lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: Opinions on Star Wars: Battlefront II
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 02-13-2006, 02:58 PM   #41
Commander Obi-Wan
Gold Standard
 
Commander Obi-Wan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,363
Current Game: BioShock 2
Forum Veteran 
lol....I forgot to list my opinion..i think. Well, anyway, I am not as into the game as I was before, but I still like the game. But, I did sell the game, but my friend has it and I can borrow it. Well, I think the game needs some improvements, as all games do. And that's what the expansion is for.

Things I like are the untis and the new levels. I also like the new vehicles. I like the ideas of the GC and the Campaign is much better. Also there is more of a variety of levels and modes to play. Which is good.

Things I don't like are some levels that are missing from BF1, like Bespin and Rhen Var. Also I thing some of the units could be better, like the Imperial Officer.

So I'd give SWBFII a: 7.5/10

-Commander Obi-Wan


Commander Obi-Wan is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-14-2006, 10:11 PM   #42
Coraan Talme
Rookie
 
Coraan Talme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 70
I agree with most of you - especially Paranoid Android. While this game is really really good - it still could be so much better!
Actually, what I miss most is the option to play Galactic Conquest in LAN mode. I read that there is some way to play it online - which would be great, yet where is the problem of making this possible for every type of multiplayer such as cozy little LAN match with friends? I think this mode is almost a necessity ... the usual gameplay is fine and nice -but sometimes one yearns for a little more sense to all those battles .. and that's what Galactic Conquest means.
By the way: Bigger & more varied space battles (Oh YES! PLEASE!) Indeed,there is this great gaping hole in the void that begs to be filled with new content! More playable classes, bigger interior etc ...
Another nice addition - as a mere game mode or perhaps an additional option for Galactic Conquest - might be a sabotage mode. I have this small idea floating in my head of a quick little game type that plays very differently from a normal match. Something vaguely Counterstrike-like. Not that I am a Counterstrike fan, but I think it might fit in very well. A mode where all the forces are already deployed at the start of the match - guarding various positions - and don't respawn (aside from players, possibly). Perhaps with a time limit. One team takes the side of infiltrators -a good opportunity for some new classes like shadowtroopers or whatever, but Dark Troopers, Bothan Spies and Wookies might also do the job - generally speaking: sneaky, mobile and specialised classes, maybe made significantly better than the normal troopers of the other side ... because the infiltrators would be clearly the minority. They'd have to destroy certain key points (like generators), maybe within a time limit. Such a sneak attack would a) be well suited to the Star Wars theme b) a nice option to weaken a fortified position in Galactic Conquest. c)offer many opportunities for further ideas (attacking an enemy fleet just with a force of starfighters / boarding a space station ...). Did I mention space stations? Now THAT would be a fine addition to GC ... I'd really love some fleet vs. space base action.
Oh- and one further thing: We Imperials need more skins! The Empire needs officers with caps and marines with big black helmets. This severe shortage in imperial variation is a significant threat to the moral of loyal troops! Sign this application now - and help pacify the galaxy!


Glory to the Empire!

Last edited by Coraan Talme; 02-14-2006 at 10:57 PM.
Coraan Talme is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-17-2006, 10:24 PM   #43
jevro
Rookie
 
jevro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mustafar
Posts: 26
i think they need more levels with jedi and accually having a jedi class, no time limits in hunt, more force powers, oh and to fly ships on land battles, more gun opinions. and no kill limit
jevro is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-18-2006, 07:26 AM   #44
MachineCult
Vincit Amor Patria
 
MachineCult's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Disneyland?
Posts: 2,657
No kill limit? The point of the game is to defeat the enemy.



"For where ever there is a n00b, there is MachineCult to make him cry and cringe."
- Halo_92

MachineCult is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-18-2006, 12:30 PM   #45
Commander Obi-Wan
Gold Standard
 
Commander Obi-Wan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,363
Current Game: BioShock 2
Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jevro
i think they need more levels with jedi and accually having a jedi class, no time limits in hunt, more force powers, oh and to fly ships on land battles, more gun opinions. and no kill limit
Gun opinions? I tihnk you mean options. Yes, I agree that they need starfighters on land battles. But, with out a kill limit it just wouldn't work. No victory....it'd get boring.


