I don't think the reviewer did a good job reviewing, so here's a better one.
The Division 2 is infinitely better than The Division 1 in every single way. The gunplay, rpg elements, gearing, specialization/class system, health/armor system and even the Snowdrop engine is better.
Not only did they learn from TD1's mistakes, they went beyond. I spent over 30 hours in the Open Beta, plan to spend over 3,000 on the live game.
I don't think the reviewer did a good job reviewing, so here's a better one.
The Division 2 is infinitely better than The Division 1 in every single way. The gunplay, rpg elements, gearing, specialization/class system, health/armor system and even the Snowdrop engine is better.
Not only did they learn from TD1's mistakes, they went beyond. I spent over 30 hours in the Open Beta, plan to spend over 3,000 on the live game.
Oh yea, m4 assault rifles are super sci fi, they don't exist in 2019 at all.
Looks like the only person moving the "goalposts" around is you, and it's not working out so well for you.
Yeah and drones repairing your armour, seeing enemy outlines through concrete and mines chasing their targets are all weapons that exist in 2019.
I can't believe you still think The Div was supposed to be a realistic simulator
You're trying too hard.
You said, "seeing enemy outlines through concrete". Thank you for providing more details that shows the division is crap.
By your own words, you go ahead and keep on moving that "goalposts" around. You're just digging your own grave at this point.
I'm glad you liked my goalposts quote and keep on using it every chance you get hoping it'll stick somewhere
While you're at it, I'll keep pointing out the silly things you say while you think I'm digging my own grave.
At least I'm happy you finally realized the game isn't supposed to be entirely realistic. Maybe you should step back and change your argument then: still think a post-apocalyptic scifi looter shooter should let you kill all enemies with a single headshot?
Maybe you should design a game like that.. I think you're on to something very special.
I keep using it because it shows how much you project yourself onto others. Something that you do often yourself, then accusing others of it.
You haven't pointed out a single silly thing. Now you're just delusional. But hey, remember when you described quake as a game with modern weapons and modern settings. That was so embarrassing for you.
Oh I love this next part. Your words: "the game isn't supposed to be entirely realistic". Thank you again for point out why the game is crap. You're six feet under now kid.
I thought you were joking, but apparently, you think m4 assault rifles are sci fi. Oh wow. Now you're twelve feet under.
A SRS marksman rifle head shot kills a human flesh is a bad idea according to you. Looks like you lose again. Because everyone that played the division 1 disagrees with you on that. It's in the comments everywhere. But hey, you can't read so, I can understand your delusion.
Oh yes, I'm on to something special. You finally said something that's agreeable.
How am I projecting when you said the game was crap because you can't kill enemies with one headshot
You say I haven't pointed a single silly thing you said (which I have) and then you go on saying the game is crap because it's not entirely realistic. A very valid argument to use in an mmo forum while talking about a post apocalyptic scifi game
Then you somehow say I'm six feet under and a kid, both of which are pretty silly. I'm obviously not a kid (wish I was) and I'm pretty sure six feet of soil would block my wifi signal. Try another insult.
Let's repeat a few things since you obviously missed them... the sniper spec can one shot people... though it has limited ammo. Most of the time you can't one shot people, because that wouldn't really make for very good gameplay... The division is meant to be a looter shooter with rpg elements, not a clicker game. The setting is science fiction.... it's set in post-apocalyptic Washington DC... that should give you a hint.
Lots of people have lots of opinions.. there's shitloads of people loving what they saw in beta, there's also lots of people who want different things than what they saw. This is the internet.. everyone has an opinion. You, I and this conversation is proof of that but I'm glad we can agree that your opinion is special though.
Shame this conversation had to reach this silly stage.
Oh yea, m4 assault rifles are super sci fi, they don't exist in 2019 at all.
Looks like the only person moving the "goalposts" around is you, and it's not working out so well for you.
Yeah and drones repairing your armour, seeing enemy outlines through concrete and mines chasing their targets are all weapons that exist in 2019.
I can't believe you still think The Div was supposed to be a realistic simulator
You're trying too hard.
