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

How moddable will this game be for PC gamers?

 

Well, if the recent Frostbite Battlefield games are any indication, which is the engine being used for this, then it won't be at all.

 

Unless EA see potential in the paid mod market. Thanks for that one Valve...

Seriously though, unless EA see a potential revenue stream and they release an official mod-support kit then don't expect a modding community. They've always been anti-modding as a policy, for whatever reason.

 

They didn't used to be but gone are the days of Medal of Honor Allied Assault and Battlefield 1942

I played so many custom maps and TC's for those games. BF1942 had the Star Wars mod Galactic Conquest before Battlefront was a thing. Good times.

 

Agreed. Whilst these next gen graphics look very good, I feel the basics of BF1 have been removed. It looks like there is no OFFLINE instant action with bots on your side.

You either have solo against bots, or coop (just two humans) against bots, or ONLINE action with bots to supplement numbers. Even in the last mode, given the small unit count, it's unlikely you really have bots, except the AT-AT on rails and sound effects of troopers talking.

I think that is such a shame. Whilst this will be a good game, it's going to be like Battlefield and COD rather than the original spirit of BF1. Is it really too much to ask for the trailer mode to be available offline with another 38/39 bots given this is 2015 and BF1 was created over 10 years ago?!!

 

Unfortunately, that's the state of the game, for multiplayer shooters in general.
More and more developers take the "why would they buy it for singleplayer if it's multiplayer focused" route these days, failing to understand that sometimes we want the multiplayer experience within our solo modes.

 

Yes, but I just don't understand why they would remove bots and offline play?? It makes no sense. Battlefront without bots ceases to be Battlefront. It's like Ross without Rachel or Ying without Yang. Battlefront was about you choosing to fight alone or with an army behind you. About you being immersed in a battle not being James Bond or Jason Bourne or even Luke or Vader and going it solo against an army. The whole point was you were one of those guys we see in the films who is doing the necessary battle work, fighting on the battle field.

I feel like they have let us down. They have reduced the unit cap from the former 50 ish and even that offline has changed to effectively 1 - just the human player versus enemy bots. That's pointless!!!!

 

I personally don't have as big of an issue with Battlefront's lack of a true singleplayer campaign. While I will certainly miss the instant action and Galactic Conquest for sure, its absence won't ruin the game as long as they stay true to the spirit of STAR WARS. I will say however that the biggest reason for the lack of singleplayer could very well be [A]- the result of a change in video game design philosophy, and/or - the potential for having an extensive, mostly/exclusively singleplayer game in the future

Regarding space battles, I loved those... except when you had to sit and wait for a TIE Fighter to magically create itself out of thin air. If they had added space battles, I would have wanted them to be able to have a hangar bay that would hold the required amount of fighters/bombers/etc. for all the players in the lobby, otherwise it could end up as a flop.

Just my two cents, take it as it is I suppose.

 

I think in terms of the hangar bay, yes you could have some form of automated system which is used to retrieve parked cars in multi storeys retrieving starfighters, etc and bringing them into the hangar to make it look more realistic than spawning there magically. But what was there before will be miles better than simply magically teleporting into an airborne starfighter after finding an arcade style icon on the map. In BF1 vehicles were available at the command posts on the ground battles and you could hop in and land and get out and back in as you pleased.

I think the restrictions on general gameplay like that will be damaging. This could still be a good game, but it would have lost so much of the good stuff from the original battlefront. Also in terms of instant action in particular, it would be a shame to lose that. You could play that single or coop or versus a human offline player with bots making up numbers. I think an offline component with bots on your side is very important if it has the Star Wars Battlefront spirit. The original BF1 had the true spirit of Star Wars and made you feel part of an army in the Star Wars universe we all love.

 

Battlefront 1 = wide open maps, large unit cap, team orders, gunships on ground and orbital strikes, no powerups whatsoever, flexible and maximum variety of play, realistic heroes, old graphics of the time, good online play, splash damage, clone wars and original era, a classic super fun game of our times. Best basics and realism, variety and fun. A few extra features would be nice.
Battlefront 2 = medium maps (a little more restrictive and replaced the old ones), large unit cap, poor team orders, no gunships on ground and no orbital strikes, no splash damage, started the powerups mode which ruined realism, introduced playable, but arcade style heroes, better graphics than the 1st, better mission/campaign, introduced space battles which added a great new dimension (even if the graphics and play could be a little more interactive), poorer clone wars play, but far superior original era, better online play. Basics were tampered with which spoilt its real potential. Additional features were a big bonus and almost made up for the tampering. Left us hopeful for the lucky third try for perfection.

