Star Wars Battlefront

[BlueLion. 21,491]

Anyone else got this game?

I'm at a bit of a loss with it.

It is undeniably a fun game to play. With the graphic quality and the incredible score, it is like being inside the original Star Wars trilogy. For that fact alone, it is plain and simply cool to be a part of it. The modes are akin to your typical Call of Duty-esque ones, such as Team Deathmatch (Blast), Domination (Supremacy), etc., with the added bonus of Hero Hunt (where you play as a hero, such as Boba Fett or Luke Skywalker) and have to battle against enemy soldiers, and an aerial combat mode where you can jump inside a TIE-Fighter or X-Wing and blast the shit out of everything. Walker Assault is epic, and the Rebels have now worked out to win. I'd go as far as saying that in the games I've played, the Rebels win around 40% of the time. That's teamwork for you.

The combat itself isn't all that fluid - it follows the Battlefield game system, which I've never been a great fan of. It feels clunky, very often awkward, and there is very little tactical scope to any of the game modes. It's whoever shoots first wins. The lack of customisation and the fact the guns are all very similar, just with different fire rates, is very disappointing.

You have to say the multiplayer is fun. It just takes some getting used to. The problem is, as you get used to it, you get bored. There are "only" four twelve maps. I say this because, in reality, there are four maps - Endor, Sulluust, Hoth, and, of course, Tattooine, which very slight variations on these allegedly constituting "different" areas. The fact is, the maps have a familiar feel - either they are corridor-based interior affairs, inside some hangar, or outside in some gargantuan map where you're trying not to get squashed by an AT-AT! They're adding two new maps based on Jakku, the main planet on the upcoming The Force Awakens, but one wonders how varied they will be from the desert environments of Tattooine...

The fact is, if you spend £40 or your country's equivalent on this game, you are in fact only investing in half of a product. The DLC, A.K.A. "The Other Half of the Game", which EA are looking to charge you £40 for, will add tonnes more maps and characters and game modes to the Battlefront experience - but will cost you the same amount as the game in the first place. It is, my friends, nothing more than a rip-off. As a massive Star Wars fan, I'm absolutely gutted. It is a good game, but you can quickly grow tired of the lack of variety, and the fact we're being milked for £80 for a single game is a piss-take. This is one of those games where, if it had an amazing single player campaign, you wouldn't mind the reduced capacity of the multiplayer. But there is no campaign. Not even "Galaxy Conquest", such as in Battlefront I and Battlefront II.

It's barebones, and I'm not paying £40 to put the meat on it.

2 out of 5.

[Muzchap 8,964]

No space battles = not buying

Sorry but EA are just 'cashing in' on this franchise.

As Didier says the 'season pass' is fucking ridiculous!!! Either charge a lower price point for the game and then charge for the content, but keeping both at a premium just takes the piss!

[BlueLion. 21,491]

No space battles = not buying

Sorry but EA are just 'cashing in' on this franchise.

As Didier says the 'season pass' is fucking ridiculous!!! Either charge a lower price point for the game and then charge for the content, but keeping both at a premium just takes the piss!

Exactly, they're air battles. In spaceships.

[Rmpr 8,977]

Thanks Alex. I was in doubt between this and BO3 but I wull probably lean towards the Treyarc game.

I love Star Wars and I wanted this game to be perfect. However, every place I go they say the same thing: excellent graphics, classic triology soundtrack and ambience but with lackluster game modes and bad weapon variety. So, in an online only game where in the first week people are already complaining about game modes, I fear for its longevity. Not to mention that tgis DLC structure will split the user base, matchmaking might get long down the line. I definitely dont want to spend 50 euros on a game where 2months from now I would either have no one to play or have to spend the same amount on DLC. I am really disappointed.

On the other hand, my ridiculously hardcore CoD friends are saying this year's game is the perfect blend of last year's crazy (and not so welcoming) new mechanics with the classic flow and feel of the last gen iterations. Also, no matter how much shit people give CoD it still has the best shooting mechanics of all FPS imo, even against the likes of Destiny, Battlefront, Titanfall, etc. New zombie mode seems lots of fun too and its always nice to jump to it to break the monotony at times. Oh, and not counting the fact there will always be tons of players playing it at all times.

Have you played it by any chance?

P.S: I played both betas but its not the same as the real game of course...

[Kieran. 6,317]

Seems like all the reputable game sites do like it, but I'm not sure now. Guess I won't buy it or at least wait til it drops in price.

[iseah100 5,612]

I don't like it. Online is not that impressive, no story mode. Idk just not what I like. Ops 3 is amazing though.

[Muzchap 8,964]

Seems like all the reputable game sites do like it, but I'm not sure now. Guess I won't buy it or at least wait til it drops in price.

Money talks

[BlueLion. 21,491]

Thanks Alex. I was in doubt between this and BO3 but I wull probably lean towards the Treyarc game.

I love Star Wars and I wanted this game to be perfect. However, every place I go they say the same thing: excellent graphics, classic triology soundtrack and ambience but with lackluster game modes and bad weapon variety. So, in an online only game where in the first week people are already complaining about game modes, I fear for its longevity. Not to mention that tgis DLC structure will split the user base, matchmaking might get long down the line. I definitely dont want to spend 50 euros on a game where 2months from now I would either have no one to play or have to spend the same amount on DLC. I am really disappointed.

