Chefelf.com Night Life: Starwars Battlefront 1 & 2 - Chefelf.com Night Life

Jump to content

Star Wars Fan Convention

Page 1 of 1

Starwars Battlefront 1 & 2 woot and meh, respectively

#1 User is offline   J m HofMarN Icon

  • Knows All The Girls Named Lola
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7,234
  • Joined: 24-May 04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rural Pahrump Nevada
  • Interests:Tyranny
  • Country:United States

Posted 23 November 2008 - 12:33 AM

I played battlefront one and it was incredible. It was challenging to be sure but still a lot of fun. the fact that the enemy had a limited number of reinforcements made the game fair, and it was fun to pretend that I could order my squad mates around. every character class was useful in the extreme and very well balanced. As much as I liked to just run in and murderize everything with a soldier, I enjoyed sniping, and then I began to really appreciate the close in capabilities of the shotgun users, and then of course the pilots made you nigh immortal in the air, and so forth.

I bought BF2 on the strength of the first and I cant believe how much they fucked it up. First of all, the enemy now has infinite reinforcements. So I can kill a hundred (as I've been known to do) enemies, and I accomplish nothing. Also, the battles become incredibly chaotic. You cannot use a sniper. You cannot build turrets. Enemies will come from fucking every cardinal direction to kill you even if you're standing at your own spawn point. Space battles, as my friend Chris and I both agreed, are a circle of hell. Lazers from every direction, and now including up and down.

The campaign is ridiculously difficult and they stick you into the storming of the Jedi temple, which is a mission from hell.

I just dont see a lot of the fun value anymore, especially now that each mission is so fascist oriented that you go from one clear beeline objective to the next. Killing enemies no longer serves any purpose and its actually better to just bunny hop through a level from one command post to another without firing a shot. The sandbox element is really lacking. Apparently the inclusion of playable Jedi was supposed to make up for this, but no.

This post has been edited by J m HofMarN: 23 November 2008 - 12:39 AM

Quote

I don't know about you but I have never advocated that homosexuals, for any reason, be cut out of their mother's womb and thrown into a bin.
- Deucaon toes a hard line on gay fetus rights.
0

#2 User is offline   Toru-chan Icon

  • Level Boss
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 394
  • Joined: 25-January 07
  • Country:Australia

Posted 23 November 2008 - 07:46 AM

Couldn't agree more!

I really enjoyed BF1; played it to death. Was really looking forward to BF2 but it truly sucks:

- Immersion ruined by cameos "Hey! You can be Luke Skywalker! Press F1!" (No. I'm already a Stormtrooper and happy with that. Stop spamming me with your inane crap and let me just play)
- Corny Princess Leia - In the vein of the Clone Wars TV announcer
- No skill required in Cameo mode - you can close your eyes and kill hundreds of enemy
- Can't get high classes straight away - incredible and that's a first! - Lucas Arts actually managed to introduce 'the grind' into a 10 minute game!
- Mostly the same scenarios as BF1 with only a few new ones - just more and more enemies - you get the sense you're not fighting the Rebels/Empire - you're fighting the level designer and it ruins the whole illusion
- Space Battles ARE SO DAMNED BORING
- The new character classes were added for no gameplay reason and it shows - they're just not worth playing
- Campaigns - the cutscenes were good - but quickly went downhill. It's all RUSH TO THE OBJECTIVE OH NO YOU ARE 15 SECONDS TOO LATE YOU LOSE! That absurd Jedi Temple scenario I played maybe ten times - it's near on impossible, and not for any good reason - just to make you play it again and again. It stopped being anything resembling fun. I quit after that.

BF1 had some shortcomings they could have improved on for BF2 - fewer chokepoints, maybe better coordination between units or the ability to operate in squads (instead of everyone runs at the enemy independently). But mostly they should have added more content.

BF2 is a very bad game. BF1 lives on my hard drive. BF2 I deleted. Not often Lucas Arts screws up a game but BF2 they did.

