If the subscriptions keep falling and the player population declines to a level they deem unhealthy, then you have something to start worrying about.
<QQ moar plz. kkthxbai.>
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
Where is the evidence for your retort?
I see the argument that superior weapon = win. I know people have varying skill levels, but I find that any weapon is beatable even with a lesser gun. I mean, if you stand there and just hold down your attack button until one of you dies, then yeah, the better gun wins, but this game is about tactics in addition to weaponry. It's about utilizing cover and finding ways to flank your opponent. That's my view anyway.
I've never really had a problem with EA. I've seen them add new updates and maps for the Battlefield series, which isn't even an MMO. They also have a history of DLC, whether or not you like it is a different subject, so they do add new content to games.
Regarding weapon balance, they seem to be situationally balanced. No one gun is best in every situation.
I'm not here to complete my forum PVP dailies.
naat, they dont update the battleifled series at all.... we have had no new map packs or anything new for quite a while in BFBC2... the "map packs" are simply the same maps with different spawns....
I guess it's a good thing RTW is the development house behind APB.
I don't have experience with BFBC2, my PC can't run it. However, with BF2142, they added new maps a year and a half after release, with patches.
I'm not here to complete my forum PVP dailies.
My point on that topic was that what you describe is not how the game plays out. Perhaps it will after some patches and some further developement. I hope so. I found the player combat somewhat lacking and in general the player with the better gun wins every time. There will always be exceptions because there is no accounting for tards, but getting into a good position, behind cover, on high ground or whatever really doesnt do anything for you against certain powerful weapons.
Its a minor gripe, but it does make a difference.
For example: my 1st few missions(when I didnt have a good gun) were "defend X location missions" and in a lot of cases my team got there 1st and got into good positions 1st, it made little difference. Guns that shoot faster and do more dmg with each bullet, or guns that shoot grenades are "Iwin" buttons against early access guns.
Later, after I had developed further and made some money, I aquired some of those weapons and the exact opposite would happen. I would dominate players despite them clearly having the better position.