Gaming Star Wars: Battlefront (2015) & Battlefront 2 (2017) [Mod Approved]

No thanks, I'd rather stay.

 

That stat is a tad misleading since the average age of actual gamers is 30 (meaning that older people are purchasing the games for somebody else.. like kids). Im 41 and only a handful of the ppl I know my own age play video games, while almost everybody I know under 35 does - particularly the ones under 30.

In any case, as a avid Battlefront gamer since the start, I really hope there's Clone War era combat in it, because that was a big part of the BF experience for me.

 

It's not misleading at all. Did you actually read what I said?

And if you're buying a game for your kids and you're a good parent, you don't want them growing up on the badly written, terribly acted, paper thin plotlines of the idiotic prequels. You want the best for your kids, which is why you would buy your kids OT themed games.

 

boo.

 

The video was a tease, I want more.

But I know I shouldn't.

 

No, they aren't. But I don't want to start this again.


Sent from my R2 unit

 

But they are? It's not a terribly controversial assertion to state that the broad popular consensus on the prequel films primarily ranges from apathetic to active distaste. You can disagree with that broad consensus, but that doesn't change the reality of the breakdown.

 

IMDB - TPM has a 6.6 and AOTC a 6.7. ROTS had a high 7 score. That's not a consensus of negative reaction. Check the RT scores as well. The numbers back me up. Reception was mixed to positive in general, not negative. And with the PT gen getting older I have no doubt the trilogy's rep will get better over time.


Sent from my R2 unit

 

Go survey the man on the street rather than an easily brigaded internet poll and I suspect it'll tell a different story. Well, I imagine most of them will say "Star Wars? That's the one with Spock, right?" but you get my point.

Disney's actively backing off from the PT to the point that there's speculation in more cynical parts of the net that they'll retcon the whole thing out of existence. That alone should speak volumes about the actual perceptions.

 

Critical Consensus: ?Star Wars Prequels Actually Better Reviewed Than Originals

by Senh Duong | Thursday, May. 19 2005
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/sta...uels_actually_better_reviewed_than_originals/

Tomatometer Scores for Original Trilogy During Original Release Dates:
(Click on the links for the archived quotes from Archive.org)
31% - Return of the Jedi
52% - The Empire Strikes Back
79% - Star Wars
Average Tomatometer: 54%

Prequels Tomatometer Scores Based on Current Active Critics:
83% - Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith
65% - Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones
62% - Star wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace
Average Tomatometer: 70%

Original Trilogy Tomatometer Scores Based on Current Active Critics:
80% - Return of the Jedi
98% - The Empire Strikes Back
93% - Star Wars
Average Tomatometer: 90%

 

That article should raise a lot of alarm bells as it relies only on archived newspaper reviews for its "contemporary" breakdown while allowing blogs and the like into the "current" breakdown. A more accurate analysis would rely on Top Critic Tomatometers. It also conflates critical acceptance with popular acceptance despite the fact that a majority of moviegoers would strongly disagree with that assessment, and frequently vocalize as much.

Furthermore, opinion contemporary with release is wholly irrelevant to a discussion of current opinions and the perception of the broad consensus of current opinion which, again, is what we are discussing. The very fact that the author felt such an article was necessary speaks volumes about the state of the latter.

Edit: Or, more to the point - suppose you changed my mind and I agreed that most people liked the PT. Disney and EA don't agree with that assessment, and they control content.

 

If Star Wars was just the Original Trilogy, I wouldn't find it any more interesting than Indiana Jones. It is too shallow on its own. The prequels and related EU are what made Star Wars far more interesting to me than most other works of fiction.

 

Again, I don't really have any problems with you enjoying the PT. The point I'm arguing is significantly more technical.

 

You never said you did. My problem is that it looks like Disney is limiting the future of things like Battlefront to the OT.

 

Fair enough. Honestly, while I'm not much of a fan of the PT, I did enjoy the Clone Wars maps in the preceding Battlefront games, so I'd be a bit sad to see them go.

 

Wonder how many Episode 7 levels will be in the game?

 

Count me in the camp of "would be ecstatic if the game was focused on Original Trilogy only". It's been 10+ years since there has been a decent game set (exclusively) in the OT time period. I would be over the moon to get a game set in the (fake) universe that I enjoy with all the modern bells and whistles.

What I don't want to see is the haphazard inclusion of OT and PT armies. Takes away from the immersion (to me, and yes subjective obviously) when they pit two armies against each other that have no business fighting each other. I don't want to see Clones vs Storm Troopers, or Rebels vs. Droids or some such, any more than I would wan't to see America vs. Britain in a WW2 game. I suppose a more apt analogy would be WW1 Germany vs. WW2 Japan.

If they came out with a stand alone Clone Wars era game, great. I'm sure there's boats of people that would like it, but keep your peanut butter out of my chocolate, please.

 

I wouldn't mind seeing cross-overs. CIS vs. Rebels, Empire vs. Republic, CIS vs. Empire, Rebellion vs. Republic etc. But we have to have Republic vs. CIS and Empire vs. Rebels at the very least. Heck, give us all 3 if not all 4 on one map! Or new factions to play as.
A Clone Wars only version would be fine as well. Still want an EU version as well. A TOR version as well!

