Yeah but if you lose vs bots you can't blame your team for being bad... :/

And isn't THAT the spirit of battlefield? Or all online games?

jdreyer wrote on Oct 15, 2015, 03:47:
When I was younger I played online more. Now that I'm older, online can be a hassle:

• I don't really have the energy after working all day to be competitive against real humans. That the AI is dumb is not a bad thing.
• I don't have to deal with real humans and their profanity, cheating, and rage quitting.
• If my wife is streaming her shows on youtube, and my daughter is watching Netflix, my ping will be shite. This happens most nights. Bots let me play even when my bandwidth is used by others.
• I can still play the game even if the servers go offline, say EA pulls them after a couple of years.
• It's a great mode to practice using the vehicles.
• It's fun to coop with a buddy against a bunch of dumb bots. It's like being Rambo or Commando.

Pretty much all of that. After spending a day dealing with people at work, I don't want to deal with more jerks when I get home...

Sepharo wrote on Oct 14, 2015, 20:45:

jdreyer wrote on Oct 14, 2015, 05:00:

Sepharo wrote on Oct 14, 2015, 02:04:
BF1942 single player campaigns lol

But bot matches were so much fun. My bud and I would set up bot matches the two of us against 20 bots or something on D-Day level, and try to get all the way up the hill. It was a blast.

I'm pretty sure he thought the 1942 expansions had real SP campaigns for some reason.

But on the topic of bot matches. I really don't give a shit. This has been an ongoing conversation here at Blue's for years. I don't really understand the enjoyment people get from playing waves of bots. Things were as dumb as rocks and it was boring as hell mowing them down. But hey to each their own.

When I was younger I played online more. Now that I'm older, online can be a hassle:

• I don't really have the energy after working all day to be competitive against real humans. That the AI is dumb is not a bad thing.
• I don't have to deal with real humans and their profanity, cheating, and rage quitting.
• If my wife is streaming her shows on youtube, and my daughter is watching Netflix, my ping will be shite. This happens most nights. Bots let me play even when my bandwidth is used by others.
• I can still play the game even if the servers go offline, say EA pulls them after a couple of years.
• It's a great mode to practice using the vehicles.
• It's fun to coop with a buddy against a bunch of dumb bots. It's like being Rambo or Commando.
If Russia stops fighting, the war ends. If Ukraine stops fighting, Ukraine ends. Slava Ukraini!

jdreyer wrote on Oct 14, 2015, 05:00:

Sepharo wrote on Oct 14, 2015, 02:04:
BF1942 single player campaigns lol

But bot matches were so much fun. My bud and I would set up bot matches the two of us against 20 bots or something on D-Day level, and try to get all the way up the hill. It was a blast.

I'm pretty sure he thought the 1942 expansions had real SP campaigns for some reason.

But on the topic of bot matches. I really don't give a shit. This has been an ongoing conversation here at Blue's for years. I don't really understand the enjoyment people get from playing waves of bots. Things were as dumb as rocks and it was boring as hell mowing them down. But hey to each their own.

Sepharo wrote on Oct 14, 2015, 02:04:
BF1942 single player campaigns lol

But bot matches were so much fun. My bud and I would set up bot matches the two of us against 20 bots or something on D-Day level, and try to get all the way up the hill. It was a blast.

NegaDeath wrote on Oct 13, 2015, 12:08:

Arithon wrote on Oct 13, 2015, 07:13:
There were two stand-alone expansions for BF1942 did not affect multi-play but added single player campaigns and cost £15 each (less than $10). So the grand total for all of it was £55 ($84). Bear in mind the two expansions were additional games, not just a pack of four maps.

The original BattleFront was the "StarWars total conversion" mod for BF1942, but was sued out of existence by LucasArts so they could release their "official" version, developed by Pandemic.

The irony is that this BattleFront, the least like a Battlefield or Battlefront game, is made by DICE - the makers of BattleField.