This post has been edited by Toru-chan: 23 November 2008 - 08:04 AM

0

#3 User is offline   Vesuvius Icon

  • Soothsayer
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 726
  • Joined: 30-July 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Crossroads
  • Country:United States

Posted 23 November 2008 - 12:10 PM

Whoa, I didn't mind BF2... I guess I should play the first one then and see the differences.
0

#4 User is offline   J m HofMarN Icon

  • Knows All The Girls Named Lola
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7,234
  • Joined: 24-May 04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rural Pahrump Nevada
  • Interests:Tyranny
  • Country:United States

Posted 23 November 2008 - 03:35 PM

Toru- Yeah I forgot about the Jedi thing. Yeah, I was getting into my arc trooper groove and all of a sudden after I've kicked some ass the game is all "OMGROFLDARFVADER!!!111" And theres a goddamn count down of how long I can choose him? How the fuck distracting is that? Also the timed run here system is possibly the stupidest aspect. It reduces the game to a relay race, with some guns thrown in for a challenge.

Vesuvius- Try BF1. The fun factor is increased exponentially, and you can win in multiple ways. On Geonosis, the level I hated the most in 1, my squad kept getting wiped out and I could never quite make up the difference... Until I turned pilot, hijacked one of the Republic landing craft, flew straight up, and just tore the shit out of everything on the map. By the end of the mission I had over 100 kills, and my side had one troop left, but we won. That's a good game. In BF2 you cannot win on kills, its just a stupid list of chores and if you don't get them you don't get your treat of some twat popping by as a playable character.

Quote

I don't know about you but I have never advocated that homosexuals, for any reason, be cut out of their mother's womb and thrown into a bin.
- Deucaon toes a hard line on gay fetus rights.
0

#5 User is offline   Toru-chan Icon

  • Level Boss
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 394
  • Joined: 25-January 07
  • Country:Australia

Posted 23 November 2008 - 11:06 PM

QUOTE (J m HofMarN @ Nov 24 2008, 06:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Toru- Yeah I forgot about the Jedi thing. Yeah, I was getting into my arc trooper groove and all of a sudden after I've kicked some ass the game is all "OMGROFLDARFVADER!!!111" And theres a goddamn count down of how long I can choose him? How the fuck distracting is that?

Yeah! Especially you're trying to peer past it to see what's happening to your trooper. And those cameo classes are boring as hell to play. They're nearly immortal, and there's no skill whatsoever required to play them. You just mash the buttons and kill stuff. When I played the cameo Ewan McGregor I killed hundred of droids effortlessly. Compare that to BF1 where you can play with a sort of martial poetry: jump, dive flinch, zap, zap, roll off to dodge fire, jump back. This isn't because I've learned the moves: This is on the fly and it's just so much fun to play.

QUOTE
Also the timed run here system is possibly the stupidest aspect. It reduces the game to a relay race, with some guns thrown in for a challenge. In BF2 you cannot win on kills, its just a stupid list of chores and if you don't get them you don't get your treat of some twat popping by as a playable character.

Like the cameos, it ruins the immersion: "EVERYONE TO THE LIBRARY! OH NO YOU'RE TOO LATE! YOU LOSE!"

QUOTE
Vesuvius- Try BF1. The fun factor is increased exponentially, and you can win in multiple ways. On Geonosis, the level I hated the most in 1, my squad kept getting wiped out and I could never quite make up the difference... Until I turned pilot, hijacked one of the Republic landing craft, flew straight up, and just tore the shit out of everything on the map.

Yeah, on BF1 Genosis I took one of the Clonecraft carriers, hover above the battlefield taking out the rollerbots, helping the clonetroopers below seize their objective. When I spot an opening, I land and order my guys to disembark, hopefully seizing it. It's a lot more fun and dammit it's a lot more real. BF2 Genosis sucks: It's just more and more bad guys. There's no finesse. It's just blam-blam-blam until you can be a cameo jedi then its back to blam-blam-blam. Playing the cameos is the only real way to win in the face of such large numbers of enemy.

What I loved about BF1 is the immersion: It's like you are there. When I'm on the fields of Hoth, it's like I'm really there. All I wish was the enemies instead of just running to each other, maybe dropped to the ground and exchanged fire prone before advancing. Instead they run one by one and you pick them off. Better if they fired prone then charged as a group. Now probably the BF1 designers wanted an arcade game feel, but I think this would have helped rather than hindered.

But with all the bad changes they made to BF2 you have to wonder if the people who designed it actually played this or the previous game (I can't fault the programmers - they were following the instructions of some extremely untalented designers. How these losers go the job is beyond me.) Why didn't playtesting pick any of this up? I'd like to meet the guys who wrote this thing and tell them to their face just how badly they suck.