 

CIS vs. Empire? DelRay! Fund this!

 

It's ok Dorkslayer, I see from the other confused heads here that you fail to understand what's happening as do others.

In fact in the thread, the pro-PT crowd have looked like this while Ramza does his best Sir Bedevere impression:



However, if you could just extricate your head from the sand for a moment, I'd bid you to look around you.

As Ramza - sorry, Ser Bedevere - said, the official move is to distance the franchise from the PT. CW gets cancelled but we get Rebels. Fantasy Flight Games is only making RPG supplements for the OT era, and their wildly successful X-Wing minis game could add Prequel ships but has expressed a preference to eat their own feet one at a time and instead drawn from Legends ships. The new books will focus on... OT characters. The Battlefornt!!1!one! game looks exclusively OT too.

So to argue that, in line with the consensus of a large chunk of the population (and if you defer to RT or Metacritic to back up your point, then you are basically saying you don't get this whole, "read, comprehend, and rebut" concept) that the prequels weren't as good as the OT (note: I would call it a "giant misstep made by a raving egomaniac surrounded by yes-men too terrified to tell him his ideas, which also include The Crystal Skull, were the worst ideas in human history." So I'm being objective), Star Wars products return to the OT theme.

OK now?

 

So you're saying if the PT weighs as much as a duck.... it's made of wood...

 

See my posts in the prequel forum thread "What did you like about the prequels?"

 

I'm not sure what part of the point you're most keen on missing, but you're doing a damned fine job at missing it. The prequels have their redeeming moments, such as Qui-Gon Jinn being the embodiment of the Jedi that Ben spoke of. But they have lots of terrible things too, to the point where broad consensus is that the OT was better. This is not to say you can't enjoy them. It's to say that when companies like EA, FFG, etc are producing heavily OT-themed products then maybe there's a reason for it.

 

Broad consensus is always changing based on what view is popular at the moment. In the thread I referred to, I outlined reasons I prefer the prequels without using another person's opinions as justification for why I hold my views. My posts talk about the movies and EU on their own merits as I see them. Here is most of one post from that thread.

"The story of the originals, on its own, seems shallow, and what happens from one scene to the next has little meaning for the overall story. There doesn't seem to be as much momentum carrying one scene to the next. For example, in Episode 4, events that should be of significant importance to the main characters, the death of Luke's aunt and uncle and the destruction of Alderaan have no effect on the main characters. Luke sees his dead aunt and uncle in one scene, and by the next, they are forgotten and never thought about again. Alderaan is destroyed while Princess Leia watches, and receives only a passing mention by a rebel leader later on. The heroes continue on with their adventure through the film, and many events of the story have little meaning to the overall story. Luke gets attacked by a Wampa, recovers, and is back to normal a scene or two later. Han is saved from Jabba's palace with no loss of life to the heroes, they go right back to leading the rebels. Most events of the stories have little to no meaningful impact on the characters.

Compare the lightness of the Original Trilogy with the Prequel Trilogy, where many events are interconnected, and have consequences for the characters and story.

One example of a continuous story in the prequels, where a continuous sequence of events drive a story to its conclusion.

Anakin Skywalker for one, has a continuous story arc, where each event along his journey leads to the finale of Episode III, with his final shift to the dark side. The continuous story is one of Anakin's attachment and inability to accept loss. This begins in Episode I, where he leaves his mother to travel to a distant world, where he is seen as an outsider whom the Jedi view with distrust. In Episode II, he reunites with Padme, who herself, has had little personal life and is lonely. (I can't remember if it was a deleted scene or part of the main movie, but Padme talks about her continuous service to Naboo and a desire to have a personal life) Anakin loses his mother in this movie, and sinks further into his worry and fear of loss. Anakin and Padme try to use each other to make up for what is lacking in their lives. In their weakness and immaturity, they begin a relationship that cannot last. When Anakin learns that Padme could die in childbirth, his inability to cope with loss, his need for Padme's companionship, drives him to extreme measures to ensure that he does not lose her.

In this moment when Anakin submits to the Sith, every past action, the coldness of the Jedi, the losses Anakin has experienced, his fear of future loss, as well as the schemes of Palpatine, drive the story to its end. Palpatine's destruction of the Jedi, and Anakin's turn to evil is the culmination of nearly every event from the previous moments on film.

In contrast, the finale of the original trilogy is not the conclusion of events of that trilogy, because so many events are unconnected to the ultimate conclusion. Luke has always been good. He is less whiny in Episode VI than in Episode IV, but ultimately, he does not change. The rebel alliance wins its war with the Empire, but this war is simply assumed to be happening from the start of Episode IV. Backstory behind the war isn't given, we don't really see who the rebels are and why they are fighting the empire. The relationship between the two sides doesn't change over the course of the story, and the battles in each movie have little effect on the battles in the next movie.

The characters, and their relationships to each other, with the exception of Vader, are mostly static over the course of the trilogy."