Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Registered on: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2014 1:48:31 GMT
So I've been following this game for a while now, and seeing as there's supposed to be a AMA later this month with the developers, I thought that now is a good time to start this thread. I think this game has a lot of potential, and while the last Ubisoft game I bought left a half-assed multiplayer for it's customers, I'm still cautiously optimistic about this MMO. I'm hoping to see a lot of teamwork in the game, so that brings up a big question for you guys: who's getting this game and on what platform?
|
|
Drakov
Member
Legendary Mod, Undisputed Tetris Champ
Posts: 373
Registered on: May 2014
|
Post by Drakov on Oct 21, 2014 11:20:25 GMT
It looks interesting yeah. If I'm gonna get it then on PC. I'm very, very cautions though. Watch Dogs went from my most anticipated game when they first showed it to a game that I have zero interest in playing. My fear with The Division is that they showed us an unrealistic teaser which the game can never hold up to. Fingers crossed that it's gonna be a cool game. P.S.: That staged ingame voice chat thing is so cringy it hurts
|
|
The_Bad_Loser
Member
Recent Status?
Posts: 1,044
Registered on: July 2014
|
Post by The_Bad_Loser on Oct 21, 2014 13:36:38 GMT
Through all of the trailers, both cinematic and game play, they've managed to set my expectations very high. I'm hoping it can live up to it.
When I get it, it'll be on PC.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Registered on: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2014 14:14:53 GMT
It looks interesting yeah. If I'm gonna get it then on PC. I'm very, very cautions though. Watch Dogs went from my most anticipated game when they first showed it to a game that I have zero interest in playing. My fear with The Division is that they showed us an unrealistic teaser which the game can never hold up to. Fingers crossed that it's gonna be a cool game. P.S.: That staged ingame voice chat thing is so cringy it hurts These are my exact thoughts. After being extremely excited for Watch Dogs and then for that excitement to faceplant suddenly around the time of its release I am approaching this one with a bit of caution. Then again, my interest in shooters - third and first person and particularly multiplayer - has dipped dramatically over the last couple of years.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Registered on: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2014 18:44:21 GMT
DrakovOn the bright side, this game is being developed by Massive Entertainment, not Ubisoft Montreal. Hopefully they take a different approach to this game than the Montreal branch did with WD.
|
|
Drakov
Member
Legendary Mod, Undisputed Tetris Champ
Posts: 373
Registered on: May 2014
|
Post by Drakov on Oct 21, 2014 21:45:05 GMT
DrakovOn the bright side, this game is being developed by Massive Entertainment, not Ubisoft Montreal. Hopefully they take a different approach to this game than the Montreal branch did with WD. Hopefully. Though I'm not sure if the devs of the Montreal studio are really the ones to blame. I think Watch Dogs mainly suffered from immense over-hyping and unrealistic showings that were likely pushed forward by the marketing people at Ubisoft. What's concerning is that (at least for day one sales/preoders) it worked out for Ubisoft with Watch Dogs. I just have a similiar too-good-to-be-true feeling from what I've seen from The Division. It's obviously not just Ubi doing that. Over-hyping, over-marketing etc to push preorders and anticipation. Rockstar did just the same with GTA Online in my opinion. Those trailers made it look like heaven on earth. That's another topic though :3 For me personally, this kind of marketing worked for a while. Getting excited for those big blockbluster games. Waiting for months and even years. Watching every single trailer, screenshot etc. But I just got disappointed too many times. The artificial hype that was built up led to too many let downs. So nowheredays I have probably the biggest distance to upcoming games I've ever had. Not long ago I would've freaked out about Batman:Arkham Knight, The Witcher 3 and Bloodborne. Today I just know that they're coming and I'm curious as to how they turn out. No hype. Which is a much 'colder' approach than what I was used to. It feels right but still a bit odd cause I like to get excited. It just has to be natural excitement and not this artificial bullshit. The biggest fun and enjoyment I got from games in the last year was from games I had little to none expectations about. Mostly smaller titles. And what made me play those games were people I know and trust talking about liking them. No advertising campaign, no trailers, no gameplay premieres, no 'betas', no hype. Just good games. Went a bit off topic. Sorry.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Registered on: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2014 22:39:37 GMT
