Your REVIEWS/THOUGHTS! [Big merge]

[Halifax28]

The air vehicles are maneuverable, but its easy to forget how fast you are going. While flying, I felt like I was going too slow and that I was going to get shot down, then I noticed how fast I was moving across the map. Tonight I want to play on a larger map, so that I have more maneuvering room in the air. On the map I was playing in, it only took me about 10 seconds to get from one side to the other in the starfighter.

 

The Super Battledroid and Droideka are awsome. In fact, I would say in a toe to toe fight, NOTHING can take down a Droideka (infantry of course). The Super Battle droid is the best "rocket troop" of all because he can fire his rocket with one trigger and his VERY GOOD laser with the other trigger. Other rocket troops need to switch out the rocket for a blaster to defend them selves, the SB does not need to. I found my self taking down clone troopers with just his laser, saving the rocket for larger groups or vehicles. There is also mention of some kind of tri shot that the SB can do, but I have not messed around enough to find it.

 

The Droideka is well balance by a sever lack of mobility once he goes into "kick ass" mode. While all other troops can manuever and strafe like any other FPS, the droideka can only really move fast while in roller mode. Once you find the enemy, you hit Y to turn into ass kicker mode. Left trigger turns the shield on and off while the right trigger lays down death. However, the Droidek cannot move worth a **** while in this mode and that includes forward, backward, turn right and left or strafing. I like this because other wise, everybody would just use these things. Basically, if you are in front of a Droideka, prepare to respawn, but if you can shoot it while it is rolling or if you can manuever to its side or behind, it will have difficulty tracking you.

 

As far as jumping into a vehicle, as far as I know you can jump into any vehicle with any character. Have I done this? No, I was too busy getting killed by the very lethal enemy AI (on Hard remember). I can tell you that as a clone trooper, I saw a Republic Gunship shoot at ME as it flew over. When I put my targeting reticle on it, it was red meaning an enemy unit. I can only assume it was some Separtist Driod, snickering as he stole and flew away with my Gunship. By the way, on that map, the Separists definately do not start out the that Gunship, that sucker stole it some how.

[The_Preacher]

possibly. it might.

 

however as i said, that would negate the argument that most people use as an excuse why the Pc is better.

 

however for thos tha dont have both a Pc and a console, and only have a Pc i would suggest you Get a good gamepad, perhas one shaped like aPS2 pad or an Xbox pad.

 

However

 

since the PC has keyboard and mouse. on infantry only maps like mos eisly your going to be severly disadvantaged.

 

remember i said that it feels wrong in vehicles on PC. but infantry combat is pretty good.

 

so this is your dilemma.

 

a good joypad will probably make the vehicles and everything Feel teh way they were meant to. but your infantry combat and accuracy is going to be much less than those using keyboard and mouse.

 

this is why getting it on console makes it more even playing ground since 99% use the joypads, and dont bother to buy peripherals of keyboard and mouse.

[Sivy]

can you not remap the controls for vehicle movement? so instead of having to keep scrolling the mouse, you can use the arrow keys and just keep it pressed down?

[pere]

Originally posted by The_Preacher

i think i will be returning My PC version and sticking with the Ps2 version, as i said before, the shortcummings of the Ported PC version spoil the flow of the game that exists on the console version.

 

Where do you live that you can return software- 1980??

[The_Preacher]

there is a Shop here Called GAME. they have a 10 day money back guarentee. you can basically buy the game, and take it back within 10 days and say, "i didnt like it" and they have no problems with that.

 

so aslong as i return the Pc version within 10 days i get my money back.

 

its very hndy for rying out new games, or if your unsure as to what system you want it on. you simply buy both see which is better, and within 10 days you take the worst version back.

 

simple

[JediCrow]

Originally posted by The_Preacher

there is a Shop here Called GAME. they have a 10 day money back guarentee. you can basically buy the game, and take it back within 10 days and say, "i didnt like it" and they have no problems with that.

 

so aslong as i return the Pc version within 10 days i get my money back.

 

its very hndy for rying out new games, or if your unsure as to what system you want it on. you simply buy both see which is better, and within 10 days you take the worst version back.

