Star Wars Battlefront (Xbox One, PS4, PC)

[Tezcatlipoca]

http://starwars.ea.com/en_GB/starwars/battlefront

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLaoiNUhDeQ

17 November in North America, from 19 November in Europe, and on 20 November in the UK.

Xbox One, PS4, and PC (Origin).

[Hom3r]

UK last again

[adzii_nufc]

So erm free DLC less than a month after it's release.

Why are we still in a position where DLC is being made before the game is even close to coming out. Dire stuff EA absolutely dire, welcome to modern gaming of course, In app purchases and day one DLC.

Of course they're already working on the second DLC pack that they'll charge for, again months before the game has even released but still they couldn't possibly include it because then you'd have enough maps and no reason to purchase the rest.

Game was awesome on the PS2/Xbox but set to be absolutely milked to death in the current gen. Was actually looking forward to a HD Battlefront but I feel very annoyed. Didn't buy Battlefield 4 for this exact reason and Won't be buying this.

I've also just realised the said 'free dlc' was actually advertised as being part of the game, they've now cut it and called it free DLC.

Remember what to expect if you buy the PC version

- Day one Server fails - No fix for a week
- Awful DRM making sure you can't actually play the game regardless of Single player.
- Premium £49.99 Price tag (Yes for a PC game) Much cheaper if you source elsewhere.

Battlefield 4 with a Star Wars skin over it? RPG at the Death Star and the whole thing explodes like Michael Bay filmed it.

I'm reading there's no space battles, anyone else know anything about this?

Engine screenshots from the first link, all standalone.

http://imgur.com/a/PpV4A

[Stephen]

So free dlc???

Why not just include it in the game in that case?

[Tezcatlipoca]

Originally Posted by Hom3r

UK last again

They are the standard/traditional release days for each territory. It's been like it for years.

North America = Tuesday

Europe = Thursday

UK = Friday


On those odd occasions when a game is released worldwide, it's usually on a Tuesday as would be normal for North America.

With a multiplayer game, and especially one such as this that will be uber-hyped due to the franchise, I actually like that the UK gets it last.

Spreads the launch chaos out a bit...

Originally Posted by adzii_nufc

- Day one Server fails - No fix for a week
- Awful DRM making sure you can't actually play the game regardless of Single player.
- Premium £49.99 Price tag (Yes for a PC game) Much cheaper if you source elsewhere.

I'm expecting massive server issues for all three platforms.

It's from the BF4 people, after all...

Originally Posted by Stephen

So free dlc???

Why not just include it in the game in that case?

Marketing BS to tie into Episode VII?

[Stephen]

I think it is, however they are releasing the Jakku(Force Awakens desert planet) level 2 weeks before the movie still, so really they may as well have it in the game.

[CycoSymz]

So looking forward to this game but i'm going to need a new gfx card first

[adzii_nufc]

No single player campaign. So an always online requirement? 40 player cap. Whether thats
Per team or not I'm unsure. I actually tipped this to deliver 200 vs 200 battles but I guess not.

Titanfall and brink spring to mind. Titanfall thought they'd get away with no single player. It now has a player base of 800 people on average each day. They tried to revive it with the free season pass but it's dead. Brink on the other hand never even left the launch pad.

BF4 in a Star Wars skin, please no.

Oh and stuff that's missing from the original series is deliberate. Space battles and such things will be DLC.
The introduction of Blu Ray to both consoles was meant to bring bigger and better games not allow a Titanfall style move of utilising 20gb and literally filling the rest with 30gb of Audio. If there's room left you fill it with playable content. Titanfall then went on to release a multiple map DLC that was ready before the game had released.

[adzii_nufc]

https://d1rktuf34l9h2g.cloudfront.ne...9713391016.png

I just don't get it. The first two were brilliant but this doesn't appear to be a battlefront game at all. I never played the second one online at all, the ridiculously fun galactic conquest made sure of it. Dice used to be a respected development team, now look at them post-EA buyout.

It's probably time to stop thinking this is a battlefront sequel and start treating it like a completely new thing.

The seemingly always online requirements look worrying though.

My disappointment is down to expectations, Space battles, huge ground battles with the tickets system they had. Remember tangling the AT's legs up on the snow map? Pure awesomeness.

Another is 20vs20, Dice usually double the teams on PC. So we'll wait and see for that.

[Kabaal]

You're missing the part where the list for the new BF side is mostly just speculation.

So much being said about the game so far is akin to someone telling you about their garden then assuming from that there is no world beyond that garden.

[qasdfdsaq]

I'm not sure what game series hasn't seen major changes between releases ten years apart.

You could just as well compare Call of Duty Advanced Warfare with the original WWII Call of Duty 1 from 2004 and claim it's "too different".

Then again, EA...

[adzii_nufc]

Originally Posted by Kabaal

You're missing the part where the list for the new BF side is mostly just speculation.

So much being said about the game so far is akin to someone telling you about their garden then assuming from that there is no world beyond that garden.

I can't see the world behind the garden because it's priced at £14.99 to open one piece.

It's 2015. 10 years since the second game and the best they can offer is less than that.. there's no need for speculation, this is EA we're talking about, you and the rest of the world know exactly how this works. We moved into the next generation of gaming and instead of getting ground-breaking massive games we got improved textures.