DrakovI agree that almost all games are a letdown compared to their built up hype, but I think Watch Dogs was an especially brutal example. The marketing has got me one too many times, and I try to approach games the same way you do now, but WD wasn't just deception from trailers and such; its ingame mechanics were flat out boring. Some of the aspects felt really nice, like shooting and stealth, but the majority of it seemed to be just untested, very clunky mechanics that made what should've been a good game even when compared to its hype a piece of crap by any standards. WD was an interesting experience, and while I did enjoy it's campaign and side missions, things like the driving, multiplayer, hacking and map design felt really poor and killed the replay value for me. Back to The Division, I hope the class customization lives up to some of the shooter titans as far as balance and options go. I'd hate to see the combat turn into a CoD:WaW, where if you don't have a certain weapon, perk, or piece of equipment you are at a disadvantage. This is assuming you have a very well supplied setup, so perhaps the class building is going in another direction completely where scarcity is a big factor; have it so bigger dark zones hold better gear. That way it is a gamble for riches. If you succeed, you can go back to smaller dark zones with an ace up your sleeve, or just defend your current zone whilst looking for more supplies. You could also use this new gear as a form of leverage while trading; have it so that your specially built class can get something that's easily attained through your playstyle while someone else does the same, then trade accordingly for both people's benefit. It's unlikely to see this happen, but one can dream.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Registered on: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2014 4:28:50 GMT
I hope the class customization lives up to some of the shooter titans as far as balance and options go. I'd hate to see the combat turn into a CoD:WaW, where if you don't have a certain weapon, perk, or piece of equipment you are at a disadvantage. . This is something that I've thought about a lot. For years I was an obsessive fan of competitive multiplayer FPS games, particularly Quakeworld, Warsaw, Quake II Lithium, and Quake III Arena / Quake Live. After a while I stopped playing those kinds of fast-paced arena shooters and moved to the now popular franchises of Call of Duty, Battlefield, Crysis, etc. I got quite good at them too but the skill ceiling for them is extremely low because the pure mechanics of them (particularly movement, timing, level design, and shooting) have been simplified and replaced with spectacle. You can kill people very easily in those kinds of games, by running around the corner, putting two bullets into someone without any consideration of their health, where they are strategically relative to items. Eventually you'll get a tank or AC-130 or giant mechanical suit or a stupid nuclear bomb to wipe everyone out with. Of course there are counter measures you can take with specialised weapons and classes and vehicles and perks but this leads to my second point. While they may appear to be more complicated than ever with hundreds of weapons, massive maps, loads of classes to choose from, a variety of vehicles to use, lots of mechanics in game to immerse yourself in, realistic graphics and sound, having all of these things makes it much harder for developers to balance things. There are too many factors too consider. Compare this kind of gameplay to Q3A where it becomes a chess match with item timing, chipping away at health, having the right weapons for the right moment (at all times for both sides), all while using skills to perfect movement (strafe and rocket jumping) and all this in a game which may appear simple but actually has a tried and tested rock solid engine which allows the mechanics to be consistent throughout and the maps to be thoroughly play tested and well designed. Basically I wish modern competitive shooters would go back to this heyday of arena shooters. Simpler rules, less items, but a bigger focus on balancing and mechanics.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Registered on: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2014 4:48:07 GMT
@driftin This is why I was really dissapointed when the characters in the above gameplay kept on throwing out gadget after gadget. I'd like to see maybe one or two gadgets per squad, but to have multiple items per person seems to dilute the combat. Quick disclaimer: I'm not talking about the health, damage, and reconnosiance abilities every player has; those help the team, and really add to the safety in numbers theme the game has. To have a single person with one of those abilities is cool, but to have a threesome of people with one of each ability is very powerful, and makes three in a group much more powerful than three people separate. What I was disappointed in was the turret, the RC grenade, etc. I was hoping for a bare-bones, guns only combat where position, weapon type, and surprise are all majorly influencing factors. With these trinkets, it seems like a game where adaptation is pushed aside for fortification, a concept that has reared its ugly head far too often in triple A shooters as of recent. The Division still looks very smooth from what was shown, but I guess I was hoping for another TLoU-ish combat where environment, stealth, movement and support were held in high regard.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Registered on: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2014 6:13:00 GMT
I was hoping for another TLoU-ish combat where environment, stealth, movement and support were held in high regard. I haven't put much time into the MP part of it but I was shocked at not just how good it is. It's more than an after-thought. It's something that sticks to the tone of the campaign with its themes of brutal survival, but also love that it isn't just a run and gun affair, it requires tactics and stealth and deviating from this will be punishing. I would love to see more multiplayer games like this. I hope The Division is like this but as you say I have a feeling it'll dilute it by adding too much stuff.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Registered on: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2014 6:32:21 GMT