On the other hand, my ridiculously hardcore CoD friends are saying this year's game is the perfect blend of last year's crazy (and not so welcoming) new mechanics with the classic flow and feel of the last gen iterations. Also, no matter how much shit people give CoD it still has the best shooting mechanics of all FPS imo, even against the likes of Destiny, Battlefront, Titanfall, etc. New zombie mode seems lots of fun too and its always nice to jump to it to break the monotony at times. Oh, and not counting the fact there will always be tons of players playing it at all times.

Have you played it by any chance?

P.S: I played both betas but its not the same as the real game of course...

COD has such a fluid manner about it. I never liked Battlefield, despite it undeniably being far more realistic. I haven't played Blops 3 and don't intend to, especially with the new Rainbow Six game out before Xmas.

Seems like all the reputable game sites do like it, but I'm not sure now. Guess I won't buy it or at least wait til it drops in price.

Most of them are getting paid to post favourable reviews, so I heard. But don't be fooled. I'm a huge Star Wars fanboy and after how promising the beta was, I had such high hopes. Well and truly disappointed.

[Blue Armour 4,158]

COD has such a fluid manner about it. I never liked Battlefield, despite it undeniably being far more realistic. I haven't played Blops 3 and don't intend to, especially with the new Rainbow Six game out before Xmas.

Most of them are getting paid to post favourable reviews, so I heard. But don't be fooled. I'm a huge Star Wars fanboy and after how promising the beta was, I had such high hopes. Well and truly disappointed.

Same here. The lack of content is rather disappointing. It seems that this game is trying to only pull at the heartstrings of people who were in love with the original trilogy. The rumored Battlefront 3 (you can probably see the trailer with leaked content on youtube) that was ultimately cancelled was more interesting to me than this release.

The only plus in this game for me, is the graphics engine, which I hope they put to much better use in the upcoming Star Wars action RPG from Visceral games.

[Rmpr 8,977]

COD has such a fluid manner about it. I never liked Battlefield, despite it undeniably being far more realistic. I haven't played Blops 3 and don't intend to, especially with the new Rainbow Six game out before Xmas.

Oh I see, makes total sense not to spend on yet another COD when you already bought all those other games. Well...I dont like Fallout and I havent purchased Battlefront nor I intend to buy Raibon Six Siege so I will probably lean towards COD.

This year I bought Batman AK, MGS5, Divinity Original Sin and now will prob buy BO3...

[Billy. 2,739]

EA are getting very lazy and are taking the piss with their games.

The new golf game for me is Half a game it only has 8 courses and like 12 golfers yet they still charged £54.99. Granted they did say that we will get some free dlc over the months but why release a game that is half done? Same with the new Need for speed it was meant to so back to its underground days of the custom things you can do to a car but you can barley do anything, again they are doing dlc over the next few months (dont know ifs it free or not) Im waiting for nexts years fifa when we only get like 10 grounds and 4 teams from each league and have to pay for the extra DLC.

EA has to be one of the worst game company's atm.

[BlueLion. 21,491]

EA are getting very lazy and are taking the piss with their games.

The new golf game for me is Half a game it only has 8 courses and like 12 golfers yet they still charged £54.99. Granted they did say that we will get some free dlc over the months but why release a game that is half done? Same with the new Need for speed it was meant to so back to its underground days of the custom things you can do to a car but you can barley do anything, again they are doing dlc over the next few months (dont know ifs it free or not) Im waiting for nexts years fifa when we only get like 10 grounds and 4 teams from each league and have to pay for the extra DLC.

EA has to be one of the worst game company's atm.

Totally agree. As bad as whoever is making COD games these days. The thing is, people are stupid enough to buy the DLC.

Oh I see, makes total sense not to spend on yet another COD when you already bought all those other games. Well...I dont like Fallout and I havent purchased Battlefront nor I intend to buy Raibon Six Siege so I will probably lean towards COD.

This year I bought Batman AK, MGS5, Divinity Original Sin and now will prob buy BO3...

I thought Ghosts was OK, I'd give it a 6.5/10. Advanced Warfare was absolutely rubbish though, IMO, and by far the worst COD. I hear Blops 3 is more like AW than the old Blops game (I loved Blops 2, though), is that true?

There hasn't been a "great" COD game since Modern Warfare 3, IMO.

[oxfordblues 299]

mines still in its wrapper ,im playing fallout4 which is quality

[Viper22 2,418]

EA are getting very lazy and are taking the piss with their games.

The new golf game for me is Half a game it only has 8 courses and like 12 golfers yet they still charged £54.99. Granted they did say that we will get some free dlc over the months but why release a game that is half done? Same with the new Need for speed it was meant to so back to its underground days of the custom things you can do to a car but you can barley do anything, again they are doing dlc over the next few months (dont know ifs it free or not) Im waiting for nexts years fifa when we only get like 10 grounds and 4 teams from each league and have to pay for the extra DLC.