You said, "seeing enemy outlines through concrete". Thank you for providing more details that shows the division is crap.
By your own words, you go ahead and keep on moving that "goalposts" around. You're just digging your own grave at this point.
I'm glad you liked my goalposts quote and keep on using it every chance you get hoping it'll stick somewhere
While you're at it, I'll keep pointing out the silly things you say while you think I'm digging my own grave.
At least I'm happy you finally realized the game isn't supposed to be entirely realistic. Maybe you should step back and change your argument then: still think a post-apocalyptic scifi looter shooter should let you kill all enemies with a single headshot?
Maybe you should design a game like that.. I think you're on to something very special.
I keep using it because it shows how much you project yourself onto others. Something that you do often yourself, then accusing others of it.
You haven't pointed out a single silly thing. Now you're just delusional. But hey, remember when you described quake as a game with modern weapons and modern settings. That was so embarrassing for you.
Oh I love this next part. Your words: "the game isn't supposed to be entirely realistic". Thank you again for point out why the game is crap. You're six feet under now kid.
I thought you were joking, but apparently, you think m4 assault rifles are sci fi. Oh wow. Now you're twelve feet under.
A SRS marksman rifle head shot kills a human flesh is a bad idea according to you. Looks like you lose again. Because everyone that played the division 1 disagrees with you on that. It's in the comments everywhere. But hey, you can't read so, I can understand your delusion.
Oh yes, I'm on to something special. You finally said something that's agreeable.
How am I projecting when you said the game was crap because you can't kill enemies with one headshot
You say I haven't pointed a single silly thing you said (which I have) and then you go on saying the game is crap because it's not entirely realistic. A very valid argument to use in an mmo forum while talking about a post apocalyptic scifi game
Then you somehow say I'm six feet under and a kid, both of which are pretty silly. I'm obviously not a kid (wish I was) and I'm pretty sure six feet of soil would block my wifi signal. Try another insult.
Let's repeat a few things since you obviously missed them... the sniper spec can one shot people... though it has limited ammo. Most of the time you can't one shot people, because that wouldn't really make for very good gameplay... The division is meant to be a looter shooter with rpg elements, not a clicker game. The setting is science fiction.... it's set in post-apocalyptic Washington DC... that should give you a hint.
Lots of people have lots of opinions.. there's shitloads of people loving what they saw in beta, there's also lots of people who want different things than what they saw. This is the internet.. everyone has an opinion. You, I and this conversation is proof of that but I'm glad we can agree that your opinion is special though.
Shame this conversation had to reach this silly stage.
No kidding, you really are a bad reader. Okay lets go through this one at a time. Try to keep up.
I said to you: "that doesn't work for modern guns with modern settings."
Then, of course you can't read well. So you followed with: "Sure it does. It works for The Div, Apex Legends, Quake, Unreal Tournament, Titanfall, Call of Duty, Battlefield, etc etc etc"
See that right there? You just described quake and unreal as games with modern guns with modern settings. Obviously quake and unreal do not have modern guns in a modern day setting. That was extremely embarrassing for you. Side note, Cod and battlefield are not bullet sponges.
To stay on topic, the argument is: "that doesn't work for modern guns with modern settings." Since you did not provide a single game that is bullet sponge with modern guns in a modern day setting, you lost the argument. That should have been the end.
Then you proceeded to accuse me of this so called "move the goalposts around". This is where you are projecting yourself onto me, and you clearly do not know what that means, hence why I called you a kid. But that's okay, I'm gonna explain it to you.
After you lost your argument, you proceeded to change the subject to sci fi and realistic simulators. That was never the topic or the argument. Basically, you were doing the "move the goalposts around" that you accused me of. That is defined as psychological projection. Something that you do often, and you project that onto others.
Great! You learned something new. This was very educational for you.
Okay next.
"Six feet under" is used as a metaphor for your argument. I won't teach you what a metaphor is here, you can just look that up in the dictionary yourself, kid.
And finally.