Example one: Forza Motorsport 5. Slightly better textures, minor updates here and there and around 50 drivable cars, bigger download than Forza 4.

Forza 4 looked great and played great, over 300 drivable cars.

Point being paying more to get less.

Example 2. Now this is more applicable to the title in question, Titanfall was so hyped and praised. Problem being they pushed out a 50gb game with a handful of maps, naturally maps followed by DLC. They filled their game up with fancy textures and massive audio packs they simply forgot about replayability. Thus it launched with well over a million players. Now it averages 800 players a day. Grim.



I want to purchase a Battlefront 2 that's come out in 2015. Not a game that's doing it's very best to offer just the tip of the iceberg then have you paying out of your eyes to get the stuff you loved the most.

Everything on that list has been seen by DICE and the only denial they've issued was they're being more than 8 maps. I'd say anything is moddable nowadays

---------- Post added at 14:20 ---------- Previous post was at 14:17 ----------

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

I'm not sure what game series hasn't seen major changes between releases ten years apart.

You could just as well compare Call of Duty Advanced Warfare with the original WWII Call of Duty 1 from 2004 and claim it's "too different".

Then again, EA...

It's not solely about differences it's about the grand scale of it, your example being how COD has changed. Massively indeed but does it have any less in it than what it had 11 years ago or does it both look better and have more content?

What happened to seeing how much stuff you could actually fit on a disc over how much you can hold back from the disc and sell later.

Being in a generation where DLC is announced ahead of a games release is absolutely dire.

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by adzii_nufc

I can't see the world behind the garden because it's priced at £14.99 to open one piece.

It's 2015. 10 years since the second game and the best they can offer is less than that.. there's no need for speculation, this is EA we're talking about, you and the rest of the world know exactly how this works. We moved into the next generation of gaming and instead of getting ground-breaking massive games we got improved textures.

Example one: Forza Motorsport 5. Slightly better textures, minor updates here and there and around 50 drivable cars, bigger download than Forza 4.

Forza 4 looked great and played great, over 300 drivable cars.

Point being paying more to get less.

Compare Forza Motorsport 5 with Forza Motorsport 1 and then you have a valid comparison.

I want to purchase a Battlefront 2 that's come out in 2015.

Convince some studio to remaster Battlefront 2 on a new engine then, they did it with Homeworld and the results were great.

Except for the storyline playing out exactly the same to the letter as 15 years ago.

Not a game that's doing it's very best to offer just the tip of the iceberg then have you paying out of your eyes to get the stuff you loved the most.

It's almost as if games these days are taking advantage of new technologies that are available to do things that they couldn't do ten years ago to make the publishers more money...

---------- Post added at 14:25 ---------- Previous post was at 14:21 ----------

Originally Posted by adzii_nufc

It's not solely about differences it's about the grand scale of it, your example being how COD has changed. Massively indeed but does it have any less in it than what it had 11 years ago or does it both look better and have more content?

I honestly wouldn't know. The first COD I played was COD 6.

As for looking better, the preview trailers I've seen for Battlefront not only look better than BFII but even look better than the original films, and to some extent even beating the HD prequels on Blu-ray.

Dunno about you but having computers generate content in real-time that look better than what it took film studios millions of dollars and thousands of hours to render just a few years back is mighty impressive IMO.

---------- Post added at 14:29 ---------- Previous post was at 14:25 ----------

Originally Posted by adzii_nufc

Being in a generation where DLC is announced ahead of a games release is absolutely dire.

I personally dislike paying anything for any part of a game at any point after initial purchase, whether that be DLC, expansion packs, PtW content or subscription models. But that's just old-fashioned me. When I was a kid I'd go to a car boot sale, pick up a bunch of games on floppies and they were mine to keep and play forever with no further payment of any kind.

Then again when I was a kid Cableforum didn't exist, neither did Google, optical mice, or streaming video.

Things change.

[adzii_nufc]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Compare Forza Motorsport 5 with Forza Motorsport 1 and then you have a valid comparison.
Convince some studio to remaster Battlefront 2 on a new engine then, they did it with Homeworld and the results were great.

Except for the storyline playing out exactly the same to the letter as 15 years ago.


It's almost as if games these days are taking advantage of new technologies that are available to do things that they couldn't do ten years ago to make the publishers more money...

---------- Post added at 14:25 ---------- Previous post was at 14:21 ----------




I honestly wouldn't know. The first COD I played was COD 6.

As for looking better, the preview trailers I've seen for Battlefront not only look better than BFII but even look better than the original films, and to some extent even beating the HD prequels on Blu-ray.

Dunno about you but having computers generate content in real-time that look better than what it took film studios millions of dollars and thousands of hours to render just a few years back is mighty impressive IMO.

It'll look miles better and play miles better. It's just the seemingly missing content that actually made the old games good. Then the no brainer that the content is probably coming at an extra cost.

As for CoD. It generally got better as it went on and then they broke massive ground with Modern Warfare.

The engine thing, don't I remember something very special from E3 a few years ago

https://youtu.be/d4JnshyKOOQ

If that'd actually came close to looking like it's trailer I'd have actually paid for each car individually in game...

I can imagine BF's final form will give it visuals similar to BF4 but more of 4.5

[Stephen]

But that is a pre rendered announcment trailer and not made using the in game engine.