Overclock.net banner

[Official] Star Wars Battlefront Discussion Thread

11K views 343 replies 97 participants last post by  SoCalMX70 
#1 ·

Welcome to the Starwars Battlefront discussion thread!

Here are my thoughts on the beta thus far:

  • It is nothing like the classics.
  • It feels less "free" than BFII.
  • To me it feels like Battlefield with a Star Wars skin on it. They tweaked the mechanics and textures but other than that it plays just like Battlefield which for me ruins the experience.
  • The developers have clearly lost sight of the spirit of a Battlefront game over the last 10 years.
  • I highly doubt mods will be supported on the new game like they were on the old ones. This is a huge negative for me since I very much enjoyed the mods on BFII.
I'm interested to hear others thoughts on this game. Please feel free to disagree with me.
biggrin.gif
 
See less See more
2
#3 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by caenlen View Post

This game requires no skill at all. It lacks a certain substance I can't put a word to.
That's how I feel. It's lifeless.
 
#5 ·
It does look gorgeous to me in ultra.
 
#6 ·
Forgot to mention that the Imperial team is incredibly over powered in walker assault. It's more like walker slaughter.
 
#7 ·
4K LOW looks great and performs 60fps on my sig rig.

Loos better than 1080p Ultra...

I will buy the game but there is a chance I might wait for a sale. Not sure. I enjoyed the beta. It feels star wars to me. But of course just 2 maps bored me and I can't really complain about that.
 
#8 ·
I only played a few rounds last night, so I'll probably reserve my final judgement until logging more time with it but here are my initial thoughts:

I did enjoy the "Star Wars" themed environment, sounds effects and background score. However, there's nothing (yet) that really pulls me in to want to keep playing more than a few rounds at a time. It does play very similar to Battlefield 3/4, which isn't surprising and isn't necessarily a bad thing. If they can somehow manage to include some of the good things that Battlefield does and keep out most of the crap, then it could work very well. Not sure how I feel about the GUI and menu system. It seems overly simplified but not to the point where it's completely useless. Loading into the maps seems almost instantaneous so far, which is the biggest surprise. Albeit, I'm sure the servers haven't been loaded enough to cause any issues yet or maybe EA is finally starting to learn something
thinking.gif


At any rate, I'm not sure this is a day one purchase for me yet. But it could shape up to be a good game or even a great game.
 
#9 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by caenlen View Post

This game requires no skill at all. It lacks a certain substance I can't put a word to.
dice cant do better.
they lost the stuff since the BF2 design which was 10 years ago.
all crap now.
they cant fix it.

if they hired me but that wont happen..............
biggrin.gif
 
#10 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoomDash View Post

No substance. If they would have made all the objectives extremely impactful, and gave leadership roles with special abilities (like MAG), it could have been a good game. Will not be buying.
I don't follow. Every objective is absolutely necessary for winning the game in both game types.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tman5293 View Post

Forgot to mention that the Imperial team is incredibly over powered in walker assault. It's more like walker slaughter.
No actually it's not. I win all the time as rebels. You only lose because noobs don't take the time to understand what they are supposed to do on the rebels team (believe me I was one of them lol). Those uplinks you need to activate add fighter's every time they do a full circle, and then the more fighter's you have, the longer the AT-AT shields are down. Once the shields are down, all the noobs turn and start shooting their pee-shooters at it. Bad idea. Use turrets, and AIR is REALLY important. The A fighters damage the AT-AT ALOT, and also the snowspeeder can one hit them with it's hook which takes quite a bit of practice. Rebels take more teamwork, but in terms of balance, it is balanced IMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tman5293 View Post

I didn't see a thread so I made one. We could use somewhere to have a serious discussion about this game.

Here are my thoughts on the beta thus far:

  • It is nothing like the classics.
  • It feels less "free" than BFII.
  • To me it feels like Battlefield with a Star Wars skin on it. They tweaked the mechanics and textures but other than that it plays just like Battlefield which for me ruins the experience.
  • The developers have clearly lost sight of the spirit of a Battlefront game over the last 10 years.
  • I highly doubt mods will be supported on the new game like they were on the old ones. This is a huge negative for me since I very much enjoyed the mods on BFII.
I'm interested to hear others thoughts on this game. Please feel free to disagree with me.
biggrin.gif
- Because it's made a decade later on a completely different engine by a completely new game design company.

- It's not BF2, it's a completely new game (see above point), hence why it's named battlefront, not BF3.

