LucasForums

LucasForums (http://www.lucasforums.com/index.php)
-   Squad Recruitment (http://www.lucasforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=570)
-   -   Not another BATTLEFRONT!!!! (http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?t=143907)

Sifandor 02-06-2005 09:36 AM

Not another BATTLEFRONT!!!!
 
I hope this doesnt turn out like battlefront where 85% of the players online are in a clan. What ever happened to Free rangers you guys gave in to the temtation. NOOO!!! Say not to clans hahaha. j/k but i hope its not like it is in battlefront.:ewok:
:ewok:

ZBomber 02-06-2005 09:39 AM

Actually, I think this will be even more so a clan-based game, since they game revolves around squads

However, I probably won't join a clan unless someone of my buds make/join one.

Ch1cago88 02-06-2005 12:31 PM

Battlefront had no community anyways, so thats why it may seem this way. Plus Battlefronts dead its a terrible game.

Joetheeskimo 02-06-2005 02:18 PM

Ditto @ ZBomber -- it wouldn't be as fun if you're allied with people you don't even know. A squad game is going to depend on clans and such.

LordMalak 02-06-2005 05:26 PM

Battlefronts dead? Where ever you get your info, your terribly wrong my friend. TONS of ppl play BF.

Nokill 02-06-2005 08:37 PM

he most have forgotten the new patch for the game

and its i think best to be in a clan in this game becouse its a squad based game and your better off whit a team you know then alone or whit some team killers :mad:

El Sitherino 02-07-2005 05:17 AM

I don't do clans, never have, never will. But who cares if someone joins a clan, it is none of your concern or business.

deloused 02-07-2005 09:07 AM

In every online game there are "clans", and there are "Clans". The differences between them are:

1) "Clans" will have their own well designed website, which will be gramatically correct and hosted on their own webspace, on a proper domain name. "clans" will either have a website hosted on Geocities or Freewebs, or the website will be permanently "Under Construction", and will never go up.

2) "Clans" will (for the most part) have their own server, or at least a co-owned server with another Clan. "clans" will always be "looking for a server", or be in the process of building one. One will never appear, however.

3) "Clans" will have regular training sessions where AT LEAST half of the clan members will be there every week. "clans" will have scheduled training sessions that nobody turns up to, or won't have training at all.

4) "Clans" will ALWAYS turn up to their matches, with a full strength squad that has been practicing as a team and knows how to play the game. "clans" will rarely, if ever, turn up to their scheduled matches. If a "clan" does make a match, there will be members missing or late, and the squad itself will be under strength. The "clan" players will go to great lengths at the end of the match to explain why you won, and who should have been playing but wasn't there etc etc.

5) "Clans" will have a good way of staying in contact, such as a mass emailer, regularly updated forums or an IRC channel. "clans" will schedule all their matches over AIM or MSN messenger, and if they have a messageboard, nobody will visit it.

As you can see, there is a difference between being in a "clan" and a "Clan". One can ruin your enjoment of the game, and the other will boost it so much that you'll wonder why you played on your own in the first place.

El Sitherino 02-07-2005 10:28 AM

And the point of that was?

Ch1cago88 02-07-2005 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by LordMalak
Battlefronts dead? Where ever you get your info, your terribly wrong my friend. TONS of ppl play BF.


Yes thatís true if you think 200 people on its busiest nights is good. Trust me, the games a dud. They first rushed out the game leaving out half the promises they first said the game would have in it. The game Manuel didnít even match up with the game controls and etc. There was no REMOTE admin or Linux server, and THERE STILL ISENT. The unbalanced teams between Clones and Sep. were sickening. (clone win 10 times out of 11, always) Sure they patched it, THEY HAD TO, if they didnít you know how many more people would just drop out of that game? They locked the fps, the games official player count is 32 man server. (only because this game is a port from the counsels) Most game official in this genre are more like 50. When the Gamespy first was hosting games the entire setup was f-up. I even dropped this game from my clan ( www.legacyofpain.com we play bfv, aa, and css :P ), it was embarrassing to play half the time when it first came out with my mates. They couldnít even join a game with me, lol, cause the server kept refreshing. I could go on too. Maybe it was a gg to you, but to me being competitive and all it didnt reach standards.

Sifandor 02-07-2005 12:19 PM

I agree
 
I agree with you it is a dud it is the only game i have until RC and i dont play it. It seems to me like they rushed it. Poor gameply it was very choppy and t wasnt my video card becase i have a radeon 9200 so no. It was a cool game other than no melee buddy list, laggy, and graphics were good but too many glitches along with a host of other problems.
:mob: This is battlefront with clone wars CIS red and Clones Blue.
lol

El Sitherino 02-07-2005 01:15 PM

Hey, this board is for RC, not complaints against Battlefront. Wanna discuss it on these boards take that to the off-topic section atleast.

deloused 02-07-2005 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by InsaneSith
And the point of that was?
I was just pointing out to the people who were saying that clans suck that they will either ruin or enhance the game. It just depends on whether you get into a "clan" run by some 14 year old who knows a bit of HTML, or a "Clan", run by someone who has the money and time to invest in actually making it good.

