I played this when it came out. The campaign was fun. The endgame PvE missions were boring as hell. They need to add a LOT of random events and layouts to them.

The PvE was a shitshow of repetitive bulletsponge crap and hackers galore. Their security around what they let the client access was just pathetic. Like whoever wrote it should be fired and kicked in the nuts on the way out. It was open season for all kinds of hacks.

Then they came out with that Phoenix mission which was just more repetitive bulletsponge terribleness. On top of that, the loot balance was horrible. I'm not gonna grind for a month to get a fucking gun that is practically necessary for doing the highest level content.

I can't see myself ever bothering with this game again, and I really regret buying it. Guess it's what I get for letting my coworkers talk me into it.

Kxmode wrote on May 5, 2017, 00:04:
That exists in the form of Season Passes. People pay in advance for mystery content that in some cases even the developers don't know what will be (See Bethesda's comment about Fallout 4 season pass). Personally, I hate crowdfunding and early access, but I view season passes as worse. I wish people would smarten up and realize the season pass format is terrible.

The Division season pass actually felt worth it to me. I think I picked up the gold edition on Dealzon right around launch for a moderate discount (80-85 I think).

The DLC is substantial and chunky for 25 additional bucks. And granted the season pass method is a crap shoot because sometimes you get good DLC and other times you get shitshows, but in this case, when the first DLC was bumped to make time to patch the game, they introduced challenging weekly loot drops and crafting mats and a bunch of other little stuff that all in all felt rewarding.

Now, some of the decisions they made during the patch process I disagree with at best and broke the game at worse, but the season pass I never actually regretted buying.

Also the last major loot drop overhaul helped a lot. Launch era blew because you had to grind forever to get any decent equipment.

I have 100's of hours into this, which I didn't expect to do.
The campaign is pretty good and interesting.
The DLC's are kind of a mixed bag for me, they are all pretty much co-op additions where I was hoping for more SP action but they are still pretty good fun.

You definitely get your money's worth out of this game,.. and not to mention that the Devs have actually listened to the community & constantly fixed issues for over a year now and added content .

That alone is pretty rare to see from any company....so it gets a double thumbs up from me.

Linksil wrote on May 5, 2017, 02:01:
Kxmode: What do you propose instead of season pass? I mean they can put out all the DLC and then just bundle it latter as a pass. But most passes tell you what to expect and when to expect it. And us as normal gamers expect a 3-6month delay off that time. I wish we didn't live in a world with seasons passes, but younger gamer's seem to be about instant gratification and that's what the pass gives them vs our older expansion pack model. Also people keep expecting more and more out of each expansion.

It's not so much the DLC itself that I dislike. What I find distasteful is a publisher selling the core game for full price (e.g. $59.99) alongside a season pass (a season pass on a preorder makes no sense). In many instances, the season pass is almost as expensive as the core game. Those who continue to support this model ultimately create a "green" approach to what publishers feel they can charge for their products. They view this as, "We are not selling a $60 game. We are selling the full game for $100, $120 and more. $60 is just the entry point." This profit-driven mindset causes them to make decisions to leave content out during development that years ago would be included. There was a time, not long ago, when core games touted an exhaustive list of features. Now, those features are listed next to the list of features from the season pass so that if you buy both, you get the complete experience. If publishers need to inflate gaming prices to cover expenses, then do it. Charge $99 for the FULL game with no season pass and no DLC.

Linksil wrote on May 5, 2017, 02:01:
Crowdfunding I don't mind as long as it's done right and you know what to expect from your money.

That would be ideal, but that rarely happens. I can't think of a single project that I've backed that launched. One, in particular, "Hullabaloo Steampunk animated film," I supported for $50 in 2014. Hasn't been produced, released, or even updated; and I suspect the creator has abandoned it. These results happen all the time. Conversely, Star Citizen pretty much broke all the suggestions you provides, and then some. The core problem with crowdfunded video games (and I only refer to video games) is expectation management. EM is essential to any project and is the difference between Harebrained Studios' track record of successfully crowdfunded deliveries and CIG's atrocious record of deliverables.

If Chris Roberts has great ideas, but can't manage his expectations and work within limits, then you run into issues with a project not beholden to anyone. It will keep going until either Chris retires or the money dries up. When publishers are involved the developer is accountable to them because it's their money. With SC the situation is worse because in additional to Chris having near autonomy to do whatever he wishes, many of the backers have turned into devoted zealots who are quick to stifle any criticisms.

Linksil wrote on May 5, 2017, 02:01:
Also letting you into the dev and influence the game is neat. Although this is almost never the case. EA's just seem like a total money grab at this point so many never finish. I wouldn't mind new laws punishing those that didn't release a full product.