You might want to check your facts there. Both expansions to 1942 were multiplayer focused expansions. Road to Rome added 6 maps and some new weapons and vehicles. Secret Weapons of Normandy added 8 maps and more weapons and vehicles. At launch R2R cost $20 and SWoN cost $30, neither was $10. You also have to factor in inflation to make a proper dollar comparison. Not to mention development costs back then were a fraction of what they are now.

BF1942 single player campaigns lol

NegaDeath wrote on Oct 13, 2015, 12:08:

Arithon wrote on Oct 13, 2015, 07:13:
There were two stand-alone expansions for BF1942 did not affect multi-play but added single player campaigns and cost £15 each (less than $10). So the grand total for all of it was £55 ($84). Bear in mind the two expansions were additional games, not just a pack of four maps.

The original BattleFront was the "StarWars total conversion" mod for BF1942, but was sued out of existence by LucasArts so they could release their "official" version, developed by Pandemic.

The irony is that this BattleFront, the least like a Battlefield or Battlefront game, is made by DICE - the makers of BattleField.

You might want to check your facts there. Both expansions to 1942 were multiplayer focused expansions. Road to Rome added 6 maps and some new weapons and vehicles. Secret Weapons of Normandy added 8 maps and more weapons and vehicles. At launch R2R cost $20 and SWoN cost $30, neither was $10. You also have to factor in inflation to make a proper dollar comparison. Not to mention development costs back then were a fraction of what they are now.

To further the inflation bit...CPI calculations would show that $40 today would get you ~$30 in 2002. So, going by this trend, $120 would be ~$90, which some rounding, basing off of the total rate of inflation being 33.76% between 2002 and today.

Arithon wrote on Oct 13, 2015, 07:13:
There were two stand-alone expansions for BF1942 did not affect multi-play but added single player campaigns and cost £15 each (less than $10). So the grand total for all of it was £55 ($84). Bear in mind the two expansions were additional games, not just a pack of four maps.

The original BattleFront was the "StarWars total conversion" mod for BF1942, but was sued out of existence by LucasArts so they could release their "official" version, developed by Pandemic.

The irony is that this BattleFront, the least like a Battlefield or Battlefront game, is made by DICE - the makers of BattleField.

You might want to check your facts there. Both expansions to 1942 were multiplayer focused expansions. Road to Rome added 6 maps and some new weapons and vehicles. Secret Weapons of Normandy added 8 maps and more weapons and vehicles. At launch R2R cost $20 and SWoN cost $30, neither was $10. You also have to factor in inflation to make a proper dollar comparison. Not to mention development costs back then were a fraction of what they are now.

Arithon wrote on Oct 13, 2015, 07:13:

Slick wrote on Oct 13, 2015, 02:06:
because you know every battlefield game for the last 15 years has been the exact same thing. $110 for base game and all expansions.

Clearly you don't know. Battlefield 1942 came out in 2002 (that's 13 years ago this month) not 15 years ago. It cost £25 ($38) and was a complete game (no content held back as DLC). There were two stand-alone expansions for BF1942 did not affect multi-play but added single player campaigns and cost £15 each (less than $10). So the grand total for all of it was £55 ($84). Bear in mind the two expansions were additional games, not just a pack of four maps.

The original BattleFront was the "StarWars total conversion" mod for BF1942, but was sued out of existence by LucasArts so they could release their "official" version, developed by Pandemic.

The irony is that this BattleFront, the least like a Battlefield or Battlefront game, is made by DICE - the makers of BattleField.

the expansions for battlefield 1942 did affect multiplayer. In fact they added some awesome multiplayer maps and new weapons etc. If you are going to insult someone about not having their facts right.. at least have your own facts right...

jdreyer wrote on Oct 13, 2015, 07:27:

ELITE wrote on Oct 12, 2015, 23:41:

Feels like titan fall - i was impressed with the graphics but then was bored shortly after. I'm guessing this will play out the same with ending with a sale bring the price down to "fair"

I wouldn't imagine the price going down until after Xmas...

It'll drop at black friday. Wouldn't be surprised if amazon goes $40.