New DICE Battlefront = Far superior 2015 next gen graphics. Super additional features like shield generators, brings back orbital strikes, seems to add additional modes of play. Attention to detail is phenomenal and finally dead troopers stay there instead of magically disappearing. Adds realism of a battle in terms of sound effects and environment. Removes additional advances made in BF2 and tampers and ruins basics of BF1 even more - no space battles, no gunships on ground, no team order system, much smaller unit cap, no spawn points and now restricted movement on the map. Timers on vehicles. Powerups to even have the ability to pilot a vehicle. Arcade style gameplay where one cannot explore the map or decide how to complete an objective or win the battle, but instead must follow a predetermined path. Removes clone wars era all together. Graphics are absolutely superior, and the additional abilities and modes are great. But the removal of basics, and introduction of even more powerups and timers have ruined the immersion that could have been felt in a superior environment created by a powerful gaming engine. Restrictions on the player and small unit caps have ruined the flexibility, variety and overall playability. This is not have fun however you want anymore, but "fun will now commence...when DICE wish it...in the way DICE wishes it."

Please improve these flaws in the next game.

 

I don't remember the TIEs "magically created out of thin air". If you're on a mutiplayer campaign, of course the small fighters/bumbers/etc. were located in hangars. Each side started within its own cruiser. You'd hop on board the fighter and fly it out to space. And I'm almost 99% sure that you would always respawn within the hangar after you've been killed in a space battle; not reappearing automatically in a new one.

 

Agreed. I think the old BF way works best. A good improvement would be to be able to call down a flying starfighter or gunship. I remember in BF1 someone used to hop in and take off before you got to it and you wish you could have gotten in or call it back down.

I liked the fact that BF1 had aerial vehicles on ground battles. I like the space battles of BF2 too. Just wish you had those really large canons you see in ROTS which could blast the cruiser and if you had a massive map inside the capital cruiser - e.g. their bridge which you could capture.

 

Well having a large canon to blast a cruiser; which is usually the base for the opposing team, kind of defeats the purpose of the massive multiplayer battle in the first place. I remember on the Geonosis map there were smaller canons that you could use to shoot at the one-person vehicles riding around. I think they had something similar on Hoth - they were ineffective against the AT-AT Walkers, but you could shoot at the Tauntans and AT-STs.

 

I phrased my point poorly, I meant that if the bots got to all the available fighters first, you were stuck in the hangar waiting for another vehicle to spawn, hence my semi-humorous comment "out of thin air." I for one never had the benefit of playing either of the original Battlefronts online, which I do regret somewhat. And don't misunderstand; I completely agree with your collective concerns related to the bots and singleplayer and such, including space battles, I was simply saying that, in my eyes, the issues being brought up aren't extremely important to the integrity of the game. I apologize for my poor phrasing; I am still new here hahaha I just signed up yesterday at like eleven at night hahaha

 

No harm, no foul. It's just a shame that the multiplayer campaigns from the original games have been rendered obsolete, because I certainly had a blast playing them. I still have my PS2, but alas, I traded in both BF1 and BF2 after seeing the BF3 teaser for PS3 around the time when I first bought the new console.

 

Very true, very true I did mostly the same thing I actually am looking at my PS2 right now: it's sitting next to my TV which is playing ANH right now hahaha

 

If you're after online action, I'm sure some of the Game Ranger PC servers are still operational. It's a long shot, sure. Especially since you'd have to pick up Battlefront 2 for PC [and if on Steam use a no-CD crack, Steam hates Game Ranger], as well as download Game Ranger. Good news is the game will run on even the lowest of spec PC's [slight exaggeration]. I haven't been on it quite a while, at least online, but it's an option.

If anything, regarding this new game - as I said before, even if it is easy to implement, very few developers see the point of adding massive singleplayer elements into a multiplayer experience these days. It is unfortunate that has happened with this game, as many do regard the Instant Action modes worthwhile, even if it's not much of a challenge.

 

I'm not a PC gamer (at least anything that doesn't involve simulation). And wouldn't those require subscription fees anyway? I know how some of those online PC games work.

 

Neither Game Ranger nor Steam require any sort of subscription fee. They're free accounts. And it's only MMO's and MOBA's which commonly require subscriptions.
Oh, upside is you can use a controller if you have one. Downside is you have to key in every single control for all five schemes [infantry, vehicle, starfighter, Jedi, turret].