Nokill 02-08-2005 05:32 AM

it is up to ppl themself if thay like the game or not and that also counts for clans

*please lock this*

FreePizza 03-09-2005 07:14 PM

Actually, it'd be nice if it was similiar to Battlefront with regards to online play and to some degree multiplayer play. DeathMatch, CTF and such gets boring and everyone has Halo 2 already. You'd think that with the concept of a Squad in RC, online play would be with a Squad and work similiar to capturing Command Posts. As it stands, the strongest point of RC is the campaign and yet you can't even play that with a friend (in Halo you can). Battlefront has issues certainly. Mainly if playing multiplayer with a friend with splitscreen the person sitting next to you can see your screen and what you're doing...vice versa as well. So if you are multiplayer at home it's you and one friend against computer gernerated forces. Halo 2 is dominating the dorms cuz 4 guys per dorm room can share one TV and X-box. That's what's killing Battlefront or will ultimately kill it, and without multiplayer Squad campaigns why buy another Halo 2 type of game for CTF, Deathmatch, etc? BTW, I'm a Battlefront addict, but only with online play. Once friends are over I have to put it away since they can't play. I really like RC campaign mode, but would love it best if I could play it with a friend or two as well.

I'm not sure what good Clans do for Deathmatch, etc. It's a small arena and all the tactics in the world won't change the chaos of a small environment.

El Sitherino 03-09-2005 07:38 PM

Because we want to play Star Wars themed games?

FreePizza 03-11-2005 01:52 PM

I realize we want to play SW themed games. But on a mass market scale, not just SW fans, isn't Halo 2 Deathmatch, CTF, KOH pretty much the same as RC Deathmatch, ctf, koh, etc? The more people who buy the game and play the game (especially online) the more support you'll get...or rather should expect, right? New maps out quicker and so forth, and yet if Halo2 basically equals RC for online play why would someone who's not a SW fan purchase RC? For the campaign level maybe, but even there the weakness is it's only single player so the dorm, frat house Halo2 party doesn't exist and can't exist...well, unless you put away RC and plug in Halo2. This is happening so why ignore it? Sorry to rant, just rather disappointed the multiplayer part of this game appears thrown in at the last minute as an after thought and yet the muitiplayer mode because of the theme and possibilities of RC would make multiplayer the best game out there if a little more had gone into the planning process. well, at least that's what it seems like. maybe LA has a plan.

El Sitherino 03-11-2005 02:14 PM

Why would anyone that's not a Star Wars fan have a reason to purchase RC? It was never projected to be a mass market game. It caters to Star Wars fans like all other Star Wars games. Sure it's trying to grab a few other people, but it's goal was never to be some revolution.

FreePizza 03-11-2005 09:16 PM

It would be hard to imagine that there weren't just a few people in biz dev, marketing and finance departments who did believe this game was intended for mass market. Certainly the marketing wasn't up to Halo level (Slurpee's at 7/11 with MasterChief images on them as well as the game for sale at 7/11's). Then again the game is at Target, Best Buy, etc...so isn't that mass market to begin with?

There are also a variety of levels of SW fans out there. I've played many Battlefront games online where there were players who had never seen any of the movies. On a daily basis you spend a little time explaining that an AT-AT is not a metal dinosaur, etc.

Of course RC being out there and hot when the new movie is out makes a lot of sense and the movie's previews are certainly intended for the mass market and not just SW fans, right?

There are many reasons to play Battlefront or RC other than just the fact you are a SW fan...after all, they are games. Foremost, for Lucas Arts..CA$H is, and should be a factor. In fact, for SW gaming fans the more money they make the more they can put into developing games and upgrading the games we are playing. More buyers, more players equals better SW games and more SW games.

So yeah, my personal guess is it was meant for the mass market. There was the hard core SW fan that could be counted on, but the non-SW addict would have been the gravy that greased the machine for more and better.

But back to the main point, why give us deathmatch online with a game that's absolutely designed for teamwork, strategy and missions? Why give us a game that is designed for teamwork, strategy and missions and only allow single player at home? Just seems odd to me that swbattlefront.net forum cries for splitscreen multiplayer had no effect on dev of RC.

BeBop 03-22-2005 02:04 PM

Because people have a tendency to complain if even one standard common game mode is left out... they did with Battlefront, they'll do it with some other game in the future.

But that's straying from the point of the topic... I see no problem with their being clans, I won't join one (i like being a roamer) but i have nothing against them.

Dark_Jedi 11-17-2007 07:46 PM

What about "CLANs"- groups of dedicated online players who are devoted to their studies and videogames. They scedule prcactices around school any time they can and always have an essay to write so they can only play for a half-hour.

MachineCult 01-19-2008 06:17 PM

^^^ Old thread, I mean who are you talking to? Most of the people on this thread have left the forums.
Check the dates before you post.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:34 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.