And here's one extremely cool thing I did with BF1. In the course of my work I have access to some very cool tech, including a very expensive VR helmet. I put it on and played Hoth. OMG. I was standing under the AT-AT walker, looking up at it. It was just so fricking wow! Dudes! I've seen Hoth in 3D and IT IS AWESOME!

This post has been edited by Toru-chan: 23 November 2008 - 11:11 PM

0

#6 User is offline   Vesuvius Icon

  • Soothsayer
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 726
  • Joined: 30-July 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Crossroads
  • Country:United States

Posted 24 November 2008 - 07:05 PM

Alright then, I'll have to order the BF1 soon then. Sounds like more fun. I like using strategy in a shootout anyway.

However, I did enjoy playing as Maul in BF2, but that wore thin pretty quickly.
0

#7 User is offline   Just your average movie goer Icon

  • -
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,140
  • Joined: 10-April 04
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 03 January 2009 - 04:29 AM

Hi all. Belated happy new year (but not too belated). I love this thread - mainly because it's so nice to read that not everyone thinks Battlefront II is the best thing sinced sliced bread.

I love Battlefront I. It's my favourite Star Wars game, topping the original Dark Forces (underrated brilliance) and Jedi Outcast (a later entry in that series with the funky Quake engine). It's not perfect though and I do think it could be improved upon. For instance, I wouldn't allow enemies to spawn in a contested command post once the control meter swings past the halfway point. I would fix that bug that lets enemies hide in walls and shoot you with impunity. I would make AT-AT blasts move a little faster so that rebels don't have time to make cups of tea while you're shooting at them and I would tone down those wretched rebel pilots (man, I hate rebel pilots). They're too damn overpowered and irritatingly cocky.

I thought maybe Battlefront II would be an expansion on this, giving us more levels to choose from while fixing those little problems.

However, as JM said, it's given us a whole lot of new ones. I won't go into too much detail here, suffice to say I hate the endless objectives and the fact that the enemies have infinite reinforcements. It just becomes stressful rather than fun. Also, the prequel elements were too intrusive as well. In the first game, prequel stuff is there but you have the option of playing a completely classic mode game without tainting it with trade federation crap and the like. In Battlefront II's story mode however, when you get past the Episode III stuff (or more rather, IF you get past the Episode III stuff), you still have to deal with Naboo guards, Jedi on the Death Star and the like.

I also detest not having instant access to all my troop types and having to earn points to unlock them. At first, I didn't even know about the locking system. I thought it was a bug in the game.

To add to what JM said about the space battles, they are also very repetitive. Each space battle feels exactly the same, no matter who's fighting who or what planet it's taking place over. There's also a huge wasted opportunity in that when you board an enemy ship, you only have access to its hangar and one room. It's unrealistic and exceedingly boring.

Another missed opportunity was the in the introduction of the hunt mode. I thought "Hey, this sounds like fun!" But in keeping with the rest of the game (i.e. the player must NOT enjoy themselves), this mode is surprisingly dull. When you hunt ewoks, you can only use the snipers. You're not allowed to blast them with excessive firepower because that would be too much fun. When you hunt gungans, you have to sink to the level of playing a Federation droid... and also, gungans can fight back. Where's the fun in that? I thought the idea would be give everybody who hated those things a chance to just blow them away...

... and this comes to my biggest problem with the game - the pervading design philosophy that everything has to be really difficult. I believe that the person who buys the game should be able to make it as easy or as difficult as they want. For instance, if I want to be invincible, have unlimited ammo and fight enemies who are only armed with wiffle bats, that should be my prerrogative. I can't see what difference it makes to the game designer. However, these guys who made Battlefront II don't even give you the option of 'easy'. They just have normal (which in Battlefront II language translates as "frustratingly difficult") and hard (which means "impossible: the game designers just want to test how much rubbish the human mind can take).

So I think, no, the driving force behind game design should not be "How can we make this more difficult?" Rather, it should be "How can we make this more fun?"

Also, I'd warn anyone against buying this game simply for the fact that it comes with SecuRom, which is basically malware. It hides in your registry and reinstalls itself if you delete it. It's basically a thing to stop pirated copies but it really only hurts legitimate owners of games. At one point, it tried to block my Star Wars Lego game - and why? Because it was released by a different publisher so know-it-all SecuRom assumed it was an illegal copy.