EA has to be one of the worst game company's atm.

EA are (and have been for years) the worst company in gaming and probably have a shot at being the worst in all of the damn world.

Money grabbing, game ruining, DLC loving, unfinished broken game releasing fucks, the lot of them. How they treated Mass Effect fans (after the release of 3) sums them up entirely.

[Viper22 2,418]

Anyone else got this game?

I'm at a bit of a loss with it.

It is undeniably a fun game to play. With the graphic quality and the incredible score, it is like being inside the original Star Wars trilogy. For that fact alone, it is plain and simply cool to be a part of it. The modes are akin to your typical Call of Duty-esque ones, such as Team Deathmatch (Blast), Domination (Supremacy), etc., with the added bonus of Hero Hunt (where you play as a hero, such as Boba Fett or Luke Skywalker) and have to battle against enemy soldiers, and an aerial combat mode where you can jump inside a TIE-Fighter or X-Wing and blast the shit out of everything. Walker Assault is epic, and the Rebels have now worked out to win. I'd go as far as saying that in the games I've played, the Rebels win around 40% of the time. That's teamwork for you.

The combat itself isn't all that fluid - it follows the Battlefield game system, which I've never been a great fan of. It feels clunky, very often awkward, and there is very little tactical scope to any of the game modes. It's whoever shoots first wins. The lack of customisation and the fact the guns are all very similar, just with different fire rates, is very disappointing.

You have to say the multiplayer is fun. It just takes some getting used to. The problem is, as you get used to it, you get bored. There are "only" four twelve maps. I say this because, in reality, there are four maps - Endor, Sulluust, Hoth, and, of course, Tattooine, which very slight variations on these allegedly constituting "different" areas. The fact is, the maps have a familiar feel - either they are corridor-based interior affairs, inside some hangar, or outside in some gargantuan map where you're trying not to get squashed by an AT-AT! They're adding two new maps based on Jakku, the main planet on the upcoming The Force Awakens, but one wonders how varied they will be from the desert environments of Tattooine...

The fact is, if you spend £40 or your country's equivalent on this game, you are in fact only investing in half of a product. The DLC, A.K.A. "The Other Half of the Game", which EA are looking to charge you £40 for, will add tonnes more maps and characters and game modes to the Battlefront experience - but will cost you the same amount as the game in the first place. It is, my friends, nothing more than a rip-off. As a massive Star Wars fan, I'm absolutely gutted. It is a good game, but you can quickly grow tired of the lack of variety, and the fact we're being milked for £80 for a single game is a piss-take. This is one of those games where, if it had an amazing single player campaign, you wouldn't mind the reduced capacity of the multiplayer. But there is no campaign. Not even "Galaxy Conquest", such as in Battlefront I and Battlefront II.

It's barebones, and I'm not paying £40 to put the meat on it.

2 out of 5.

Adored the first 2 Battlefront games, some of my favourite ever. Didn't even consider getting this game as soon as I found out it was going to be released by EA because I know their track record. Surprised so many people didn't realise this catastrophe coming from a mile off.

I'll just leave this here:

[Spike 12,049]

Seems like all the reputable game sites do like it, but I'm not sure now. Guess I won't buy it or at least wait til it drops in price.

There is barely such a thing these days. I only trust a few reviewers like Total Biscuit and Yahtzee. I'd wouldn't trust the megasites like IGN and Gamespot with a twenty cent coin.

Gamespot even fired one of their reviewers under pressure from Eidos Interactive because in 2007 they were heavily advertising Kane and Lynch on their website. The reviewer gave the game 6/10 and he lost his job. This guy wasn't just a joe schmo he was the Chief Editor.

At the end of the day, I urge you and everyone not to spend money at what IGN and Gamepot tells you are good games. They are shills.

[BlueLion. 21,491]

Adored the first 2 Battlefront games, some of my favourite ever. Didn't even consider getting this game as soon as I found out it was going to be released by EA because I know their track record. Surprised so many people didn't realise this catastrophe coming from a mile off.

I'll just leave this here:

I know, I know. The beta was so perfect that I thought this would be a perfect game, especially, as you say, BF I and BF II were both so brilliant. All they had to do is copy that formula, with sleek new graphics. They got the audio/visual element spot on, give them credit, and at times it does feel like you actually are a stormtrooper. But the mechanics of the game - and the fact you need to pay another £40 for the rest of it - is a piss-take. As an Amazon pre-order, I get two Jakku maps in December, which is pretty sick. I think everyone gets them eventually, though.

[iseah100 5,612]

There is barely such a thing these days. I only trust a few reviewers like Total Biscuit and Yahtzee. I'd wouldn't trust the megasites like IGN and Gamespot with a twenty cent coin.

Gamespot even fired one of their reviewers under pressure from Eidos Interactive because in 2007 they were heavily advertising Kane and Lynch on their website. The reviewer gave the game 6/10 and he lost his job. This guy wasn't just a joe schmo he was the Chief Editor.

At the end of the day, I urge you and everyone not to spend money at what IGN and Gamepot tells you are good games. They are shills.

Kand and Lynch was fucking awful.