The fact that the division 2 is claimed to be less spongy by the developer themselves, shows that my argument is correct. Bullet sponge does not work for modern guns with modern settings.
And that's checkmate.
I'm still baffled by you calling m4 assault rifle and drones sci fi features. You really should watch the news sometime. The US military has been using drones for quite awhile, nothing sci fi about that.
I'm glad you realized people have opinions, and mine is that bullet sponge doesn't work for cover shooters with modern games in a modern setting. Now you just have to learn to be okay with that and not get so triggered. It is a shame indeed.
So for someone who missed out on the first, is this one worth getting into? Playing and enjoying Anthem right now but thought this looked pretty good as well.
Was still too bullet-spongy for me (and this after the redo, apparently), but it looked nice and played well. Very few glitches on my PC, and that was on wireless. I'm just playing Div1 now, so Div2 will probably have to wait til the price comes down a lot before I switch.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Well I guess I have a bias because I really liked the first Division game. For me the open beta was super smooth. In the private beta the only real issue I had was fixed by running dx11 mode. In the open beta I didn't have that issue.
The only real issue I had in open was after you had access to the three level 30 specs. I was moving through that mission super slow the first time and eventually had a crash where it reset. So I picked up the pace just to get through the mission. I'm not sure if it was time related and likely a memory leak or just a one time thing.
I feel for the people that are legit having some kind of issue. I put quite a few hours in each day it was up and had the one crash.
Just looking forward to release and then I'll be on a pretty slow track. Simply because I like doing all the side missions and exploring around the map.
So for someone who missed out on the first, is this one worth getting into? Playing and enjoying Anthem right now but thought this looked pretty good as well.
The second one will be much better for newer players overall. Everything is explained pretty well, there's much much more content, and a lot more stuff to do out of the box. Plus all the content updates for the first year are free, so no worries if you stop playing for 6 months and come back to it, you won't have to buy anything else.
If you want realism go participate in America's Army. I don't.
I want to play games. So I play games like The Division 2. The open beta was good enough to keep my curiosity up. I may buy it when it's on sale.
"I used to think the worst thing in life was to be all alone. It's not. The worst thing in life is to end up with people who make you feel all alone." Robin Williams
I don't care how smooth the gameplay was or how great the core game itself becomes over time, the game world's narrative is what completely turned me off.
These writers knew exactly what they were writing, and if you take the time to listen to the games audio tapes hidden throughout the levels; it paints a disturbing picture that mimics real life in American society; and absolutely plays and exploits on our fears of a psychotic presidency and the old Soviet Union coming back into power to bring war to the United States.
The first Division had such a better Story, and although far from original, at least it didn't have to draw from political fear-mongering to heighten the narrative.
From what i experienced in the closed/open beta of D2, the original Division's beginning first hour of gameplay felt FAR superior versus how this one felt, and to be fair this could be me just seeing Division 2 through the lens of an unfinished product, i don't know, but i really did not enjoy it anywhere near as i enjoyed the first game.
Why does this need to be a bullet sponge game? It's already a cover shooter. If you're behind cover and the enemy is shooting at you, that's called suppressive fire. If you poke you head out then you get shot and die. Common sense 101.
You're not wearing futuristic vibranium metal armor. You don't have space alien technology energy shields. Why are you taking 20 shots to the face and still alive and kicking?
This game is 1000% turn off.
But you don't mind the completely realistic plague that crippled North America, whose gangs as we speak ravage the former capitol of the United States?
All the people saying its not realistic enough with headshots, please explain the completely realistic collapse of North America and the fall of the capitol to raider gangs.
My main gripe was the female characters. It's like they went out of their way to make every female into some asexual androgynous blob so as not to offend anyone. I get that it's a post disaster setting, but not every woman needed to be a flat butt, flat chest, dog ugly render. And btw UBI, keep gender politics out of video games please. Body type vs gender. What is this world coming to.
This isn't that type of game. Not every game has to be like black desert online or vindictus. Developers with horny thoughts pretty much always make crap games.