Commander Obi-Wan is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-18-2006, 03:54 PM   #46
Coraan Talme
Rookie
 
Coraan Talme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 70
Jevro, do you mean different secondary fire options when you speak of 'more gun options'? Like in the Jedi Knight series? Might indeed be a nice touch, though I think there are more important stuff that the developers could add. Like - as you said - the return of ships in land battles, though this would probably lead to problems in the currents system of ship handling. I guess things like using the 'afterburners' ( sorry, blame it to Wing Commander, but that's what I call everything that speeds up starships for a limited amount of time) would be none too practical in the small and obstacle-ridden ground battles. Maneuvers are perhaps not sensible here, either. Personally, I wouldn't object at all, if they'd just take the old BF1 system for this case - it seemed to work just fine. Ah yes - reintroducing cockpits for land based combat would be very welcome, too. The current 3rd-person-only view feels a little bland to me (for land battles, anyway).
As to 'no kill-limit' I have to agree with ObiWan ... what would you use as a replacement objective? Or do you want unlimited combat?? And Jedi as a regular class ... well, I doubt that this would find a majority here. They are just too strong for that - and Battlefront shouldn't be a playground for filthy Jedi anyway . It's a place where loyal imperial troops can shine.


Glory to the Empire!
Coraan Talme is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-18-2006, 11:30 PM   #47
ParanoidAndroid
Veteran
 
ParanoidAndroid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The three dimensional geometric shaped space station of DOOM!
Posts: 787
Gun options? I think that would be cool, I keep reading stuff about a "charged shot" that was planned for the rebel rifle and can think of some other cool modes for weapons (like setting the sensitivity of mines or explode times of grenades delayed or instant).

As for no-kill-limit, Well I'd say this would be kind of necessary unless somthing is introduced as a substitute. Like each team has a destroyable base, and the level doesn't end until one is blown up, or maybe a "king of the hill" type match, where one team must capture a VICP (Very Important Command Post) and hold it for a certain amount of time for victory.

As for playable jedi, well typically no I don't think that would be a good idea but I can think of execptions. Maybe certain scenarios could call for a jedi "elite class" with limited numbers and only high ranking players can use them. I could see this for all sorts of units and not just jedi though.


Not being paranoid doesn't mean someone isn't trying to kill you... or does it?
ParanoidAndroid is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-19-2006, 08:29 AM   #48
Redtech
Veteran
 
Redtech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: London, England
Posts: 800
No, you'll have a n00b class that's Jedi, remeber who'd make a BF3. I mean, I dunno why they don't just make it Jedi Academy 2 while they're at it. Especially when Kyle was so good at using weapons anyway.


I am the definition of your defeat.
Redtech is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-19-2006, 12:04 PM   #49
jevro
Rookie
 
jevro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mustafar
Posts: 26
What i mean is like a free for all for or at least a bigger kill limit cause it's too short and the same thing for hunt no time limit a kill limit. I also like the destroyable base idea it's good.
jevro is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-21-2006, 06:25 PM   #50
Solo4114
 
Solo4114's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 440
The Good:

- The addition of space battles is cool. It's not a space sim like the old X-wing games, but it's still fun. The ships seem reasonably balanced and different enough to allow for alternate tactics.

- Some of the ground maps are cooler. I like Hoth a bit better than before, but I've only played it a few times.

- Sprinting is a nice addition.

- Graphics seem a bit better than before, or at least a bit less blocky.

- GC mode is a LOT more fun than it used to be.

The Bad:

- Gameplay is RIDICULOUSLY spammy and arcadey. Shooting a thousand bullets at someone who circle strafes reminds me of Quake or Unreal Tournament. I personally really dislike arcadey games. Some folks say they want this to be more like the Battlefield series, but I'd go one step further and make the game more like Red Orchestra in terms of its realism. I'd make it so it takes some skill to hit someone else, but if you do, they die in basically one hit. To me, that looks like how the movies operated.

- Ground maps seem quite small, even when they LOOK like they're larger. I think this is due to both the speed of the game and the layout of the maps. Maps seem wider rather than longer, so considering you spend most of your time rushing forward instead of to the sides, a wider map doesn't help much.

- Space combat still feels limited. "Fleets" are more like individual ships with a few escorts. That ain't a fleet. Wish these were larger scale.