 

Yes if you had large canons to destroy cruisers you would need to change the battle slightly. Instead of one capital ship, have several (like the full scale battle seen in ROTS). And should capital ships be destroyed (don't forget you first have to breach their shields and destroy significant hardpoints), there is also a massive space station or permanent capital ship that can take the beating and acts as a final spawn point.

Also the capital ships should have a far larger interior than just a simple hangar bay and control room. Instead have a large map inside (with say a few command posts for good measure) and allow the fight to go all the way up from the hangar to corridors to the bridge. If the bridge is captured, control of the capital ship's turrets, mega turrets (as seen in ROTS) and hangar bay to spawn vehicle is yours. The capital ships should be able to move, with the player directing their movement much like a walker on the ground. This would make it possible to capture capital ships and truly make the space battle like a ground battle with command posts inside the ship and a moving (albeit very slow moving versus starfighters) ships like you see in the movies or Clone Wars series. This would be complimented by dogfights by starfighters in space (themselves capable of attacking capital ships from the outside).

Of course the other way to win a space battle (just like a ground battle) is to simply defeat the enemy by wiping out their numbers or destroying or capturing all their ships. But there is so much potential to improve the space battles and make them truly like the ones we see in the movies or in the Clone Wars series.

In terms of mixed ground and space, have battles where you actually have to blockade a planet or get supplies down there. Or simply have a massive planetary battle at both ground and space level, where orbital strikes depend upon control of space (by dominating the battle above) and reinforcements of troops and vehicles can come from both ground and space. Bring in those gunships which can carry vehicles down to the surface. Also bring in gunships back to ground battles too.

Agreed. I do hope this comes back in the not to distant future. Multiplayer instant action with plenty of bots on your side as well was immensely fun. Hope they can still be played on the new consoles.

Yes agreed. It was annoying on the ground or in space when you spawned and some hopeless bot gets to the vehicle before you and then you see them on the radar just aimlessly flying about. Especially on BF1 where they took a gunship! Part of the way to fix this would be with the BF1 order system being tweaked (the BF2 order system wasn't that good so forget that). You were able to order troops or ground vehicles in ground battles, but not aerial vehicles. Have the ability to call down an airborne starfighter or gunship to the human player. That would work.

In terms of the thin air, I get what you mean about realism. That's what I meant about having something similar to what you see in Star Wars Rebels (the tv show). In the hangar bays or ground battles, have the delivery system employed there where there is essentially a factory style railing system from an area behind the hangar bay wall with Tie fighters or whatever ships being brought through a hatch and delivered to the hangar bay. In addition, ships that landed were lifted and removed to be taken for refuelling, etc. Of course, this should take time to make the game more realistic and fair.

Also one way to stop the bot from taking a vehicle was to try to order them to hold position and then get in and drive off lol. This worked in BF1, but in BF2 the order system was clumsy and took time to target the person to stop.

I still think that bots are an absolute requirement to be on your side in all battles (except maybe the survival mode). Because this is not a game where it's you compulsory alone to fight against an army. It is meant to be you as part of an army given the choice to join forces with your team to beat the enemy or do it single handedly.

You really need to experience the BF games with bots on your side whether single or multiplayer to understand that that is essential for a true Star Wars feel. After all you are not playing as a hero here, but an ordinary trooper.

Even as a hero, you should have the option to command troops on your side and have them cover you etc. That's realistic.

 

Well in BF2's space battles, you could already find your way into what some might call the "heart" of the cruiser to bring down the enemy's shields and even take out users manning the turrets. I remember manning the turrets on those cruiser (home bases) in BF2 were kind of the lazy way out, but it was still a different perspective. I actually thought it was pretty neat too; you could shoot down enemy fighters already engaged in dogfights, all from the comfort of your own seat. The only drawback was that you were completely vulnerable to any enemies who had boarded your cruiser.

 

Yes but it was a very small heart of the cruiser given its immense size from the outside and in reality. I mean you're talking about something that should be the size of at least half a ground battle here. Lol on being vunerable to attack, which is why I think that turret control should be on the main bridge. I think something similar to what I have suggested, with a far larger interior would make for an epic battle and something closer to those we see on the movie screen and in Clone Wars. E.g. it always takes even our greatest heroes or villains a while to get to the command centre of a capital ship. They are incredibly big.

 

I use steam and GameRanger and I never had to use a nocd crack (for BF2).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Wait, even A-Wings and Y-Wings aren't playable?

 

It's already been established that the new BF game takes place in the OT. Why would they need to include the clone wars era vehicles if none of the maps will feature a clone wars setting?