I seldomly play betas, but this game was one i was waiting for. I am a little offset by the partner spawning too, as you kill someone, and then someone immediately flashes up right behind them. I think it should be like halo rules where you only respawn next to them if they're "safe" or not in combat/ being actively shot at. Then you'd never experience the issue of the random ghost person popping up right after you kill someone.

I am a little worried though. I see 7 menu items for game selections, where it looks like 9 actually fit. This is the huge problem I have with a lot of new games. They completed a game, most likely removed 2 game modes, sell the game, and sell you the parts at an additional expense. I can't appreciate that. It's different if a legitimate "expansion" to the game comes out. But when DLC is available shortly after the release, or the day of the release...

So far I have not been dropped from Star Wars Battlefront, but I also have yet to experience a rebel victory on Hoth either. Eeveryone has given up on objectivess and it's just a team deathmatch with a timer now basically. I also feel the rebels need something else to do. I feel the imperials only real objective is to kill any rebel they see - this prevents their victory any way you look at it. Wheras the rebels need to babysit uplinks to win, you can't just kill imperials to win. The objectives I feel are a little more in favor to the empire.

I've seen a total of 3 rebel victories having played all weekend over 4 days.

I've seen a total of 3 rebel victories having played all weekend over 4 days.

Huh. I only played like... Maybe two, three sessions? Rebels won at least half the time, but I played around 10-12 matches. Hell the most recent one- I felt like the rebels were kicking our rears inside out.

Because they were and it was freakin' scary dude.

I've seen a total of 3 rebel victories having played all weekend over 4 days.

Huh. I only played like... Maybe two, three sessions? Rebels won at least half the time, but I played around 10-12 matches. Hell the most recent one- I felt like the rebels were kicking our rears inside out.

Because they were and it was freakin' scary dude.

Any chance there was an AdmiralDeathrain on the Rebel team ? I played Hoth with a group of 5 friends yesterday and we destroyed it. Started the game by calling in 6 Y-Wings and getting the AT-ATs both to about 55-60% on the first bombing run. Rebels need a bit more coordination, but when everyone works together - it is amazing. Despite my problems with it I will probably even preorder it for Jakku. The beta went well and I am willing to bet on this one.

Anyone actually played some X-Wing this Weekend?

I've seen a total of 3 rebel victories having played all weekend over 4 days.

The map is pretty imbalanced. The Imperials have too many things that can keep the Rebels at bay. Unless the rebel team is really coordinated and good, a mediocre Imperial team can simply roll them. People need to learn to focus all firepower on the closer AT-AT and not worry about the one on the outside of the map until the closer one is destroyed. That takes away a lot of firepower the Imperials can throw at the Rebels.

Out of 15 or so matches I've seen the Rebels win once.

I was hit by an A-Wing that kept going. Hit, like a dog by a car.

"A-Wing Pilot."
"I ain't even mad."

If any of you saw that, I was the victim.

EA did not disappoint...another junk game. So much wrong with this, where to even begin. Cycler rifle, what the hell is that? Map looks nothing like the battle in the movie. I actually think one of the older Star Wars Battlefront was designed closer to what was in the movie. All the extra garbage does not add to game play. Jet packs galore, x-wings and tie fighters, y-wings making bombing runs, orbital strikes. That last one really gets me...did EA ever watch the movie? Total crap.

EA still has no business making FPS games.

I too have shyed away from most EA stuff. I always hated buying some expansion pack from them that I thought was cool, just to find out no one else played it at all, so I was the only one in the match (aircraft carriers on BF4 comes to mind).

I personally am liking the beta so far. It reminds me of the original battlefront. It's not like Call of Duty or stuff like that where you're supposed to be an individual of some kind, but you are some nameless cannon fodder - that's why the respawn is so fast, there's 1,000s of soldiers and you were just standing in as one of them. It's a much faster experience than most FPS. I also actually like that you can't go prone. If you're going to snipe someone, you do so from far away and behind a ridge, instead of laying on the ground. Also, someone can shoot you back pretty easily. It minimizes camping. I'm ok with that.

I can imagine few people bought BF4 DLC after that launch, where Jesse Cox was the only person in the world who could properly play.

I agree with your assesments. Fast respawns really give you the feeling of larger armies at battle than they really are. Partner respawns should have a timer, though. I was suprised not to find a slog fest with my character crawling at ultra slow pace. It is still slower than my prefered shooter experiences (hell yeah rocket jumping!), but dashing through Hoths trenches is fantastic.

The beta gives me hope for a good launch. I imagine more people played (or at least as many) than there are people actually buying the game and the servers, at least for me, have been, with the exception of one disconnect, rock solid. Did anyone experience the BF4 beta here who could make some more accurate predictions?

I would say the biggest problem I see is everyone lvl 5+ having jetpacks. Now some might argue the future of FPS gaming is mobility but to be honest if you need jetpacks to navigate around your level maps, and the core gameplay doesn't revolve around jetpacks such as Tribes, then the level maps are poorly designed. Not to mention if you need a jetpack to be any good at the game and it is gated off at level 5 well for new players starting at 1 it is going to be a negative experience.