- Spaceship turrets do exactly squat. A few work somewhat well as anti-fighter guns, but even those are limited in power. The big beam cannons don't do anything against other ships.

- Spaceship interiors are tiny.

- Too much emphasis on heroes/Jedi. Frankly, I'm bloody well sick of Jedi this and Jedi that. I LIKED just being a grunt. Yes, it's cool to have Boba Fett and Han Solo in the game, but they should've left them as non-controlled heroes or just not bothered to put them in at all. If people want to play as heroes, go load up a Jedi Academy mod and play as whoever you like. Or they could, you know, release a few games in the classic trilogy timeperiod instead of all this focus on crappy prequels...

- No mod support (yet). Makes for gameplay that gets old FAST.

- Not enough new maps and no reason to take out the old ones.



Overall:

It's a polished version of BF1 that still misses the mark. A lot of squandered potential due to the EXACT same problem as last time: LucasArts and kicking the game out the door way too early. The end result is that I don't feel like I bought a new game as much as that I bought an expansion with a patch that polishes the old one. I'd say it's worth about $30, but not the $50 pricetag. Luckily, I got it cheap.
Solo4114 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-21-2006, 06:47 PM   #51
jawathehutt
Its 5 o'clock somewhere
 
jawathehutt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,636
Current Game: Age of Empires II
I'd say that gamespeed needs to be lower
i liked bf1s pace
in this every thing is so close together adn cps change ownerships like a bazion times each game
also i think the ai got stupider
fianly, the game makers are lazy
look into the sky of corasant when its emps vs rebs
i didnt no the droids were still attacking and the space battle was still going on



"Everyone that posts here is aware of the game, thanks though." ET
"It is Lucasarts"~ LordJhredmo
jawathehutt is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-22-2006, 10:28 AM   #52
Redtech
Veteran
 
Redtech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: London, England
Posts: 800
Solo414 gains my support at least, Jawa, got a point as well. I think I said somewhere that posts should eb more pivitol to the action, so that when one is lost it actually is a loss in that it is harder to deploy close to the action and maybe they are "well" defended so take effort to take and keep. Not like old Geonosis where they're just scattered here and there and you spawn in the open where an AT-TE is waiting to eat you!


I am the definition of your defeat.
Redtech is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-22-2006, 11:47 AM   #53
Solo4114
 
Solo4114's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 440
Either the speed should be lowered or the size of the maps increased. But as it is, you can really haul ass on most maps. I think you could slow the pace and leave the sprint speed what it is now, to keep things interesting.

I don't mind that CPs take less time to change, but I think you could make the game more team-oriented and then let the points take longer to change.

Honestly, I think a lot of the problem here is that the game was simultaneously designed for consoles and PCs. And frankly, the two markets are pretty different in terms of what they like from a good shooter. Consoles tend to be more arcadey, and PC shooters tend to be a bit more involved. You probably couldn't have the intricate command aspects of Battlefield 2 in a game developed for a console, or at least not to the degree of complexity they appear in a PC game, simply because of the lesser number of input options.

Of course, we can trust LucasArts to continue the trend of simultaneous development at the expense of really outstanding PC versions of games simply because it's more economical for them to do so. While I don't intend this as a dig at console games (since there's a lot of cool stuff about them), they're necessarily a "dumbed down" version of a PC game. You'll never see a real flight sim on a console, nor will you see a game like Civilization, or an number of other types of games. It just won't happen because of the nature of input. Until consoles start coming with a mouse and keyboard combo, that's just how it's gonna be. The unfortunate part is that due to business concerns, this ends up royally screwing PC gamers when developers design for both -- by necessity, they'll take the lowest common demoninator approach to design, rather than making the PC version more complex or intricate.
Solo4114 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-24-2006, 02:10 PM   #54
Redtech
Veteran
 
Redtech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: London, England
Posts: 800
Damn, didn't know so many intellectuals visit this board.

Fair point and pretty realistic, but you have to consider that they are trying to make money and so they're following a minimal effort=maximum gain plan.

The license is a certain way to virtually print money. I don't think giving a console a mouse and keyboard is the answer, it's the whole gaming culture that's at hand. PC users, by the fact that PCs are so complicated in the first place, are more willing to play cerebral games, while consoles with an efficient control system for action games tend towards quicker button-bashers. I don't mean either point in a bad way, they're just different.