- I have absolutely no idea how you could think this plays like battlefield it's not even close. I was thinking it would, but then I started playing. It is much more fast paced (like WAY more) than Battlefield, the FPS mechanics like bullet lead feel like I'm playing tribes with an auto pistol, which is awesome, and the vehicles are compleeeetely different. The AT-AT feels more like a ac130 from cod, the aircraft are ridiculously nimble and much faster than any in battlefield which makes dogfights more fun IMO. Also the ability and perk system is way different. I could go on and on. All I can say is ask your mom or dad (or really anyone who doesn't play games), to play battlefield, then load this game up for them. They will not tell you they feel like the same game, I can almost guarantee it. I feel like it's just because people know that dice is making the game... It's like M. Night Shyamalan movies... everyone dismisses them immediately now to the point that when he makes a good one, it will still get bad reviews lol.

- They are different developers so this is their take on it... and even then, it is quite similar where it needs to be. Honestly, I'm happy they didn't just make battlefront 2 and put a reskin. They took risks and tried new things. Thinking the safe way, we would have had a Warcraft 4 instead of World of Warcraft.

- I have never cared for mods at all, so I have nothing to say here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tman5293 View Post

That's how I feel. It's lifeless.
Until you actually understand what is going on lol.
Quote:
Originally Posted by caenlen View Post

This game requires no skill at all. It lacks a certain substance I can't put a word to.
There is definitely skill required lol. To say that the game requires no skill is like saying all FPS games require no skill. When you are playing noobs, you can absolutely feel the difference.
 
#11 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultracarpet View Post

- I have absolutely no idea how you could think this plays like battlefield it's not even close.
I can't speak for tman, but when I said it plays very similar to battlefield, I mean in the most general sense possible. And even then, the similarities or differences are very subjective. In my opinion, you can definitely tell they drew some inspiration from the battlefield series.
 
#12 ·
inspiration aside the game definitely doesnt play like battlefield. the style and flow of the map maybe yeah a little when it comes to a good map layout direction the battle flows

ive been hearing and reading a lot of complaining about the beta, most of it not here, but the game has its oddities that can easily be fixed like spawns, balance of maps, adjusting cooldown times on stuff. would be cool to see the option for team balancing might be there already but not present in the beta. also the walker assault is slightly empire sided but not impossible to win as rebels. air superiority is key on that game mode also the rebels have no ground vehicles which makes it tough to fight the AT-ST
 
#13 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by NicksTricks007 View Post

I can't speak for tman, but when I said it plays very similar to battlefield, I mean in the most general sense possible. And even then, the similarities or differences are very subjective. In my opinion, you can definitely tell they drew some inspiration from the battlefield series.
Again, though, I feel like if dice wasn't on the label, people would not be comparing this to battlefield at all.
 
#14 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultracarpet View Post

Again, though, I feel like if dice wasn't on the label, people would not be comparing this to battlefield at all.
I definitely see your point there. At any rate, I played a bit more this morning and before I realized it, I had played about a dozen matches. The game definitely grows on you once you actually start worrying more about defending/attacking objectives than just trying to stay alive. As for the balance issues in the Hoth map, I played 3 matches on each side and won every time no matter if we were rebel or imperial. Didn't seem to be favored one way or the other. And there is definitely some skill and strategy required to successfully secure an objective. I'll be spending more time tonight playing both maps for sure.
 
#15 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by NicksTricks007 View Post

I definitely see your point there. At any rate, I played a bit more this morning and before I realized it, I had played about a dozen matches. The game definitely grows on you once you actually start worrying more about defending/attacking objectives than just trying to stay alive. As for the balance issues in the Hoth map, I played 3 matches on each side and won every time no matter if we were rebel or imperial. Didn't seem to be favored one way or the other. And there is definitely some skill and strategy required to successfully secure an objective. I'll be spending more time tonight playing both maps for sure.
I think as gamers we get into a really critical state of mind (which isn't always a bad thing), and we forget that games are supposed to be fun. Just buckle in, get competitive and have fun. One of the funnest games I have played in a while... and it's a beta. I'm pretty excited for the full game.
 