ELITE wrote on Oct 12, 2015, 23:41:

Feels like titan fall - i was impressed with the graphics but then was bored shortly after. I'm guessing this will play out the same with ending with a sale bring the price down to "fair"

I wouldn't imagine the price going down until after Xmas...

Slick wrote on Oct 13, 2015, 02:06:
because you know every battlefield game for the last 15 years has been the exact same thing. $110 for base game and all expansions.

Clearly you don't know. Battlefield 1942 came out in 2002 (that's 13 years ago this month) not 15 years ago. It cost £25 ($38) and was a complete game (no content held back as DLC). There were two stand-alone expansions for BF1942 did not affect multi-play but added single player campaigns and cost £15 each (less than $10). So the grand total for all of it was £55 ($84). Bear in mind the two expansions were additional games, not just a pack of four maps.

The original BattleFront was the "StarWars total conversion" mod for BF1942, but was sued out of existence by LucasArts so they could release their "official" version, developed by Pandemic.

The irony is that this BattleFront, the least like a Battlefield or Battlefront game, is made by DICE - the makers of BattleField.

Julio wrote on Oct 13, 2015, 04:31:
I love the "DLC shortages" writeup. Buy now before it's sold out!

Unfortunately this game is a poorly done licensed game which is the equivalent of virtual whack-a-mole. Dead on arrival.

I find your lack of faith in the hype of all things Star Wars disturbing.

I love the "DLC shortages" writeup. Buy now before it's sold out!

Unfortunately this game is a poorly done licensed game which is the equivalent of virtual whack-a-mole. Dead on arrival.

Tom wrote on Oct 12, 2015, 23:11:
And its use of typography is impressive.

The stormtroopers make great use of type when designing their logos?

Slick wrote on Oct 13, 2015, 02:06:

MysterD wrote on Oct 12, 2015, 20:24:
Pricing:
http://starwars.ea.com/starwars/battlefront/buy

$60 for SW:BF Base-Game only.
$70 for SW:BF Base-Game Deluxe Ed.
$50 for Season Pass.
$120 for Ultimate Edition (SW:BF Base-Game Deluxe Ed. + Season Pass).

Yeah, I'll wait for it to brick down quite a bit before I purchase.

so if you can live without a deluxe edition emote, then it's $110 for the base game, and all the expansions. that's so weird! so deserving of it's own thread! because you know every battlefield game for the last 15 years has been the exact same thing. $110 for base game and all expansions.

I might be wrong but I think BF3 and BF4 had 5 map packs for the same $50 premium price. BF Hardline started the 4 map packs for $50.

MysterD wrote on Oct 12, 2015, 20:24:
Pricing:
http://starwars.ea.com/starwars/battlefront/buy

$60 for SW:BF Base-Game only.
$70 for SW:BF Base-Game Deluxe Ed.
$50 for Season Pass.
$120 for Ultimate Edition (SW:BF Base-Game Deluxe Ed. + Season Pass).

Yeah, I'll wait for it to brick down quite a bit before I purchase.

so if you can live without a deluxe edition emote, then it's $110 for the base game, and all the expansions. that's so weird! so deserving of it's own thread! because you know every battlefield game for the last 15 years has been the exact same thing. $110 for base game and all expansions.

jdreyer wrote on Oct 12, 2015, 20:23:

Retired wrote on Oct 12, 2015, 20:19:
No buy here.

Hard to justify. My kid is having a blast though. We'll see. Maybe if it goes on sale.

And I hate no full bot support. Sometimes after a long day at work you just want to comp stomp, and not deal with aimbot cheaters.

i guess your kid still has a sense of joy.

by the way, the guns are all projectile and not hit-scan. so you could still juke an aimbot.

ELITE wrote on Oct 12, 2015, 23:41:
Speaking of which - the whole game is every gun is a sniper rifle. I'm not sure if I like that - I get a lot of kills - but it feels like I didn't earn them the other player just was clueless where he was being hit from...

"Cycler Rifle is OP: This weapon is indeed OP within the Beta"

Known Beta Issues

Wake me up when that $120 ultimate bundle sells for €19.99 or less.