The only "problem" with Battlefront is that on PC we've already seen games that have done any single formula of Battlefront better. Battlefield owns the genre, UT2k4 has a command post system exactly as you describe. The powers that be don't really want to try to push the genre in any new direction, although Petroglyph seem to have their RTS side done, but what about Battlefront's?


I am the definition of your defeat.
Redtech is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-25-2006, 05:38 PM   #55
Solo4114
 
Solo4114's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 440
Oh, I recognize that this is a pure economic consideration. That's kind of the problem in the industry, though. People are interested in making popular console games and porting them to PC rather than making good PC games. At least that's how LucasArts seems to approach this stuff with first person shooters. Obviously, RTS games wouldn't work as well on a console, though. I haven't tried Empire at War, mostly because, well, I'm just not into RTS games. I prefer turn-based games like Civ (although I did like Rebellion and that was RTS). I've heard disappointing things about SW:EaW, though.

LucasArts used to be a company that you could count on to deliver quality product. Now they're a company you can count on to deliver mediocre product, or product that has huge potential but falls short each time.

That's the real shame of it all. The license is so great as far as setting and opportunities for cool games, but they just don't care about that as much.
Solo4114 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-25-2006, 06:56 PM   #56
MachineCult
Vincit Amor Patria
 
MachineCult's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Disneyland?
Posts: 2,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solo4114
LucasArts used to be a company that you could count on to deliver quality product. Now they're a company you can count on to deliver mediocre product, or product that has huge potential but falls short each time.
One definite exception to that is KOTOR, and i'd go as far as saying Battlefront.



"For where ever there is a n00b, there is MachineCult to make him cry and cringe."
- Halo_92

MachineCult is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-26-2006, 03:58 AM   #57
daventry
 
daventry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: South Africa
Posts: 103
When i finished the SWBF2 Game, i decided to wait for a Patch. After waiting 6 Months for the Patch, i decided to sell the Game anyway when Patch 1 and 2 did not work.

LucasArts really dissapointed me.

I never really had a PC problem with the Game itself, it was just the Graphics that looked really poor to me.

I do hope they make a Star Wars Battlefront 3 Game and then they must just sit and play other Games like Half Life 2/Far Cry/TR7 and see how smooth the Game is and how Awsome the Graphics look.

SWBF1 was way cooler and better then SWBF2.

You guy's wont believe the threats people give LucasAarts at the Official Forum Board, they even want to sue the Company and demand there Money back.
daventry is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-26-2006, 04:33 PM   #58
jawathehutt
Its 5 o'clock somewhere
 
jawathehutt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,636
Current Game: Age of Empires II
there are 4 different types of players for this game
1. star wars freaks- bought the game because it had star and wars in it
2. shooter fans- you shoot therefore they like
3stratagy fans- thought game would be team orianted like battlefield 2
4. combonations of thoose groups
it seems like la decided there were the most shooter fans and absolutely no stratagy people
therefore we have an arcade shooter



"Everyone that posts here is aware of the game, thanks though." ET
"It is Lucasarts"~ LordJhredmo

Last edited by jawathehutt; 02-27-2006 at 06:41 PM.
jawathehutt is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-27-2006, 09:04 AM   #59
Brainpr0n
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 7
LOL @ "the moist shooter fans".

Yeah, with all the squad based stuff out there thats doing so well, I had hoped the game would be a bit less arcadey.


You are part of the rebel alliance and a traitor. Take her away!
Brainpr0n is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-27-2006, 09:20 AM   #60
Redtech
Veteran
 
Redtech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: London, England
Posts: 800
Emphasis on the "moist".

Yep, you've summed it up best Jawa. Thing is, the arcadeness is the unique selling point of Battlefront. I disagree with the idea it should only be for Star Wars fans, because as you mentioned, they'll buy anything with Star Wars on it...heck, that's the whole problem. But the arcade ness is the only way they could have given a game like this mass appeal. I mean, Battlefield is a niche of it's own..okay, not as niche as counterstrike, but it'd be hard for a Star Wars game to nab into their "hardcore gamer" territory.


I am the definition of your defeat.
Redtech is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > SWBattlefront.net (SWBF I & II) > Star Wars Battlefront II > General Discussion > Opinions on Star Wars: Battlefront II

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:23 AM.

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