#17 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultracarpet View Post

I think as gamers we get into a really critical state of mind (which isn't always a bad thing), and we forget that games are supposed to be fun. Just buckle in, get competitive and have fun. One of the funnest games I have played in a while... and it's a beta. I'm pretty excited for the full game.
For sure
thumb.gif

I will definitely be playing as much as I can before retail release.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conspiracy View Post

inspiration aside the game definitely doesnt play like battlefield. the style and flow of the map maybe yeah a little when it comes to a good map layout direction the battle flows

ive been hearing and reading a lot of complaining about the beta, most of it not here, but the game has its oddities that can easily be fixed like spawns, balance of maps, adjusting cooldown times on stuff. would be cool to see the option for team balancing might be there already but not present in the beta. also the walker assault is slightly empire sided but not impossible to win as rebels. air superiority is key on that game mode also the rebels have no ground vehicles which makes it tough to fight the AT-ST
Unfortunately there are always those that complain just for the sake of complaining and don't offer any real insight into what their objections are. For the the most part I have been pretty happy with the direction the game is going. I agree with you on the walker assault though. Maybe they could add speeder bikes to the rebel arsenal to make it more interesting.
 
#18 ·
I disagree, it feels nothing like a Battlefield game. If it did, I'd have not asked for a refund. This game is a train-wreck in terms of gameplay and mechanics. Literally the only positive thing is the Star Wars sounds.

Stuff I really dislike:
  • 40 player limit, advertised in-game as mind-blowing.
  • No server browser.
  • No squad system.
  • Can only partner up with one friend for Coop or up to three for regular multiplayer, and this only puts you in the same server, nothing more.
  • No player classes.
  • No real special abilities.
  • Cannot get in and out of vehicles freely, only via random power-ups.
What an awful, terrible game.
 
#19 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultracarpet View Post

I don't follow. Every objective is absolutely necessary for winning the game in both game types.
It's not just the necessity, but the impact of the objectives that is not noticeable enough. For example, in MAG if you took down the Anti-Air battery troops could parachute in. If you took down the mortar battery mortars could not be striked, etc. Team leaders each had tactical abilities that they could use (or not use depending on your teams progress with taking down objectives), that made a real impact on the battle. Every thing seemed impactful, there was so much stuff that made a difference in the outcome of the battle. In Battlefront it suffers mostly from the same "Capture this objective", and when you do very little changes. It's hard to describe it entirely but I feel like a good objective/team/leader system is important in battlefield/front type games, and DICE is really lacking in this department time and time again.
 
#20 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultracarpet View Post

I don't follow. Every objective is absolutely necessary for winning the game in both game types.
No actually it's not. I win all the time as rebels. You only lose because noobs don't take the time to understand what they are supposed to do on the rebels team (believe me I was one of them lol). Those uplinks you need to activate add fighter's every time they do a full circle, and then the more fighter's you have, the longer the AT-AT shields are down. Once the shields are down, all the noobs turn and start shooting their pee-shooters at it. Bad idea. Use turrets, and AIR is REALLY important. The A fighters damage the AT-AT ALOT, and also the snowspeeder can one hit them with it's hook which takes quite a bit of practice. Rebels take more teamwork, but in terms of balance, it is balanced IMO.
- Because it's made a decade later on a completely different engine by a completely new game design company.

- It's not BF2, it's a completely new game (see above point), hence why it's named battlefront, not BF3.

- I have absolutely no idea how you could think this plays like battlefield it's not even close. I was thinking it would, but then I started playing. It is much more fast paced (like WAY more) than Battlefield, the FPS mechanics like bullet lead feel like I'm playing tribes with an auto pistol, which is awesome, and the vehicles are compleeeetely different. The AT-AT feels more like a ac130 from cod, the aircraft are ridiculously nimble and much faster than any in battlefield which makes dogfights more fun IMO. Also the ability and perk system is way different. I could go on and on. All I can say is ask your mom or dad (or really anyone who doesn't play games), to play battlefield, then load this game up for them. They will not tell you they feel like the same game, I can almost guarantee it. I feel like it's just because people know that dice is making the game... It's like M. Night Shyamalan movies... everyone dismisses them immediately now to the point that when he makes a good one, it will still get bad reviews lol.

- They are different developers so this is their take on it... and even then, it is quite similar where it needs to be. Honestly, I'm happy they didn't just make battlefront 2 and put a reskin. They took risks and tried new things. Thinking the safe way, we would have had a Warcraft 4 instead of World of Warcraft.

- I have never cared for mods at all, so I have nothing to say here.
Until you actually understand what is going on lol.
There is definitely skill required lol. To say that the game requires no skill is like saying all FPS games require no skill. When you are playing noobs, you can absolutely feel the difference.
Interesting points on all accounts but I stand by my opinions. When Battlefront II came out it basically became my life for a couple years. I loved that game and I still do. There's nothing in this new game that makes me love it like that. It doesn't have the wow factor that the previous game had. To me, it doesn't feel like a Battlefront game. It's just a generic Star Wars shooter.