However, I have successfully removed SecuRom from my computer since I encountered it. If anybody else has it on their machine and want to remove it, look online for a small, free application called "CureSecuRom". It's good gear.

Anyway, great posts all. Good to see that not everyone was blinded by the hype.
0

#8 User is offline   Mr Pye Icon

  • Henchman
  • Pip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 85
  • Joined: 28-April 08
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 03 January 2009 - 07:07 PM

For instance, if I want to be invincible, have unlimited ammo and fight enemies who are only armed with wiffle bats, that should be my prerrogative.

He he, I'm sure there are games for that as well.

But I agree with your general stance that a game should not be so difficult it kills the fun. Some of the most enjoyable games are quite easy, yet one keeps playing them because they are still enjoyable. And if part of the game design is intended to be experienced (which is the only term I can think for it right now) then it is ruin for game to snatch you out of this because you have to keep restarting a saved game or repeat something painstaking a couple of dozen times when you know very well that just a little luck would have gotten you through.

I find this true for games in general, not just Star Wars games. If a game has to be very tough it should at least give you unlimited time to figure it out or it'll just stress you out. One reason I'm so sad for the seeming demise of turn based strategy games. The real time games are fun for the first 75% of the levels, but then they just become an excersize in mousehandling and fingerskill and that's when they loose my interest. Good thing most of them have cheat codes.

In my philosophy a game should be quite simple in its normal difficulty, even at the boss levels, cause no one likes having to resort to beginners difficulty to finish a game. Then there should be the option of selecting higher difficulty if one so desires, which might then make the higher diffculty something enjoyable rather than annoying. And that doesn't seem like a difficult thing for game creators to achielve. On the other hand I must admit I know very little about making computer games.

This post has been edited by Mr Pye: 03 January 2009 - 07:17 PM

0

#9 User is offline   Toru-chan Icon

  • Level Boss
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 394
  • Joined: 25-January 07
  • Country:Australia

Posted 05 January 2009 - 07:31 PM

Hi JYAMG, wondered where you were...

QUOTE (Just your average movie goer @ Jan 3 2009, 07:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
To add to what JM said about the space battles, they are also very repetitive. Each space battle feels exactly the same, no matter who's fighting who or what planet it's taking place over. There's also a huge wasted opportunity in that when you board an enemy ship, you only have access to its hangar and one room. It's unrealistic and exceedingly boring.

Incredible, isn't it. We've got high-powered PCs, awesome graphics cards and home-theatre LCDs sitting on our desk. And this is the best they could do? Space battles this damned boring? Didn't this occur to anyone writing/testing this game? And yes, when you finally get on the enemy ship... just a hangar and one room with a cupboard. BORING. So damned boring.

QUOTE
So I think, no, the driving force behind game design should not be "How can we make this more difficult?" Rather, it should be "How can we make this more fun?"

Good point. Making someone play the same battle over and over again isn't fun. The game designers really screwed up here.

QUOTE
Also, I'd warn anyone against buying this game simply for the fact that it comes with SecuRom, which is basically malware.

Now I'm mad. I just checked and that intrusive piece of SONY malware had indeed installed itself on my PC. Scum of the earth. My mistake was having a legit copy. Next time I'll just rip it off thepiratebay.org with SecuRom no doubt already excised. Shame on you, LucasArts.

You can cure the SecuRom malware with this link:
http://www.gameburnw...eSecuROMEng.rar

QUOTE (Mr Pye @ Jan 4 2009, 10:07 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I find this true for games in general, not just Star Wars games. If a game has to be very tough it should at least give you unlimited time to figure it out or it'll just stress you out. One reason I'm so sad for the seeming demise of turn based strategy games. The real time games are fun for the first 75% of the levels, but then they just become an excersize in mousehandling and fingerskill and that's when they loose my interest. Good thing most of them have cheat codes.

There's a game a bit long in the tooth called Operation Flashpoint that did this fairly well. You could only save one game per scenario, so you had to be really careful. That meant not running straight at the enemy. You had to stay low, shoot when you can, but keep out of trouble. Now compare that to Doom-like games where you run around blasters blazing and look for health pills.