At least they are not selling us micro-transactions.

EA did not disappoint...another junk game. So much wrong with this, where to even begin. Cycler rifle, what the hell is that? Map looks nothing like the battle in the movie. I actually think one of the older Star Wars Battlefront was designed closer to what was in the movie. All the extra garbage does not add to game play. Jet packs galore, x-wings and tie fighters, y-wings making bombing runs, orbital strikes. That last one really gets me...did EA ever watch the movie? Total crap.

EA still has no business making FPS games.

Most people will take enjoying themselves over freaking out about everything wrong with it.

Also that Cycler? That's a rifle Tusken Raiders use. Unorthodox, sure. But I like it.

EA did not disappoint...another junk game. So much wrong with this, where to even begin. Cycler rifle, what the hell is that? Map looks nothing like the battle in the movie. I actually think one of the older Star Wars Battlefront was designed closer to what was in the movie. All the extra garbage does not add to game play. Jet packs galore, x-wings and tie fighters, y-wings making bombing runs, orbital strikes. That last one really gets me...did EA ever watch the movie? Total crap.

EA still has no business making FPS games.

Good they chose Dice for the job. There are also a lot of things right with the game. For example it is, through the addition of jetpacks and the ability to really run fast not as much of a slog fest as other FPSs nowadays. You have the option of turning the FoV up to 120 instead of just 90. The Hoth map has a lot of elements from the movie, most importantly the hangar and the trenches. I had an amazing scene play out when I entered the hangar with 5 friends + randoms as imperials, where we really swarmed into there and cleared all hallways to then begin a long firefight in the main hangar. If running through the trenches doesn't tickle your Star Wars organs I don't know what could.

The addition of starfighters is a bit questionable from a thematic standpoint, but it makes sense. Without it, the Snowspeeders would be the only air vehicle availiable, so the empire would have no way of disrupting the rebel air supperiority. In that case the Snowspeeders had to be really weak to accomodate for the fact that they would be largely uncontested - and therefor less fun to fly. This way both rebels and imperials have something cool to pilot. i would say this strengthens the experience. While the orbital strikes may sometimes seem unfair and we never saw anything like it in the movies the EU has a lot of examples of these pratices and I think they are well executed. It really makes you run when you get that warning and they look fantastic, not to mention the sound. I, as someone who adores objective based gameplay, am pretty happy with the way walker assault works, but ultimately that comes down to personal taste.

Being critical of AAA (well any game, really) games is important and people who preordered this when it was announced made a big mistake in taking a risk that big, blindly hating on it because EA stands behind it also is wrong. I can get behind not buying this game to not support that company, because it really did bad things to the industry, but don't invent a bad game where there is at worst one that you personaly don't enjoy. I hate survival/crafting/zombie games, but that doesn't make Arc or DayZ bad games, since after all there are a lot of people who they appeal to.

I too have shyed away from most EA stuff. I always hated buying some expansion pack from them that I thought was cool, just to find out no one else played it at all, so I was the only one in the match (aircraft carriers on BF4 comes to mind).

I personally am liking the beta so far. It reminds me of the original battlefront. It's not like Call of Duty or stuff like that where you're supposed to be an individual of some kind, but you are some nameless cannon fodder - that's why the respawn is so fast, there's 1,000s of soldiers and you were just standing in as one of them. It's a much faster experience than most FPS. I also actually like that you can't go prone. If you're going to snipe someone, you do so from far away and behind a ridge, instead of laying on the ground. Also, someone can shoot you back pretty easily. It minimizes camping. I'm ok with that.

I can imagine few people bought BF4 DLC after that launch, where Jesse Cox was the only person in the world who could properly play.

I agree with your assesments. Fast respawns really give you the feeling of larger armies at battle than they really are. Partner respawns should have a timer, though. I was suprised not to find a slog fest with my character crawling at ultra slow pace. It is still slower than my prefered shooter experiences (hell yeah rocket jumping!), but dashing through Hoths trenches is fantastic.

The beta gives me hope for a good launch. I imagine more people played (or at least as many) than there are people actually buying the game and the servers, at least for me, have been, with the exception of one disconnect, rock solid. Did anyone experience the BF4 beta here who could make some more accurate predictions?

I would say the biggest problem I see is everyone lvl 5+ having jetpacks. Now some might argue the future of FPS gaming is mobility but to be honest if you need jetpacks to navigate around your level maps, and the core gameplay doesn't revolve around jetpacks such as Tribes, then the level maps are poorly designed. Not to mention if you need a jetpack to be any good at the game and it is gated off at level 5 well for new players starting at 1 it is going to be a negative experience.

At least they are not selling us micro-transactions.

I would agree that you need the jetpack on Sullust, most of the time, but on Hoth there are different loadouts that can be just as effective, like blaster pistol with marksman traits (optional), a grenade, and the Cycler rifle or on the rebel side the "tank buster" With both Ion grenades and thermal detonators, combined with Ion charges on the MG-type blaster.

The sniper loadout can even work on Sullust as a one of on the team. I love the jetpacks, they are my substitute explosive jumps, but they are not without flaws.