I feel like this game had a huge legacy to live up to and it let me down. In my opinion, the Star Wars Battlefront series is one of the greatest franchises in gaming history and the new Battlefront does not have what it takes to stand with its predecessors.
 
#21 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoomDash View Post

It's not just the necessity, but the impact of the objectives that is not noticeable enough. For example, in MAG if you took down the Anti-Air battery troops could parachute in. If you took down the mortar battery mortars could not be striked, etc. Team leaders each had tactical abilities that they could use (or not use depending on your teams progress with taking down objectives), that made a real impact on the battle. Every thing seemed impactful, there was so much stuff that made a difference in the outcome of the battle. In Battlefront it suffers mostly from the same "Capture this objective", and when you do very little changes. It's hard to describe it entirely but I feel like a good objective/team/leader system is important in battlefield/front type games, and DICE is really lacking in this department time and time again.
I think I see what you're saying; there needs to be more secondary objectives that make an impact. I don't feel like the way it is now is bad, but I would agree that more objectives would be cool. We'll see what the other game modes have, and what they might add to the ones in the beta.
 
#23 ·
It feels exactly like battlefield cause its made by DICE and is an fps. /s

Seriously, after reading the complaints everyone here has I'm dumbfounded if people even played the beta. I played ALL day yesterday and I literally destroyed every game I was in. Going 40-6 and such, because I played the objectives and kept my head on a swivel. I honestly think this plays NOTHING like battlefield, I actually played bf3,bf4 & bfh days before playing the beta and I don't see any similarities in it except its a first person shooter.

1. Card system similar to titanfall (NOT BATTLEFIELD)
2. Fast paced action with 1 squad mate (unlike battlefields slow paced revive hungry 4-5 squad games)
3. Random vehicle and special spawns (Honestly, this is the best thing that isn't like any battlefield game. I HATED when people just waited around for the vehicle to spawn. This breaks that entirely)
4. No class based system like EVERY battlefield game out.
5. Regenerate health over time (Hmm.. no battlefield game you can do that either)
6. Heroes (Seriously, do we need to keep going?)

I think I've made my point. People just want to hate on something cause they either have this warped version of an old game in their head and because this isn't EXACTLY what they wanted they are going to complain. Honestly those people probably go 2-15 and don't see that this isnt a e-sport game that is meant to be super realistic. Its a fantasy shooter based on a fantasy sci-fi world that has nothing to do with our perceived physics/laws.

Continue to complain on what you thought they should have done to make a multi million dollar game in 2015 where everyone apparently is a AAA game dev who knows whats best for the mass.

/r
 
#24 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by HostageX View Post

It feels exactly like battlefield cause its made by DICE and is an fps. /s

Seriously, after reading the complaints everyone here has I'm dumbfounded if people even played the beta. I played ALL day yesterday and I literally destroyed every game I was in. Going 40-6 and such, because I played the objectives and kept my head on a swivel. I honestly think this plays NOTHING like battlefield, I actually played bf3,bf4 & bfh days before playing the beta and I don't see any similarities in it except its a first person shooter.

1. Card system similar to titanfall (NOT BATTLEFIELD)
2. Fast paced action with 1 squad mate (unlike battlefields slow paced revive hungry 4-5 squad games)
3. Random vehicle and special spawns (Honestly, this is the best thing that isn't like any battlefield game. I HATED when people just waited around for the vehicle to spawn. This breaks that entirely)
4. No class based system like EVERY battlefield game out.
5. Regenerate health over time (Hmm.. no battlefield game you can do that either)
6. Heroes (Seriously, do we need to keep going?)

I think I've made my point. People just want to hate on something cause they either have this warped version of an old game in their head and because this isn't EXACTLY what they wanted they are going to complain. Honestly those people probably go 2-15 and don't see that this isnt a e-sport game that is meant to be super realistic. Its a fantasy shooter based on a fantasy sci-fi world that has nothing to do with our perceived physics/laws.

Continue to complain on what you thought they should have done to make a multi million dollar game in 2015 where everyone apparently is a AAA game dev who knows whats best for the mass.

/r
+ rep

Most insightful post so far in the thread. 100% agree with everything you said.
 
#25 ·
Hostage is right, you know.
 
#26 ·
Stats wont carry over right? Had my younger neighbors come over and play and he went 0-25 multiple times lol.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top