So, you need to be horny to make realistic women? Thats kinda funny... am i to assume you do not have much experience with women IRL?
Why does this need to be a bullet sponge game? It's already a cover shooter. If you're behind cover and the enemy is shooting at you, that's called suppressive fire. If you poke you head out then you get shot and die. Common sense 101.
You're not wearing futuristic vibranium metal armor. You don't have space alien technology energy shields. Why are you taking 20 shots to the face and still alive and kicking?
This game is 1000% turn off.
But you don't mind the completely realistic plague that crippled North America, whose gangs as we speak ravage the former capitol of the United States?
Oh wait.. ...
/s
??
That's story... You understand that story and gameplay are two separate things?
Oh yea, m4 assault rifles are super sci fi, they don't exist in 2019 at all.
Looks like the only person moving the "goalposts" around is you, and it's not working out so well for you.
Yeah and drones repairing your armour, seeing enemy outlines through concrete and mines chasing their targets are all weapons that exist in 2019.
I can't believe you still think The Div was supposed to be a realistic simulator
You're trying too hard.
You said, "seeing enemy outlines through concrete". Thank you for providing more details that shows the division is crap.
Im not even going to go fan boy and defend the division #1 was shit and most of us quit that after launch. However he is refering to a skill that can temporarly ping enemy locations and highlight them for a short time. Realistic? No... fun to gameplay? At times yes.
My main gripe was the female characters. It's like they went out of their way to make every female into some asexual androgynous blob so as not to offend anyone. I get that it's a post disaster setting, but not every woman needed to be a flat butt, flat chest, dog ugly render. And btw UBI, keep gender politics out of video games please. Body type vs gender. What is this world coming to.
This isn't that type of game. Not every game has to be like black desert online or vindictus. Developers with horny thoughts pretty much always make crap games.
So, you need to be horny to make realistic women? Thats kinda funny... am i to assume you do not have much experience with women IRL?
Wtf? You're implying if a women character is not attractive, then she's not realistic. Do you hear yourself? When is the last time you left your cave?
I generally enjoyed the beta, a few glitches but nothing game breaking or show stopping, and I didn't personally have any performance issues (i5-4670K 3.4GHz, 32GB RAM, GTX1070).
It also felt like a significant upgrade on The Division 1 (yes, it is has the same general gameplay; it's a sequel, what do you expect?)
- New enemy types and better variety overall (e.g. some enemies have head armour but no body armour so aiming for the head isn't always the best option).
- New armour system is a massive improvement (e.g. enemies generally feel less bullet spongy and react when hit in the 'fleshy' bits).
- A few new weapons / weapon types / weapon rebalances (e.g. Semi-auto rifles are now distinct, MGs now do that thing where they get more accurate the longer you hold down the trigger).
- Side missions are much more fleshed out (e.g. even random enemy encounters / world events are better than the side tasks in The Division 1)
- Open world feels slightly more 'alive' and more believable (e.g. friendly and enemy patrols frequently fight each other, far less random half-dead civilians wondering about)
- Control points (open world PvE capture points) are fun and rewarding to engage (supposedly these can be re-captured by enemy factions, but I didn’t see this happen in the beta).
Some points of concern:
- Dark Zone didn't feel rewarding; even 'elites' dropped only greens (if anything at all) ... I got much better gear (including a few purples) just doing random PvE world events. (Disclaimer: I didn't get any 'infected' gear from Dark Zone supply drops, so don't know how worth it they are).
- Shotgun was useful at low levels, but playing the pre-made 'end-game' character with the shotgun was horrible... I found an assault rifle half way through the mission and it killed things 10 times faster (and from a much longer range).
- Assault Rifle still feels like the 'king' of weapon types, Rifle (semi-auto) and Marksman Rifle (sniper) were also OK... I think this mainly stems from the game being deadlier (i.e. no more instant med-kits) which makes getting up close or simply being out of cover a death sentence in a lot of situations (a proper Shotgun / SMG / MG based build may fix this).
- Robots (end-game faction) were super annoying and super bullet spongy... maybe it was just the limited nature of the beta (most skills were locked), but I didn't find any good or interesting way to deal with them.