Given the current track record of early access and crowdfunded projects, I'd rather let the process stay behind closed doors in exchange for developers having to answer to a boss (publisher). I guarantee you if an EA or an Activision funded Star Citizen they would be busting Chris' balls right about now, and rightly so. The game's budget, scope, and deliverables have been a joke.

Kxmode: What do you propose instead of season pass? I mean they can put out all the DLC and then just bundle it latter as a pass. But most passes tell you what to expect and when to expect it. And us as normal gamers expect a 3-6month delay off that time. I wish we didn't live in a world with seasons passes, but younger gamer's seem to be about instant gratification and that's what the pass gives them vs our older expansion pack model. Also people keep expecting more and more out of each expansion.

Crowdfunding I don't mind as long as it's done right and you know what to expect from your money. Also letting you into the dev and influence the game is neat. Although this is almost never the case. EA's just seem like a total money grab at this point so many never finish. I wouldn't mind new laws punishing those that didn't release a full product.

Linksil wrote on May 4, 2017, 19:48:

Kxmode wrote on May 4, 2017, 13:40:

Linksil wrote on May 4, 2017, 13:02:
Because you have to really pound into the game to get through all the free content.

In difference to your asinine comment, I do not want to play for free. I merely want to test drive the product, like I do before buying other products such as cars and music.

Nothing asinine about my comment. The fact that you took it as to saying you want to play the whole game for free is just a reflection on yourself and your views. I agree with today's game market, demos and ways to try the game on your system before buying it is even more important.

I was more pointing out that they are more likely to do this now because the amount of content is enough, that most players, aren't getting through it in a weekend. This makes them more likely to buy the game that's over a year old and had a horrible launch. Also they have all the DLC content which flushes out the game even more.

I see. If someone quotes me, then uses "you" as opposed to the broad "we" or "us," to me this implies I prefer to "really pound into the game to get through all the free content." Anyhow, thanks for clarifying.

Linksil wrote on May 4, 2017, 19:48:
Sadly I see us moving more towards paid alpha/beta tests for reduced trials instead of real demos.

That exists in the form of Season Passes. People pay in advance for mystery content that in some cases even the developers don't know what will be (See Bethesda's comment about Fallout 4 season pass). Personally, I hate crowdfunding and early access, but I view season passes as worse. I wish people would smarten up and realize the season pass format is terrible.

The game is rather boring. I actually like Wildlands over this - which isn't much different.

Survival mode is a lot more fun than the rest of the game.

So the web site (https://tomclancy-thedivision.ubisoft.com/game/en-US/free-weekend/) lists the game is on sale for 65% off. Standard is $19.99 and Gold is $31.49. When you click the link to buy, or go to the Uplay client to buy the prices are 50% off. Standard is $24.99 and Gold is $44.99.

That kinda sucks as I was actually considering the Gold version at $31.49. Oh well I'm having a lot of fun with Wildlands anyway, and I normally don't even like 3rd person shooters.

Kxmode wrote on May 4, 2017, 13:40:

Linksil wrote on May 4, 2017, 13:02:
Because you have to really pound into the game to get through all the free content.

In difference to your asinine comment, I do not want to play for free. I merely want to test drive the product, like I do before buying other products such as cars and music.

Nothing asinine about my comment. The fact that you took it as to saying you want to play the whole game for free is just a reflection on yourself and your views. I agree with today's game market, demos and ways to try the game on your system before buying it is even more important.

I was more pointing out that they are more likely to do this now because the amount of content is enough, that most players, aren't getting through it in a weekend. This makes them more likely to buy the game that's over a year old and had a horrible launch. Also they have all the DLC content which flushes out the game even more.

Sadly I see us moving more towards paid alpha/beta tests for reduced trials instead of real demos.

SimplyMonk wrote on May 4, 2017, 16:24:

Slick wrote on May 4, 2017, 14:43:
Oh whatever, in the sea of cookie-cutter open-world Ubisoft games (liberate strongholds, yawn) The Division was a breath of fresh air....

And the DLCs were actually good...

That's fair. Too be honest, I played primarily before the DLC was released and up until the second Incursion was released. The end game at that point just felt so badly done from a design perspective that I didn't have any confidence that they could fix it with DLC so I never went back. The shift between the tactics you used while leveling and in the Dark Zone compared to the strategies you needed to use in the Incursions was too jarring for me personally. The game play was drastically different and of little appeal in the Incursions with the only challenge being provided by NPCs that rush you, realizing they take 50 rounds to kill and can one-shot players.