But my dirty secret: I found a savegame cheat for Flashpoint and started using it. My gameplay would suffer. I'd sneak up, shoot a few bad guys, then save. I got through the mission, but it definitely took the fun out of it. Yet the idea of playing the same mission over and over again (even from that one savegame) was too much to bear.

If anyone comes up with a solution for this dilemma, please share: We like the threat of dying to make the game interesting, but we hate the idea of dying.

Agreed on turn-based games: Civilization, Master of Magic, MOO were great games. Unfortunately no one has come up with anything better, and Civ I's and MOO's gameplay is far better than any of its sequels.

Anyway, isn't it time we saw something new? We've been playing DOOM-with-skins for ten years now...

QUOTE
In my philosophy a game should be quite simple in its normal difficulty, even at the boss levels, cause no one likes having to resort to beginners difficulty to finish a game. Then there should be the option of selecting higher difficulty if one so desires, which might then make the higher diffculty something enjoyable rather than annoying. And that doesn't seem like a difficult thing for game creators to achielve. On the other hand I must admit I know very little about making computer games.

Trouble is higher-difficulty difficulty in the eyes of game designers just means more enemies. More and more until you can't possibly win. I strongly suspect the people who write these games don't play them.

0

#10 User is offline   KurganX Icon

  • Soothsayer
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 566
  • Joined: 06-June 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Country:United States

Posted 06 January 2009 - 09:24 PM

A mediocre series at best (note: I own both games on the PC), but then it was created to capitalize on the success of Battlefield: 1942, a game I never played, and one that any fan of will tell you is far superior anyway (despite the lack of SW license, and there was a fan mod for Star Wars made back in the day anyway, but IIRC Lucas got it canned, though I could be wrong about that).

The first game was rather monotonous, and the real "fun" was to be had in single player. However they didn't do much to support the game after release (like all LucasArts titles these days, sadly), and one thing you couldn't do that I wanted, was to have a human team vs. bots (at our LAN party we tried to do that but couldn't). SWBF2 did implement this latter feature, but too little, too late.

Removing "prone" in the sequel was a dumb idea. Apparently people discovered you could exploit parts of certain maps (ie: hiding inside parts of walls) using prone, and so instead of fixing this, they went with the lazy way out and removed "prone" (as well as some of the maps too, apparently). This was one aspect that actually made the game interesting and feel more like a war game... because everyone wasn't just running around constantly firing from the hip. The "toss and forget, unaimable" grenades bugged me too (to be fair, Republic Commando had those as well).

I'm just spoiled by the "deep" combat of other Star Wars FPS games (the JK series, Republic Commando) and though I played these a lot when they first came out, I just didn't get that same feel from them.

Playing Battlefront makes me feel like I'm playing with toys (when enemies get shot they even tumble over like pieces of plastic half the time, and you often can't tell where you were hit, and many of the weapons feel like popguns), rather than how I should feel whilst playing, which is immersed in the battles and world of the movies as if they were real.

That said, in many ways BF2 is an improvement over the original, though the infinite enemies reinforcements in the early SP missions (I honestly never played through them all, it was too tedious) and the scaled down maps (that were ported over) were less fun than the original.

These two would have worked the best as arcade games, because that's really what they are (nothing against arcade games, I was just expecting more, in an era when we have games like UT2k4 and Jedi Academy).

For an example of what I'm talking about, try playing the official "Asteroids" mod for Jedi Academy and then compare that to the gameplay of the space maps in SWBF2 or even the air combat on the ground maps in either game. Apart from a few spinning moves, it just isn't as fun. There felt like a lot of wasted potential in these games.

I guess some of this is pent up anger over the media campaigns to sell these along with sub-par Star Wars DVD box-sets, but they were fairly forgettable games, unless all you ever play are Star Wars titles, but even then, they needed work.