- NPCs that inhabit 'safe-zones' (e.g. base of operations) are still 'static'... e.g. the lady cleaning the same window 24/7 for the rest of eternity.
I generally enjoyed the beta, a few glitches but nothing game breaking or show stopping, and I didn't personally have any performance issues (i5-4670K 3.4GHz, 32GB RAM, GTX1070).
It also felt like a significant upgrade on The Division 1 (yes, it is has the same general gameplay; it's a sequel, what do you expect?)
- New enemy types and better variety overall (e.g. some enemies have head armour but no body armour so aiming for the head isn't always the best option).
- New armour system is a massive improvement (e.g. enemies generally feel less bullet spongy and react when hit in the 'fleshy' bits).
- A few new weapons / weapon types / weapon rebalances (e.g. Semi-auto rifles are now distinct, MGs now do that thing where they get more accurate the longer you hold down the trigger).
- Side missions are much more fleshed out (e.g. even random enemy encounters / world events are better than the side tasks in The Division 1)
- Open world feels slightly more 'alive' and more believable (e.g. friendly and enemy patrols frequently fight each other, far less random half-dead civilians wondering about)
- Control points (open world PvE capture points) are fun and rewarding to engage (supposedly these can be re-captured by enemy factions, but I didn’t see this happen in the beta).
Some points of concern:
- Dark Zone didn't feel rewarding; even 'elites' dropped only greens (if anything at all) ... I got much better gear (including a few purples) just doing random PvE world events. (Disclaimer: I didn't get any 'infected' gear from Dark Zone supply drops, so don't know how worth it they are).
- Shotgun was useful at low levels, but playing the pre-made 'end-game' character with the shotgun was horrible... I found an assault rifle half way through the mission and it killed things 10 times faster (and from a much longer range).
- Assault Rifle still feels like the 'king' of weapon types, Rifle (semi-auto) and Marksman Rifle (sniper) were also OK... I think this mainly stems from the game being deadlier (i.e. no more instant med-kits) which makes getting up close or simply being out of cover a death sentence in a lot of situations (a proper Shotgun / SMG / MG based build may fix this).
- Robots (end-game faction) were super annoying and super bullet spongy... maybe it was just the limited nature of the beta (most skills were locked), but I didn't find any good or interesting way to deal with them.
- NPCs that inhabit 'safe-zones' (e.g. base of operations) are still 'static'... e.g. the lady cleaning the same window 24/7 for the rest of eternity.
For the DZ I think it's just the low level stuff, the higher the levels the better the chance you'll get rarer drops. For example the best I found at level 8 was blue gear, but yellow dropped several times per run at max level.
I'm with you on the shotgun thing, it doesn't scale very well. I complained about this on the official forums but I guess it's lower priority. With the faster kill times, it's a little bit better, but I still feel that the damage, shut delay and reload time don't work out to be a great choice for weaponry. Maybe with the right gear...
SMG's feel like they're close range critical damage masters, but usually the range of the assault rifle makes them much better for just about everything.
The robots I didn't find to be as spongy as in the private test, especially now that I could break their armor quickly with special weapons. Would be better if shotguns didn't have a melee boost but instead had an armor break boost.
Wow, im just amazed how much energy ppl are willing to spend just to make their point that they dont like a game, that its bad and that your stupid if you actually dont agree with what you are saying? Its so much easier to just walk away, and write about or comment on something that is closer to your liking instead. Its not like your gonna change the minds of those that truly love the game, looking forward to it and actually enjoy it.
And the whole realistic discussion again? Like videogames are ever realistic, sigh
Division series is a little cheaper than Destiny, but still, I understand that the 60€ includes 3 updates. But it's a bit like charging upfront. Why don't they have a 30€ version with no updates? The reason I'm a little on the defensive is that I've spent 60€ on so many games in the past and played them a week and never looked back. The difference here is that they reuse many assets and it feels it should be cheaper, but that's just me. I don't have so much time to play in march, easter is coming up, I'll check if ir's on sale in april, and pick it up then.
