Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Combatus, 26 Nov 2015.
Star Wars Battlefront Review
Meanwhile, I'm sitting here, rediscovering how much better BF4 is after a couple of years of tweaks and fixes.
I think i'll wait a similar amount of time before getting this.
Seems a fair review, although I enjoy online gaming now and then I really enjoy Single Player games which come across as more authentic to the "Star Wars" theme and I always used to enjoy the single player modes on the original battlefronts more than the Multiplayer (I even downloaded the SP mod when I had the GC mod on Battlefield 1942 back in the day), so the fact that new Battlefront is missing a SP mode makes it less interesting for me, ill probably wait till it appears in the EA Vault on Xbox one
Are you guys changing the score system? Because the review sounds like a below average game overall that won't last long but the score is above average/good.
PS, the review also sounds about right - shallow game, not much to do.
It's telling that a YouTuber I follow was raving about the upcoming launch of Battlefront on it's aesthetic authenticity and sense of theatre... and since he got Fallout 4 has only mentioned Battlefront to say he's not played it.
Probably just didn't get it for free after the 'pay for hype' scandal came out regarding Battlefield.
Can't find the link from Reddit as I'm at work just now, but Mods and Admins of the Battlefield sub were getting paid in kickbacks from EA to hype the game up beyond belief.
Wouldn't put it past EA to have 'paid' some Youtubers to do the same thing and then put the mockers on it as soon as it all came out.
Oh. That's that then.
Probably just as well - I've got heaps of unplayed stuff. Time to crack on with those!
Lol, £95 on Origin for the full fat version.
100% above the rate of inflation for the full game then, compared to Battlefront 2 when it was released.
Biggest problem of all modern day games. The grind-tastic leveling systems in games that are clearly not RPG.
The floating power-ups are excellent though. It's the reason I'll be picking this game up on sale when the next star wars film comes out. (the one after force awaken)
No, this year EA is just paying it's Battlefield-centric Youtubers to put out Battlefront after Battlefront video every stinking day.
It's getting quite funny watching them desperately searching for things to talk about as the sponsored by EA Ronku logo quietly pops up and fades out of the corner of the screen.
£50 for a reskin of Battlefield 4 multiplayer only?
Say what you like about it, but its not like Battlefield at all. In a blind test, you wouldn’t know they both came from DICE.
As I've got older, I can dedicated less and less time to gaming. I really can't be bothered with leveling up, but I'm not prepared to buy weapon packs for a game I've already paid for. CoD MW2 had it about right. You could level up reasonably quickly, but the default classes were reasonable and you weren't complete cannon fodder. I played the beta of Battlefront Star Wars and reached level 5 with the jetpack. I was hoping that I'd keep the kit I had already unlocked, when I bought the game - I didn't. I'm currently on level 6 and given my two hours a week of gaming, I might get the jet pack by Easter.
Is it above average? I'm guessing here, but I'd imagine the 'average' score for a game these days is something like 65%.
A shocking lack of content if you don't buy season pass. Coupled with a very average gameplay. This is just bang average and very expensive for what it is.
Bits score guide says 50% is average, though it also says that they wouldn't recommend buying anything below 50%.
Having to pay the extra for a 'season pass' (on a PC??) is what put me off. Glad I wasn't tempted having read the review.
Yeah, but when you normally read 50% in a review, it's implying that it's worse than average.
Through my years of readership of various publications, I'd say an average score would be ~70%, and classed as an acceptable game. 50% to me says that it just shouldn't be bought unless under very extreme (see: fanboy-ish) circumstances.
That's the problem with gaming media generally - IGN springs to mind. Bit changed the scoring a while back iirc, so that average was actually 50% not the 70% most sites seem to give. To be honest, while I realise I'm kinda complaining about the score, the score should really never be what anyone judges their opinion on, that should be the review itself. It's just that the review didn't seem to align with the score based on the score guide hence my original question, are they changing the score system.
Separate names with a comma.