Star Wars: Battlefront Runs at 60FPS, But Resolution Unconfirmed

[DivinePaladin]

Chazore said:

DivinePaladin said:

12 maps is more than fine for the first shooter in a franchise. (Yes, it's technically speaking a new franchise because EA doesn't exactly have any code from the previous BF games to work with, especially not on 8th Gen platforms.) I would've loved having a bunch more, yes, but having 14-15 maps at $60 within a month of launch is pretty much what we've come to expect with modern shooters. 

 

As for the 60fps part, it sounds like they're defending it and continuing to hammer these points in because the old guard of BF fans are just slamming this game constantly and dehyping the game for some people. Like shit, yeah guys, EA is bad, but some of the BFII fanatics are just screaming bloody murder at every announcement. I loved BFII as much as the next guy but god forbid space battles are in the sequel because it's too expensive to make 12 different maps on the current consoles as it is. It's almost like everybody forgot that we're a games INDUSTRY, and that money is more important than making the minority's wishes come true immediately. 

 

Sorry, that last bit isn't on you. I'm just getting tired of the damn BF fanbase being stupid. 

I'm gonna be honest, before the reveal I was hped as BF fan, after the reveal not so much.

The whole 12 maps thing just doesn't sound much for someone like me who's come to expect great things from a popular franchise as Star Wars and a well recieved IP of Battlefront, i'm not screaming bloody murder but I do miss the fact that I won't be able to pilot an AT-AT like we could in 2 or the fact we won't get some epic looking space battles  around the Deathstar and within it's trenches, the lack of AI on all maps like the previous games and being restircted to a few leaves a lot to be desired for me, especially with the smaller player count when I;m used to BF2/ most modern shooter player counts.

I just can't feel any excitement for this like I had before they showed us the game and told us what to expect, I know your first answer is likely to tell me to temper my expectations but then why should I have any in the first place if they have to be in line with yours to become the norm or acceptable?, I mean what I expected was acheived almost a decade ago on much older hardware and I feel today we'll just flat out never advance if we have no choice but to pull this move with all franchises because a dev team isn't prepared and had years to prepare, I just don't feel that's a valid excuse as some like to believe, if you think it's rightfully valid then by all means lets do this with every single franchise, cut out loads from the previous and give us barebones while hinting at the promise that in another 4 years or more the enxt installment will have what the game ebfore last had and slightly more and then act as if we're totally satisifed.

All I wanted was BF2 but with a new coat of modern paint and I would have totally been fine with forking over £35 no problem, but because the last few EA games have involved battlebacks with £30-40 DLC lobbed on top I can't expect to pay for the already abrebones game and expect it to be decent if they are already going to pull a season pass like they usually do, I really don't mind EA's Origin service and what they provide but they hardly price down gamea as much and even then they've been caught out with bad practices and shoving things in games they don't need to, it's just part of their given track record of what to expect.

The landscape of gaming is much different now than it was when BFII hit. That's the key point that most people ignore. I'd love to pilot an AT-AT too, but console gamers are dicks. You can't pilot a jet in BF on consoles most of the time because it probably has C4 on it, or somebody is camping it, or you'll get team killed if it's Hardcore mode. "It's my jet, I deserve it because I'm better." 

 

Moreover, I'm glad the AT-AT is even in the game, they found what should be a good way of implementing it without giving a player the chance to screw over his whole team by being stupid. Space battles will be back eventually, I'm sure (I really hope they wait until the sequel rather than DLC it though), but right away I can see a dozen problems with that. 

 

Asking for BFII but pretty is asking for a game that doesn't work when modern gamers are accounted for. The only thing I genuinely question is, as you noted, the lack of bots. The bots would've made the scale feel larger, and Titanfall did that just fine. But you know what, I'll accept a lack of bots for the addition of split screen, something I've dearly missed since pretty much the PS2 days.

 

Even then, if the game is designed around 40 players I don't mind not having filler bots (though they would've been great for being filler spots on each team before other players join a match or something). But that's really my only qualm with what we've heard so far. We're still getting a Battlefront game, which is something I never expected to see again. I fully expected Battlefield Star Wars, and the fact that we're getting something even CLOSE to what BF used to be is a sign of at least the developers caring. 

 

Literally every other complaint comes down to the fact that it's a modern shooter. DLC is going to happen, you can't avoid that nowadays. Most people are asking for this game to look and play like 2015 but have 2005 game design. That's asking for a bad game.