I was hoping for another TLoU-ish combat where environment, stealth, movement and support were held in high regard. I haven't put much time into the MP part of it but I was shocked at not just how good it is. It's more than an after-thought. It's something that sticks to the tone of the campaign with its themes of brutal survival, but also love that it isn't just a run and gun affair, it requires tactics and stealth and deviating from this will be punishing. I would love to see more multiplayer games like this. I hope The Division is like this but as you say I have a feeling it'll dilute it by adding too much stuff. Maybe a balancing point could be that equipment is less effective against other players, or that it is costly/rare much like higher tier weapons in TLoU and DayZ. Either way, it'd become something almost like a killstreak from CoD in that the player worked hard to obtain one, and that it isn't readily available unless properly earned. I wouldn't mind that quite as much, especially if they could only be obtained by trading essentials like guns, water, other gadgets, etc. That way, you have to sacrifice something for something, and the weaponry isn't set up like a ladder where you're constantly moving up to better weapons until you've maxed yourself out. By the way, are you planning on getting the game? If so, I always am happy to see new company on the PS4.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Registered on: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2014 6:37:07 GMT
I haven't put much time into the MP part of it but I was shocked at not just how good it is. It's more than an after-thought. It's something that sticks to the tone of the campaign with its themes of brutal survival, but also love that it isn't just a run and gun affair, it requires tactics and stealth and deviating from this will be punishing. I would love to see more multiplayer games like this. I hope The Division is like this but as you say I have a feeling it'll dilute it by adding too much stuff. Maybe a balancing point could be that equipment is less effective against other players, or that it is costly/rare much like higher tier weapons in TLoU and DayZ. Either way, it'd become something almost like a killstreak from CoD in that the player worked hard to obtain one, and that it isn't readily available unless properly earned. I wouldn't mind that quite as much, especially if they could only be obtained by trading essentials like guns, water, other gadgets, etc. That way, you have to sacrifice something for something, and the weaponry isn't set up like a ladder where you're constantly moving up to better weapons until you've maxed yourself out. By the way, are you planning on getting the game? If so, I always am happy to see new company on the PS4. I'm planning on getting it for PS4, yeah. Same with TLOU remastered.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Registered on: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2014 1:37:12 GMT
One thing I am glad to see is a relatively high TTK. The gameplay has only shown a full PvAI battle, but I am confident that PvP is a fairly lengthy battle because of the low bullet damage. If you look at 3:08 on the E3 2013 gameplay, you can see the special ability "Adrenaline Boost" gives a player an extra 500 health, while the new weapon collected at 6:07 in the same video only deals a maximum of 148 damage per round. That's an extra 4-5 shots on the player from just that ability, so there's definitely a lot of wiggle room as far as taking damage goes. Take into account that the new rifle is likely a powerful gun, and we might be seeing a TTK that is multiple seconds if not more. I much prefer a high time to kill rather than a low one because once those numbers get too small, lag really starts to dictate who was the victor instead of gun skill. Just look at CoD: Ghosts; it has guns with a TTK of as little as 1/16th of a second, and it is a brutal MP experience.
Also, the lobby size looks promising. Again referring to the E3 2013 gameplay, I managed to count out ~244 players on the one map at a time. At 6:41, there is clearly seven people in battle(4 enemies, 3 allies); when we zoom out to 6:51-6:58, we can see the original conflict is marked with a circle that has seven dots(4 red, 3 blue). Assuming that each dot represents a single player, when counted out there's ~244 players visible on the map, a fairly refreshing number compared to GTA 5's 16.
|
|
MrMister
Member
Posts: 321
Registered on: May 2014
|
Post by MrMister on Oct 30, 2014 15:39:43 GMT
This is fairly offtopic but I agree with you guys that TLOU had one of the most balanced multiplayers that I have ever played on PS3 with strategy playing a major role. Maybe we could do some online some time with 3-4 nodo's with mics and do some proper teamwork . On topic: I too have the feeling that the trailers are again an overhype because the look to amazing to be true, but the concept is very good. So we will see what the end product is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Registered on: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2014 2:12:13 GMT
This is fairly offtopic but I agree with you guys that TLOU had one of the most balanced multiplayers that I have ever played on PS3 with strategy playing a major role. Maybe we could do some online some time with 3-4 nodo's with mics and do some proper teamwork :). On topic: I too have the feeling that the trailers are again an overhype because the look to amazing to be true, but the concept is very good. So we will see what the end product is. It's a shame my only access to TLoU is through a friend, :( Also, will you be getting The Division, or is it too soon to call?
|
|