This post has been edited by KurganX: 06 January 2009 - 09:46 PM

0

#11 User is offline   Zatoichi Icon

  • Left Hand Man
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2,250
  • Joined: 04-August 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Upstate NY
  • Interests:Conquering the World! Being the who when you call "Who's there?"
  • Country:United States

Posted 07 January 2009 - 01:28 AM

I own them both for Xbox, kinda liked them both, but the first one was definately the better of the two. I've got my complaints for each, but can't remember much since I haven't played either game in awhile

I
- I loved playing as the Empire - fuck those Rebel Pilots! Out of all the opposing units in the game, they trashed my advances the most
- And screw the comp controlled Snowspeeders when playing on Hoth. In the ESB they go down left and right. In this I couldn't hit one for the life of me. The only thing I ever figured out to deal with them was to walk near mountainous areas so that they'd fly into the ground.
- Loved the shotgun + jumppacks with the Darktroopers. They were just plain fun, and I would often work on my "Death from Above" technique
- Why are the enemy special characters so un-freaking killable? (There were ways to pull it off, but it was an absolute bitch, and I usually got killed first) And why does mine do almost nothing to advance, while the enemy one kicks the shit out of my troops?

II
- What the crap are these electro-shocker pieces of garbage on my beloved Dark troopers?
- Why do I have to unlock what were previously standard guys? Good thing I enjoy using regular Storm Troopers.
- Well at least the Heroes can actually die in this, but why do they have a life drain when you play as one of them? That makes no freaking sense.
Apparently writing about JM here is his secret weakness. Muwahaha!!!! Now I have leverage over him and am another step closer towards my goal of world domination.

"And the Evil that was vanquished shall rise anew. Wrapped in the guise of man shall he walk amongst the innocent and Terror shall consume they that dwell upon the Earth. The skies will rain fire. The seas shall become as blood. The righteous shall fall before the wicked! And all creation shall tremble before the burning standards of Hell!" - Mephisto

Kurgan X showed me this web comic done with Legos. It pokes fun at all six Star Wars films and I found it to be extremely entertaining.
<a href="http://www.irregularwebcomic.net/cast/starwars.html" target="_blank">http://www.irregularwebcomic.net/cast/starwars.html</a>
0

#12 User is offline   Just your average movie goer Icon

  • -
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,140
  • Joined: 10-April 04
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 07 January 2009 - 09:04 PM

QUOTE
In my philosophy a game should be quite simple in its normal difficulty, even at the boss levels, cause no one likes having to resort to beginners difficulty to finish a game.


Yeah, I'd agree with that. Then everyone can enjoy the satisfaction of finishing their own games. Actually, I think it should almost be a game consumer's right. If you spend $20 on a game for instance and you can't get past the first level, would you feel you'd got your money's worth? I wouldn't.

QUOTE
And yes, when you finally get on the enemy ship... just a hangar and one room with a cupboard.


Love it, Toru Chan. I couldn't put it better myself.

QUOTE
Now I'm mad. I just checked and that intrusive piece of SONY malware had indeed installed itself on my PC. Scum of the earth. My mistake was having a legit copy. Next time I'll just rip it off thepiratebay.org with SecuRom no doubt already excised. Shame on you, LucasArts.


No, LucasArts isn't at fault. The people responsible for secretly installing SecuRom on their customers' computers is EA Games. See, LucasArts doesn't seem to publish the games. As far as I can tell, it's just responsible for leasing the licence.

Battlefront I was released in my country by Pandemic studios and Jedi Outcast was released by Activision. Neither of them had SecuRom. Ditto for my copy of Star Wars Lego 2, which was also released by Activision (so EA Game's malware declared it an illegitimate copy and tried to block it from running).

I also read up on the matter while looking for a solution to the problem and apparently EA Games has made a lot of people angry. I would suggest that everyone blacklist anything released by this game publisher.

QUOTE
Trouble is higher-difficulty difficulty in the eyes of game designers just means more enemies. More and more until you can't possibly win. I strongly suspect the people who write these games don't play them.


That seems to be standard. It's not very imaginative and it's not that difficult to think of alternative ways to make things more difficult. You could limit the amount of ammunition available for example so you have to think harder about how to conserve your supplies or you could increase the AI of the enemies...

... actually, that annoys me in both Battlefront games. Why is that the enemies always have higher AI levels than your teammates?

My teammates will swarm around an enemy command post but won't make the next logical step by going in and taking it. A group of twenty outside a friendly command post will sit back and allow one rebel to waltz on in and take it. I'm forever going back and forwards trying to cover for their sloppiness. I particularly dislike having to recapture command posts I've already taken because I've occasionally tried staying put and guarding them and most of the time, it's not that difficult. The other thing I've found is that I can never rely on my teammates to watch my back.

Anyway...

