Star Wars Battlefront III

Originally posted by Arachnid1
Cod, yes. I'm a sucker for zombies mode though. Battlefield, on the other hand, is great whether you think it is or not. This IS a general consensus, so way to be the wrong minority.

That's a cute appeal to majority there little guy.

Never said why people buy them.

Sure you have. You did so by making comparisons to Battlefield and noting multiplayer is the only reason people buy Battlefield.

Ya, partly, but that's not why it survives (1 had a boring campaign, and 2 was cool but tedious after a while). You could cut these out and still have a fun multiplayer. Maybe even an even better multiplayer since all the focus would be on multiplayer alone.

Sure you could, but why not have both be good? I don't believe in the notion that one aspect of a game necessarily has to be cut for something to be good. Battlefront had a good campaign and fun multiplayer. This new Battlefront can only aspire to the latter, and frankly its multiplayer sounds much less fun than 2's.

And anyone and their mom that owned a ps2 had these games. You're not special for having played them. Literally every kid I knew back then that had a ps2 had Battlefront. Now I wouldn't call myself a fan (always hated the movies except for the original 3, and even they don't compare to Star Trek), but I owned and played them just like everyone else. 👆

Correct I'm not special. You're special for having never played it. 👆

I don't know about any other possible criticisms

Originally posted by NemeBro
That's a cute appeal to majority there little guy.

Sure you have. You did so by making comparisons to Battlefield and noting multiplayer is the only reason people buy Battlefield.

I never once made a claim as to why people bought past Battlefront games. Past Battlefields sure, but thats appropriate considering who's making this one.

And the multiplayer in this game will likely be fantastic.

Sure you could, but why not have both be good? I don't believe in the notion that one aspect of a game necessarily has to be cut for something to be good. Battlefront had a good campaign and fun multiplayer. This new Battlefront can only aspire to the latter, and frankly its multiplayer sounds much less fun than 2's.

Either way, we'll have to wait and see.

Correct I'm not special. You're special for having never played it. 👆

Then why are you here?

Thank god for DICE. 👆

Yeah, DICE is making it so of course everything will be alright and awesome, regardless of all the news we've heard thus far being negative, and despite BF4 and Hardline being dogshit.

You"ve just gotta keep the blind faith man.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Yeah, DICE is making it so of course everything will be alright and awesome, regardless of all the news we've heard thus far being negative, and despite BF4 and Hardline being dogshit.

You"ve just gotta keep the blind faith man.

Battlefield 4 had great online. It had server issues at launch, which is why it gets a bad rap despite the fact that those issues where ironed out after two months. Gameplay wise, it's on point just like every other game in the series with the exception of Hardline. You'd actually have an argument there with Hardline.

If it was made by DICE, anyway.

The gane being unplayable for almost three months after launch is not great online.

Everything we've heard about this game has pointed to it not following the BF formula, so even if you wanted to frame the discussion in that context, you're still clinging to blind faith.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
The gane being unplayable for almost three months after launch is not great online.

Everything we've heard about this game has pointed to it not following the BF formula, so even if you wanted to frame the discussion in that context, you're still clinging to blind faith.

If literally the only reason you're optimistic about the game is because "it's DICE", that's the text-book definition of blind faith.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
If literally the only reason you're optimistic about the game is because "it's DICE", that's the text-book definition of blind faith.

I think it's likely to have good map design and balance at a bare mininum. Having those two qualities does not make it a good Battlefront game.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
I think it's likely to have good map design and balance at a bare mininum. Having those two qualities does not make it a good Battlefront game.

I'm entirely ambivalent on it actually- expect shit and hope for gold is my life outlook. My point is that your optimism is pretty baseless if you're looking for something beyond just a re-skin of Battlefield. Almost every new development we've heard about the game thus far has pointed to a regression/dumbing down of the series rather than a progression. "But it's DICE" really does nothing to address those concerns.

Gearbox is famous for it's Borderlands but that didn't help Duke Nukem.

I'll wait to see some gameplay before I give my verdict but so far, it looks disappointing.

Originally posted by Nemesis X
Gearbox is famous for it's Borderlands but that didn't help Duke Nukem.

I don't get that with Gearbox, They pour all they're love and passion to make the Borderlands games be good and yet when they're given the chance to help finish off a game that's been stuck in development hell they squander it.

Duke Nukem Forever was at that point beyond saving without literally scrapping everything and starting over from nothing, which would just probably repeat the cycle. I don't think it could have been saved.

Originally posted by FinalAnswer
I don't think it could have been saved.

I think it could'eve been saved...well better then what we ended up with, But i blame the people Gearbox assigned to complete it.

Gearbox also gave us Colonial Marines, iirc.

Borderlands aside, I wouldn't put much faith in them.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Gearbox also gave us Colonial Marines, iirc.
.

And yet they gave Sega to do all the work.

Gameplay.

YouTube video

Geeked out at the end.