Comments
The Division 2 is infinitely better than The Division 1 in every single way. The gunplay, rpg elements, gearing, specialization/class system, health/armor system and even the Snowdrop engine is better.
Not only did they learn from TD1's mistakes, they went beyond. I spent over 30 hours in the Open Beta, plan to spend over 3,000 on the live game.
You say I haven't pointed a single silly thing you said (which I have) and then you go on saying the game is crap because it's not entirely realistic. A very valid argument to use in an mmo forum while talking about a post apocalyptic scifi game
Then you somehow say I'm six feet under and a kid, both of which are pretty silly.
I'm obviously not a kid (wish I was) and I'm pretty sure six feet of soil would block my wifi signal.
Try another insult.
Let's repeat a few things since you obviously missed them... the sniper spec can one shot people... though it has limited ammo. Most of the time you can't one shot people, because that wouldn't really make for very good gameplay... The division is meant to be a looter shooter with rpg elements, not a clicker game.
The setting is science fiction.... it's set in post-apocalyptic Washington DC... that should give you a hint.
Lots of people have lots of opinions.. there's shitloads of people loving what they saw in beta, there's also lots of people who want different things than what they saw.
This is the internet.. everyone has an opinion.
You, I and this conversation is proof of that but I'm glad we can agree that your opinion is special though.
Shame this conversation had to reach this silly stage.
..Cake..
but i dont like the setting. too much distracting clutter everwere.
I enjoyed the first one.
I'll enjoy this one.
Please don't kill me with your pitch forks.
I said to you: "that doesn't work for modern guns with modern settings."
Then, of course you can't read well. So you followed with: "Sure it does.
It works for The Div, Apex Legends, Quake, Unreal Tournament, Titanfall, Call of Duty, Battlefield, etc etc etc"
See that right there? You just described quake and unreal as games with modern guns with modern settings. Obviously quake and unreal do not have modern guns in a modern day setting. That was extremely embarrassing for you. Side note, Cod and battlefield are not bullet sponges.
To stay on topic, the argument is: "that doesn't work for modern guns with modern settings." Since you did not provide a single game that is bullet sponge with modern guns in a modern day setting, you lost the argument. That should have been the end.
Then you proceeded to accuse me of this so called "move the goalposts around". This is where you are projecting yourself onto me, and you clearly do not know what that means, hence why I called you a kid. But that's okay, I'm gonna explain it to you.
After you lost your argument, you proceeded to change the subject to sci fi and realistic simulators. That was never the topic or the argument. Basically, you were doing the "move the goalposts around" that you accused me of. That is defined as psychological projection. Something that you do often, and you project that onto others.
Great! You learned something new. This was very educational for you.
Okay next.
"Six feet under" is used as a metaphor for your argument. I won't teach you what a metaphor is here, you can just look that up in the dictionary yourself, kid.
And finally.
The fact that the division 2 is claimed to be less spongy by the developer themselves, shows that my argument is correct. Bullet sponge does not work for modern guns with modern settings.
And that's checkmate.
I'm still baffled by you calling m4 assault rifle and drones sci fi features. You really should watch the news sometime. The US military has been using drones for quite awhile, nothing sci fi about that.
I'm glad you realized people have opinions, and mine is that bullet sponge doesn't work for cover shooters with modern games in a modern setting. Now you just have to learn to be okay with that and not get so triggered. It is a shame indeed.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
The only real issue I had in open was after you had access to the three level 30 specs. I was moving through that mission super slow the first time and eventually had a crash where it reset. So I picked up the pace just to get through the mission. I'm not sure if it was time related and likely a memory leak or just a one time thing.
I feel for the people that are legit having some kind of issue. I put quite a few hours in each day it was up and had the one crash.
Just looking forward to release and then I'll be on a pretty slow track. Simply because I like doing all the side missions and exploring around the map.
I want to play games. So I play games like The Division 2. The open beta was good enough to keep my curiosity up. I may buy it when it's on sale.