Kurgan X, I've heard about Battlefield 1942 too but hey, Battlefront is Star Wars and we're all Star Wars fans. It's a hoot. I agree it doesn't make you feel like you're really experiencing being on a battlefield but that doesn't matter for me. I just think it's a lot of fun. And the fact that the violence isn't realistic makes it good clean fun too.

Although, I think they've tried to make one thing a little bit like the movies... the stormtroopers' blaster rifles. For anyone who wonders why stormtroopers have a hard time hitting anything in the movies, play Battlefront and you will find out. Those of you who've played it, you know what I mean.

Hey, Zatoichi! Nice to see a fellow Empire fan. I think the Empire's the only side to play really. Yeah, the rebels are loveable in the movies but in Battlefront, they come across as the biggest bunch of thugs. Every single last one of them, with the possible exception of the wookies, looks as though they've got criminal records a mile long.

Also, I'm glad I'm not alone in hating the the rebel pilots. They're too damn uncanny at getting kills in and surviving. Many times, I've been kicking and ass and taking names only to have it all end with the sound of one click... and then one of those damn rebel pilots appear with that ridiculously absurd weapon of theirs that looks as though they're running around with a large polaroid camera. I hate those guys. I hate those guys so very very much.

As for the snowspeeders, that's why we need the AT-AT's weapons to be a little more responsive. One trick I have learned is to reverse the AT-AT when they're coming behind you. Sometimes they'll crash into you and naturally, you'll be the one who fares better.

Another annoying thing is that whenever I activate the "Sabotage" bonus on Hoth, I find it does absolutely nothing to the snowspeeders. I mean, are they vehicles or not?

Oh, there's another bug in Battlefront. Has anyone noticed how in the campaign game, the enemy will frequently award themselves bonuses they're not entitled to? Often, I've stripped them of all their bonuses only to find that they're treating themselves to free sensor jamming or they're running around with secret bacta tanks. However, on the flip side, it makes it even more satisfying when I beat the rebels... that fact that even when they cheat left, right and centre, I can still kick their asses.

QUOTE
Why are the enemy special characters so un-freaking killable?


Are they killable at all? I thought they weren't. I've tried any number of techniques with Luke Skywalker. I've run him over with a speeder. I've lobbed grenades at him that toss him about the place like a rag doll. I've tried very hard to knock him over the occasional bottomless drops that pop up in the levels but with no luck.

However, I'm never too worried by an enemy Jedi Hero. They're as thick as two short planks and most of the time, they just stand about doing nothing as they wait for their brains to warm up.

Vader does that too. I can't even get him to follow basic commands. Sometimes, I think I just bring him along out of some strange sense of obligation. "Oh, Hoth. I'm sure Vader would love this."

QUOTE
What the crap are these electro-shocker pieces of garbage on my beloved Dark troopers?


Yes! Battlefront II completely neutered the Dark Trooper. I felt as though I were charging into battle armed with a cheese grater. The only feeling that comes close to it in Battlefront I is when you charge into a group of enemies and discover that you forgot to reload your weapon. Man, is that awkward.... and embarrassing. "Ha ha! ..... oh, bugger."

Also, just another thought on Battlefront II. The maps are lame. The only good maps are the ones they imported from the first game... and they abandoned the Bespin maps, which are awesome. Also, the new Kashyyyk map is crap. It's just standing out on an open beach while enemies shoot at you from all sides.

Has anyone also noticed how in Battlefront II, all the enemies will specifically pick on you? Sometimes they'll run past dozens of your teammates just so they can take potshots at you.

Oh and one last beef with it. I hated how in the campaign you had to buy bonuses. I think what they were going for was more realism but that makes it more like a strategy game when most people who are playing this are after a first-person shooter. It's not a good idea to mix the two like that. And there was a missed opportunity there as well. If bonuses were something you'd have to fork over money for and not something you'd just get after you conquered a planet, then they could have had a new system where you could use multiple bonuses at once. That way, you'd gradually become stronger as you progressed in your campaign, which would make sense. In fact, it really looked as though that's what the system was going to be (but then again I thought gungan hunt mode was going to be chance to slaughter vermin, not a battle with the little rubbery fools armed to the teeth with all sorts of weapons). What a waste.

This post has been edited by Just your average movie goer: 07 January 2009 - 09:06 PM

0

Page 1 of 1


Fast Reply

  • Decrease editor size
  • Increase editor size