Soldato
**** Star Wars: Battlefront ****
- Thread starter valkia
- Start date
Soldato
But we've heard similar stories and statements in the past.
Their words aren't credible anymore.
I will have my fingers crossed they do well, but I won't hold my breath.
Battlefront 1 and 2 were amazing so I hope this is too.
Heh. Look what happened when they pulled that crap with BF: Hardline. Have you played that game? It feels so samey. Oh wait. That's because it is, and I have it installed...It's called Payday.
Caporegime
I think people's negative reactions to hardline will mean that Battlefront is too different from BF4 for the true battlefield fans.
I'm actually surprised EA went with Battlefront first - I mean...Don't underestimate its popularity, but I also kind of expected an announcement to let bioware finish Knights of the old republic (yes, I know swtor exists, but it doesn't complete the story IMHO.)
Permabanned
Bioware are working on the next Mass Effect game though?
I would absolutely love a new SW single player game. Tomb Raider and ME show that SP games will still sell and sell well if done right.
That is actually ridiculous, pretty much a no buy from me. Time to re install Planetside 2..
Associate
- Joined
- 20 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 1,380
why does a game need to be a zergfest in order for people to buy it? 20 vs 20 is fine. Reduce some of that spam.
Que?
Hardline has been criticized for being a cut and paste of many BF4 elements with horribly limited content throw in. It's nothing like Battlefront.
Soldato
I'm fine with it being 20 vs 20, in fact I find that even in BF 48 players seems optimal for many of the maps. I'm hopeful that the netcode is 60hz in this version of frostbite.
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2011
- Posts
- 1,426
I was wondering if they might do a 20 v 20 thing but each player character has a squad of 2-3 AI troopers following their commands. I guess it wouldn't really work, but I just think it'd be kinda neat no knowing whether you were blasting stupid drones or some angry teen somewhere.
Caporegime
People complained that Hardline was too much like battlefield 4. Too much cut and paste.
I'm theorizing that DICE is likely to respond to this criticism by making lots of changes with battlefront over other battlefield games. To the point whereby traditional battlefield fans may not actually like them as they seek to create something very different from battlefield 4.
In case they end up getting accused of creating a "star wars mod" battlefield like the way that Hardline was accused of being a "cops and robbers mod" for battlefield 4. The 40 player limit is a case in point. People in denial already saying that DICE would only set it at 40 players because of consoles, not actually anticipating that DICE aren't creating another battlefield game here. Just because something was a certain way in BF4, doesn't mean it will be the same in Battlefront.
Soldato
Not sure why they would be blaming consoles given this title will be exclusive to next gen..
At the very least this game will employ totally new maps, art style, gun/player models. I'm also assuming that the guns will be predominantly hit scan.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Star Wars blasters act almost the same as bullets, apart from firing in a totally straight line. They're individual beams that take time to reach a target, so there'll definitely be more aiming involved than your typical Instagib UT match.
Caporegime
my point exactly if you read back a few pages
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?p=27932219#post27932219
Last edited:
Theres just no way you can have hit scan weapons in a star wars game. You can physically see the blaster bolts flying towards targets, they travel much much slower then bullets do. Hit scan wouldn't make any sense at all.
Caporegime
I think from an overall technical level of the game engine. Thats true.No developer is going to spend the sort of money required to develop a game engine that had the effect on PC the likes of the Far Cry games did. I remember when Crysis came out and it had everybodys PCs on their knees. It was years before anybody could afford a system that could max that game out.
So in that sense consoles will be holding back the PC, because the developers simply won't get the return on an engine like that from console games, which is where most of the money is. But thats no reason why the PC game has to run 40 players. BF3 on PC was 64 player while BF3 on 360 / PS3 was 24 player for example.
So in that sense consoles will be holding back the PC, because the developers simply won't get the return on an engine like that from console games, which is where most of the money is. But thats no reason why the PC game has to run 40 players. BF3 on PC was 64 player while BF3 on 360 / PS3 was 24 player for example.
Last edited: