it's a pvp game. so most of the content is generated by players, given they have a foundation for it. so a developer should provide this foundation.

As someone who played, let me check ... just shy of 804 hours of Bf4, I can say with confidence that DICE doesn't know how to make shooters. They only know enough to make a shooter with a lot of potential so that once you sunk your money into it, you keep playing in hope to unlock that potential somehow, hoping that the next patch really will fix those issues they claim it does.

Mind you, the game did work well every now and then if you plain avoided playing whichever current glitchy maps/modes/vehicles/guns/attachments there was and it was an enjoyable experience when it worked. But more often than not, I ended a game session not because I just felt I had my share for that day ... I ended them because I finally triggered that one gamebreaking bug or just fell victim to one-too-many instances of whichever small drop of inconveniencing bugs it was that let the barrel overflow and I was just too angry and annoyed to keep playing.

So out of those ~804 hours of gametime, I'd say I'm generous when I say that only a quarter of that time was played to my full enjoyment and the remaining playtime accumulated because there simply was no other shooter game to play instead and that playtime was me tolerating the contemporary issues there were.
Gameplay balance has been out of whack ever since the game launch, requiring several balancing patches, with every new DLC aggravating the situation needed even more patches, the basic framework of the game itself is broken (the infamous "netcode") and a number of just stupid game design decisions like visual recoil (your gun (and aim!) kicks way more than the actual ingame recoil does, meaning you literally couldn't trust your aim because the reticule you use to aim with is not pointing at where the gun ingame is pointing!) and running servers at 10Hz update rate for the longest time (that's for massive maps with 64+2+4 people on the server (yes, that +2+4 means the commanders and spectators, which even though they don't interact with other players much (or at all in the spectators' cases, still task the server).

So in the end, around 200 hours of 100% satisfied gametime, spread out from Bf4 launch right until I stopped playing a couple months ago, so that's just a bit more than one and half years. If I compare that with my, let me check ... roughly 485 hours of ME3 MP playtime, which is a MP with vastly less available content to play with than Bf4 offers, of which ALL my playtime has been 100% satisfying (ME3 MP was the game I occasionally backtracked to when Bf4 was having a particularily annoying fit), that's really poor showing for a MP-focused game.


Or in plain short:
DICE knows how to make a shooter popular, but they have no clue about making a good shooter.


But you are right, there's going to be the same people who just buy the game because it looks pretty, getting milked. Plus the people who'll by it because it's one of the very, very few new SW games out there, plus the group who buys it specificaly because of its ties with the upcoming movie ... so yeah, it'll sell.

But as has been said already, DICE has no fucking clue about how to make a good, competitive shooter. And they don't have the competence to even deliver a consistent quality, let alone a high quality product.

I got my money's worth out of Bf4, even when I really had to close my eyes at times to enjoy it, but if I could go back in time with the experiences I made, I wouldn't buy Bf4 again, neither at launch, nor at any other point during it's still ongoing lifetime. And Hardline showed they didn't learn anything. Hell, even though they said all the improvements made to Bf4 would carry over to Hardline, it launched with an earlier build for the "netcode" that was several patch versions behind the Bf4 retail version and had even worse game balance, plus it was obviously missing the thankfully competent hardware stability patches Bf4 got (that was the only thing that DICE actually managed to patch properly, after two or so patches, hardware related patches were effectively gone (leaving only the various connectivity related stability issues).

JK, you played a not a good game and hallucinated it was good.

Battlefront won't have Microtransactions

I just love how in the comments people are trying to re-word everything to make it sound like there will be since it's an EA game.

And that's the straw for me.


-Absolutely overblown system requirements which mean one of two things: either the game is an absolutely shitty port from the console versions, or it just wants to blind players with its bling bling, because ...
-Extremely shallow gameplay. Every single bit of gameplay I've seen (and the NDA is out so there's lots to be found now) attests the game a ridiculously low skill ceiling. That may be great for people just hoping for a quick Star Wars fix, but people looking at this game for thrilling gameplay will inevitably grow bored FAST when there's little incentive to learn the game to master it.
-11+ GB download for a couple days stress testing their servers ... last I checked, the vast majority of internet accesses do still come with monthly data volume limits and 11+ GB isn't just peanuts. I don't have that issue myself (do have a monthly limit but it's generous enough that I need not care about 11+ GB), but I'm not downloading that much just fpr a couple days worth of gameplay of questionable quality (server outages and stuff WILL happen). And 40 GB for the full game? Is that uncompressed audio again? Unless the game is chockfull with as of yet unnannounced content, I don't see this game justifying 40 GB installation size (without DLC) when other huge-ass games barely scratch the 30 GB mark.

As someone who looks for gameplay value instead of pretty graphics and big name licensing, I don't find this game to be my cup of tea and the rest around this game isn't looking good either. I'll pass.

Here's to hoping the other soon-to-be DICE game, Mirror's Edge: Catalyst, can impress. At least the demo from Gamescom looked decent (though no M/K controls is a BIG warning sign for me and they better have that sorted out).

To top it off, it'll be the first Star Wars game since 2011 that is phone based; so that'll help it sell.

I call it star wars battlefield for good reason.

So it's an insult to both franchises? Go you Star wars battlefield!

Yes. That's true. It's also a fucking insult the the original battlefront games and can join the pile of all the other shit reboots.