Yeah, I mean that's the problem with any RPG though, "high-level" just means bitch tons of health and tons of damage. If the setting was Destiny and you were fighting aliens, it would be easier to digest. A "human gangster with a shotgun that has 5 billion HP and one-shots you just feels off, but that's what you get when you implement all the RPG elements so heavily, I don't really see a way around it, other than to spawn just waves of tons of mobs for you to deal with, but I think the engine would have exploded at that point, it wasn't built into the design of the game.

Leveling was fun, but was too short. The end-game was a shit-show, and still mostly is, but the PvP in the Dark Zone as a goal to be well-geared was fun. It had the tension of battlegrounds but with the ability to respawn, and now (since 1.6) you don't even lose DZ creds or XP if you're not rogue when you die. So they fixed a lot of stuff, but it was still probably one of the most fun games while it lasted of 2016 for me, brought out all the old guns I used to play with competitively, and we had a ball.

Slick wrote on May 4, 2017, 14:43:
Oh whatever, in the sea of cookie-cutter open-world Ubisoft games (liberate strongholds, yawn) The Division was a breath of fresh air....

And the DLCs were actually good...

That's fair. Too be honest, I played primarily before the DLC was released and up until the second Incursion was released. The end game at that point just felt so badly done from a design perspective that I didn't have any confidence that they could fix it with DLC so I never went back. The shift between the tactics you used while leveling and in the Dark Zone compared to the strategies you needed to use in the Incursions was too jarring for me personally. The game play was drastically different and of little appeal in the Incursions with the only challenge being provided by NPCs that rush you, realizing they take 50 rounds to kill and can one-shot players.

SimplyMonk wrote on May 4, 2017, 13:45:
Nope. This game is a trap that free weekends are designed to exploit. Great game up until max level, then big shift in game play as everything just becomes a bullet sponge and just grind, grind, grind. The Tom Clancy IP/Universe I think really hampered this game in being able to make appealing end game content at least on the level of Destiny. Which honestly isn't that great compared to other MMOs/Loot Games, but is enjoyable.

Oh whatever, in the sea of cookie-cutter open-world Ubisoft games (liberate strongholds, yawn) The Division was a breath of fresh air. Not only was it visually the most impressive game of the year, but it also had a lengthy campaign for SP that can be done in co-op, a very inventive optional PvP mechanic, and a host of other shit like Raids, weekly quests, etc. And the loot system was much more comprehensive than say, Destiny.

And the DLCs were actually good, the first gave you an infinite Diablo-style dungeon generator, the second a "Battlegrounds"-like experience, and the third some straight up objective based respawn-friendly PvP.

Nope. This game is a trap that free weekends are designed to exploit. Great game up until max level, then big shift in game play as everything just becomes a bullet sponge and just grind, grind, grind. The Tom Clancy IP/Universe I think really hampered this game in being able to make appealing end game content at least on the level of Destiny. Which honestly isn't that great compared to other MMOs/Loot Games, but is enjoyable.

Linksil wrote on May 4, 2017, 13:02:
Because you have to really pound into the game to get through all the free content.

In difference to your asinine comment, I do not want to play for free. I merely want to test drive the product, like I do before buying other products such as cars and music.

Rhett wrote on May 4, 2017, 13:08:
Honestly leveling up to 30 was the most fun I've had. It's a much smoother game. Once you get to 30, it's just endless grinding for beams of light. You get handed so much loot, it's ridiculous. Most of it's garbage, too.

Survival is really awesome though. (DLC)

I like survival a lot, but I don't know when the active players play that, as the last time I tried I think it just gave up and put me into a PvP server alone Survived for 50 minutes, never saw another person, never saw a death in the killfeed.

Honestly leveling up to 30 was the most fun I've had. It's a much smoother game. Once you get to 30, it's just endless grinding for beams of light. You get handed so much loot, it's ridiculous. Most of it's garbage, too.

Survival is really awesome though. (DLC)

Because you have to really pound into the game to get through all the free content. Also this game is WAY better then when it was at launch. I'm actually hoping for a season 2 to see where they can take the story/gameplay.

Kxmode wrote on May 4, 2017, 12:20:
See. This is a 48-hour demo with no time limits. How can this not happen for launch titles?

I imagine that will become slightly more popular over time.. EA has kinda been doing this (while also, smartly, pimping out their EA Access paid service as a requirement.. but it balances out)

At least free weekends are a thing. And Steam refunds. Thank goodness for steam refunds...

See. This is a 48-hour demo with no time limits. How can this not happen for launch titles?

This comment was edited on May 4, 2017, 13:34.