I hope EA doesn't start pushing microtransactions on the game, I really do. Hopefully they learned from killing the Dark Space franchise.

Dead Space.

Dead Space.

lol, I knew something was off there...

The Cycler Rifle on Hoth, by the way, is friggin' awesome.

For example it is, through the addition of jetpacks and the ability to really run fast not as much of a slog fest as other FPSs nowadays.

?

Other FPS like Advanced Warfare, which has jetpacks? The forthcoming Black Ops 3, which has jetpacks and parkour? Titanfall, which has jetpacks and parkour and giant mechs? Evolve (man, that game died so quickly) which had lots and lots of jetpacks?

Arguably the Battlefield series, but the squad spawn system and proliferation of vehicles means it doesn't usually take very long to find something to shoot.

I didn't play any of these since I was completely non interested in the MMS genre by that point. If it has changed, good, but it is still something that stands out positive to me.

The Cycler Rifle on Hoth, by the way, is friggin' awesome.

Yeah because that makes a lot of sense. An old antiquated tusken rifle is so great, that both the Galactic Empire and Rebel forces felt compelled to stock pile and have them available to every soldier.

Even EA admits on their forum it is OP.

The M1 garand was a game changer during WWII. Far greater killing power over the modern M-16. Wonder why all the soldiers dont cary one on their back to complement their arsenal?

Defend the game all you want. I have played it and feel it is only worth 19.99. Glad I could test it out without buying on a hope it would be good.

I will say there are positives. The graphics were good. The laser bolt fire looked awesome. The sound was good. Some of the combat is an improvement over other EA games.

But overall still crap in my book and taste cannot be argued.

But overall still crap in my book and taste cannot be argued.

No.. but it can however be mocked.

Indeed. For instance, "It's crap. I would pay $20 for it."

Like, it's your money and your time, dude, but maybe don't spend $20 and x hours on stuff you don't like, okay?

No I think it's crap and not worth full retail but I'd pay £20 is a perfectly valid statement.

A game with ten hours of single player content and a online mode is only worth £40 if your going to play online, if all you care about is story mode your getting short changed.

I've bought plenty of games on a steam sale I wouldn't pay full price for.

Things are only worth what the consumer is willing to pay.

I liked the game and will pay full retail for it. I also realize that it was just the beta, but I had enough fun with it to play it long enough with only 2 game modes and 2 maps.

I liked the game and will pay full retail for it. I also realize that it was just the beta, but I had enough fun with it to play it long enough with only 2 game modes and 2 maps.

Good for you, me it made me reconsider buying it at release I'm not sure I'd play it enough to get my moneys worth.

Like I said things are only worth what the customer is willing to pay that bars different for everyone.

Game is fun. I would have like better explanations of what the drop pod power up things do and how to use them and how they function, like the Orbital Strike and infantry turret. Would also be nice if you could pick them up and move them around, about half of my power ups were wasted because I deployed them on slopes or at bad angles because I didn't know exactly what I was deploying and their limited traverse screwed me.

Giving everyone a sniper rifle is annoying. Should be a dedicated weapon instead of a side arm. Or better yet, should just not exist in game so that you have to close the distance to kill things far away. If Hoth turns into Red Orchestra 2 where you go over the top and instantly die that would be a shame.

General gunplay feels very Star Wars and cool.

No I think it's crap and not worth full retail but I'd pay £20 is a perfectly valid statement.

A game with ten hours of single player content and a online mode is only worth £40 if your going to play online, if all you care about is story mode your getting short changed.

I've bought plenty of games on a steam sale I wouldn't pay full price for.

Things are only worth what the consumer is willing to pay.

Preliminary note, all prices are in CAN$

This. I too have spent a lot of money on steam and Xbox Market paying $20 for a game i wouldn't spend $60 for.

Games I have paid $60 for include destiny (which I regret) and for $50 i got BF4 premium (which I regret). I regret these two because really not worth it for price paid, though admittedly BF4 if i had a crew to play with on XBone i might play more.

Games that i spent far less on and were worth far more: Mount and Blade Warband ($15)

Dragon Age Inq (ok, so after getting this and playing a bit I got all the DLc so probably spent more than $60 on, but so far 60 hours in game so worth it). Far Cry 3 ($20) GTA V ($40) Assassins Creed 1(free with graphics card) 2 (free with XB gold) Brotherhood $10 second hand) Revelations $10 second hand) 3 ($40) and 4 (also $40, though 2 months later was free on gold, oh well).

I oft maintain that going out to a cinema is generally an inefficient use of money for entertainment - and really only good for spadework, or for movies I really, REALLY want to see (the lord of the rings movies, Star Wars).

Still, there are games I would pay $60 for, these are the ones I am anxiously waiting for. I've paid the full price for every Halo game, and have pre-ordered the digital deluxe of Halo5. In fact there are a lot of games I've pre-ordered over the last 15 or so years, and i've had no qualms putting down the full amount. Ultimately, you have to ask yourself - how much do you want this, is this a priority, can you wait etc.