These writers knew exactly what they were writing, and if you take the time to listen to the games audio tapes hidden throughout the levels; it paints a disturbing picture that mimics real life in American society; and absolutely plays and exploits on our fears of a psychotic presidency and the old Soviet Union coming back into power to bring war to the United States.
The first Division had such a better Story, and although far from original, at least it didn't have to draw from political fear-mongering to heighten the narrative.
From what i experienced in the closed/open beta of D2, the original Division's beginning first hour of gameplay felt FAR superior versus how this one felt, and to be fair this could be me just seeing Division 2 through the lens of an unfinished product, i don't know, but i really did not enjoy it anywhere near as i enjoyed the first game.
Fishing on Gilgamesh since 2013
But you don't mind the completely realistic plague that crippled North America, whose gangs as we speak ravage the former capitol of the United States?
Oh wait.. ...
/s
Thank you.
Now F Off.
So, you need to be horny to make realistic women? Thats kinda funny... am i to assume you do not have much experience with women IRL?
That's story... You understand that story and gameplay are two separate things?
I guess not...
Im not even going to go fan boy and defend the division #1 was shit and most of us quit that after launch. However he is refering to a skill that can temporarly ping enemy locations and highlight them for a short time. Realistic? No... fun to gameplay? At times yes.
It also felt like a significant upgrade on The Division 1 (yes, it is has the same general gameplay; it's a sequel, what do you expect?)
- New enemy types and better variety overall (e.g. some enemies have head armour but no body armour so aiming for the head isn't always the best option).
- New armour system is a massive improvement (e.g. enemies generally feel less bullet spongy and react when hit in the 'fleshy' bits).
- A few new weapons / weapon types / weapon rebalances (e.g. Semi-auto rifles are now distinct, MGs now do that thing where they get more accurate the longer you hold down the trigger).
- Side missions are much more fleshed out (e.g. even random enemy encounters / world events are better than the side tasks in The Division 1)
- Open world feels slightly more 'alive' and more believable (e.g. friendly and enemy patrols frequently fight each other, far less random half-dead civilians wondering about)
- Control points (open world PvE capture points) are fun and rewarding to engage (supposedly these can be re-captured by enemy factions, but I didn’t see this happen in the beta).
Some points of concern:
- Dark Zone didn't feel rewarding; even 'elites' dropped only greens (if anything at all) ... I got much better gear (including a few purples) just doing random PvE world events. (Disclaimer: I didn't get any 'infected' gear from Dark Zone supply drops, so don't know how worth it they are).
- Shotgun was useful at low levels, but playing the pre-made 'end-game' character with the shotgun was horrible... I found an assault rifle half way through the mission and it killed things 10 times faster (and from a much longer range).
- Assault Rifle still feels like the 'king' of weapon types, Rifle (semi-auto) and Marksman Rifle (sniper) were also OK... I think this mainly stems from the game being deadlier (i.e. no more instant med-kits) which makes getting up close or simply being out of cover a death sentence in a lot of situations (a proper Shotgun / SMG / MG based build may fix this).
- Robots (end-game faction) were super annoying and super bullet spongy... maybe it was just the limited nature of the beta (most skills were locked), but I didn't find any good or interesting way to deal with them.
- NPCs that inhabit 'safe-zones' (e.g. base of operations) are still 'static'... e.g. the lady cleaning the same window 24/7 for the rest of eternity.
I'm with you on the shotgun thing, it doesn't scale very well. I complained about this on the official forums but I guess it's lower priority. With the faster kill times, it's a little bit better, but I still feel that the damage, shut delay and reload time don't work out to be a great choice for weaponry. Maybe with the right gear...
SMG's feel like they're close range critical damage masters, but usually the range of the assault rifle makes them much better for just about everything.
The robots I didn't find to be as spongy as in the private test, especially now that I could break their armor quickly with special weapons. Would be better if shotguns didn't have a melee boost but instead had an armor break boost.
Let's party like it is 1863!
And the whole realistic discussion again? Like videogames are ever realistic, sigh