 

simple

 

Well you are lucky then. There are no more stores in my area where you can return an opened new game. But that really hurts the stores more than me, since I used to buy ALOT more games than I do now when I could just return what I didn't like. Sure I'd return a fair amount (and I freely admit that it's due to ppl like me that stores changed their policies) but I know on average I actually bought and kept more games than I buy now.

 

And don't say I lose also because I have less games now, since I found a little thing called Gamepass that lets me get as many games as I want (one at a time) for $20 a month, which is ALOT less than I used to spend on games, even if you count the money that I occasionally spend to buy a game and keep it. Ok, back on topic, heh.

 

I'm getting the game today, but me and my brother HAVE played it already at a store and I'd have to give that experience an 8 out of 10. I'm sure I'll think more of it after tonight though.

[FpS_Vandal]

Starwars Battlefront: "The Force is Strong With This One"

 

Being an employee at a gamestore has it's advantages. We generally get stuff before it comes out at the store, and thus if we get to take it home before the street date.

 

This meant that I got to spend some quality time with the Single Player mode in this game before many MP servers were up...here's my thoughts on the game:

 

Way back, say more than a year ago I got a copy of BF:1942. I played it, anticipating great gameplay and fun like all of the magazines and articles I'd been reading suggested. What I got was a 30 dollar peice of crap. The game had a really intresting premise, but was poorly executed because of lack of realism, lack of atmosphere and lack of conflict. You generally had to run a good couple of minutes from spawn to see any action. Uninspired, boring action.

 

Fast forward 12 months and I pop Battlefront into my PC, fully expecting to slam my dick in a drawer for laying down 50 bucks for a bf1942 clone with stormtroopers. What I got, instead was perhaps the most fun I'd had with a new game since Counter-Strike, three years earlier.

 

Battlefront does not suffer from any of the problems of 1942. It takes the great concept of controling points which directly relate to "tickets" that represent reinforcments, and fixes the faults with the originator of the idea.

 

The first thing you'll notice, and perhaps be dissapointed in is that when you get in the aircraft of the game and take off, you're at the other side of the map before you know it. "Why are the maps so small!?" you'll cry in all your emo-kid angst.

 

Then when you get blown up by some imperial walker, you'll respawn and start running, and within seconds see laser fire EVERYWHERE. There's a group of Rebels holding off a Storm Trooper raid! You run to the trees they are using for cover and add fire support, only to turn while reloading your blaster rifle and see a small group of jetpack troopers drop behind you, a flank attack! Your entire resistance is crushed and the imperial war machine captures the point.

 

Every re-spawn throws you into the battle nearly immediatly. One of the best examples of this is a map like Kamino where the strategically placed spawnpoints are on large platforms with only 2 or 3 catwalks connecting each to one another, creating large choke points with lots of blaster fire.

 

There is something to be said, in my opinion about sound. The pepole at lucasarts clearly share my opinion and offer a spectacular audio arrangement, consistant of great voice acting from both players and the "guide" voice that tells you a point has been captured or lost, ect. and a great musical score which uses the wonderful orchestral sound of the movie music and delivers it in massive form in the game.

 

The graphics will not dissapoint. Perhaps its not Half-Life 2, but the game is definatly more appealing than Battlefield:Vietnam, as told by the lush forest enviroments, well done textures and sleek laser effects. I thought the modeling and skinning on some of the weapon models could have been alot better, but that is something that can be fixed with patches and replacement models.

 

The single player campaign has a few options: Instant Action, where you'll spend most of your time, just tossing up a quick game on your favorite map as your favorite faction. "Historical" mode where you can play the major battles of either the Civil War (Empire vs Alliance) or Clone War (CIS robots vs Republic Army) eras sequentialy. It's fun, being a fan of the series. But the real meat of the single player experience is "Conquest" mode. Where you pick a side, and are given the options of about 5 planets and are told to attack. Each victory ears you another chance to attack again, each defeat means the enemy gets to attack and you must defend. It takes two victories per-planet for you to have influence on the planet, once you have it the enemy can only get it back by beating you twice. Each planet also offers some sort of combat bonus, also. Before each fight you choose which advantage you want to use, based on the planets you have. In the beginning you have none, but once you've gotten a few, you'll have some options (Jedi Hero, Health Regeneration, Vehicle Sabatoge, ect.)

