Battlefront Single Player?

[Chazore]

Normchacho said:

Most the chart is wrong, as you can see in my response to Zorn.

and why, on earth, would I be saying it's just like the old games?

Ok from your list lets get on with what's different:

 

1. There are 12 maps not 8, with 2 more coming as free DLC a couple of weeks after launch.
2. Battlefront 2 was not 32 vs. 32 on all modes
3. The new game doesn't have space battles, but it still has ship combat.
4. One of those DLC packs is free
5. The only difference between playable infantry types and loadouts is the physical appearance of the character, and the new game lets you customize your character.
6. There are 10 playable vechiles that we know about so far, plus 2 turret types.
7. We already know that bots are in at least 4 games modes.
8. It's technically Classic, and the new series.

1. BF 2 has 33 in total and 16 planets like the chart says, BF will have a total of 14, that's still small no matter how you try to spin it.

2. Instant action has 32 vs 32, CTF was afaik, the campaign wasn't and neither was their Heroes mode but at the end of the day 32v32 is better than a total count of 40 for th new BF.

3.Space battles>ship combat

4.Jakku isn't full blown meat and bones worth DLC that's brimming with content that basically makes it a standalone game, that is hardly a pro that defeats BF2's DLC let alone the game.

5.The classes added strategy and variety to the game, loadouts have you looking more or less the same while the older games at elast had varying numbers of people sporting different classes that added to different appearances. Rebels in the beta for example had a male and female model and that was it, Snow troopers had the same models and different voices. Also the loadouts are a done deal once you are in the battle with the only other option of being able to copy your partners loadout.

6.27 and 15 turrets still beats out the 10 and 2, even by the time the base game comes out I don't see EA giving you the same number if not more than BF2, this again isn't something positive, sure you have a little more than what he chart originally said but BF2 still beats out the current in numbers.

7. BF2 has bots in every mode while BF has them in limited small sized map modes instead of on every map, again it's nice to have them on 4 maps but BF2 still does it better, why couldn't EA do better?.

8. BF2 did classic, clone wars and some early clone wars to boot while BF is doing classic and some new saga and even then they haven't even shown or told us zip about the new Saga, if it;s added in as DLC then that debunks the fact that the base game of BF only does classic while the base game of BF2 does all 3.

At the end of the day the chart has some inconsistancies, that much is given but BF2 still overshadows and outputs BF by a lot, BF definitely does graphics better but honestly that's a moot point because one game is from 2004/5 and the other is from 2015, of course visuals are going to be upgraded and look better.

It's fine and all to be hyped for BF, I liked the Beta even though most battles were one sided, the beta felt very barebones and people abusing glitches and the like, but BF2 is going to be steps ahead of BF until EA make a new BF that has and does it all in the base game or they release all DLC with maps, weapons and vehicles all for free in the future since paying £40 per DLC pack isn't going to beat out BF2 in the price ratio either.