 

When you use the fun idea of BF:1942, and add in smaller maps, spectacular and immersive audio and visuals, and some gameplay tweaks you get a very full, and fun experience. Thats what Battlefront does. I have only a few gripes which can easily be fixed in one patch:

 

I belive it takes a little too much to take down an enemy, weapons should be more leathal across the board so that running out in the open was a stupid idea, rewarded with a re-spawn screen. Vehicles take too much damage before going down. 2 or 3 rockets should do in an AT-ST, and they don't. Really the only effective way to take down vehicles in the game is with other vehichles, which is a shame to me. The aircraft have a small learning curve before being a good pilot, but once you do it, you'll have fun with the x-wings and whatnot.

 

The game is what every game should be: Fun, and thats all that matters. Take off those heaphones, blast your speakers and jump into a hectic re-creation of the most famous battles of the Star Wars saga.

 

I give Starwars: Battlefront a confident 4.5 out of 5.

[Pimp69Lando]

I am tired of Lucas Arts making crap ass games. This game had the potential to be a jewel! Battlefield 1942/Vietnam are beautiful. Great graphics, awesome animations, great controls, and and an emersion like no other game. SW Battlefront does not have a single one of those qualities.

 

I was so excited to play this game. I logged in and over the course of two hours, my excitement was killed by what I saw.

 

The game feels rushed. There are a number of problems with the game. The animations are terrible, Atari 2600 ish! The run animation is choppy, teckmo bowl for the NES looked better. Death and explosion animations are a joke, Droids explosions look pitiful. Shot or damage collision animations are non existent, you cant tell if I am hitting someone. Vehicles are sluggish and clunky feeling and moving, hover tanks are suppose to be fast and sleek NOT slow and awkward. Maps are not well done graphically or tactically. The in-game interface and HUD seems very plan and basic. You cant fire a weapon if you jump, no more jumping from a hi ledge on an un suspecting group and taking them out in the air.

 

And Jedi... Jedi are just the most unbalance element I have seen in a game... EVER!!!! The 1st game I played I saw a "RTJ Luke" running around with a lightsaber. I got excited! I shot at him and he deflected my shot back at me. I really got REALY excited! He ran up and cut me down with the saber. Some how I ignored the choppy animation of his swing. He was by a spawn point, so I selected a heavy trooper with a missile launcher so I could kill the Jedi. I tried to kill the Jedi but he reflected the missile. Not with a force push, but with his LIGHTSABER! As ridiculous as that is, I then tried to kill by shooting at the ground or walls by him so he would be killed by the blast radius. He was fully in the the explosion and didnt look like he took damage at all. After I ran out of missiles I used grenades. I threw them under his feet. he flew 50 in the air. I thought I finally found a way to kill Jedi... WRONG! As soon as he landed he got back up. Well by this time there were other team mates that had spawned around and we ALL (about 5-8 players) were trying to kill this Jedi. HE BLOCKED EVERY SINGLE SHOT AND MISSLE FROM ALL OF US! We bounced him around with at least 10 grenades and he still lived. From that point I put this next to Masters of Teras Kasi (Chewbacca and Vader doing round house kicks... COME ON!). Unfortunately the game just went down hill from that point.

 

I don't know how the developers or testers played this game and thought it was ready for launch. It looked and played like this at E3. The developers said it was a "ruff version". Obviously it was the finished version, or they just didnt care.

 

Outside of being a SW game... it's just not fun or exciting.

[reelguy227]

So do most people agree that the xbox and ps2 versions are better than the pc versions ? How good are the console versions ,preferably xbox ? Im asking this because Im getting mine later today , thanks anyway. And are the maps really that small compared to bf42 ? How small in comparison to one of the bf42 maps ?

 

Reelguy

[reelguy227]

How is the xbox version ? Are the maps really that small ,how big compared to bf42s maps ? thanks

 

Reelguy

[Alegis]

Thanks for all the reviews guys. They're a good read. Even of the negative ones, i still will try this one out. No demo till now is very dissapointing of LEC and I hope they will offer fast patch support.

[Pimp69Lando]

I am tired of Lucas Arts making crap ass games. This game had the potential to be a jewel! Battlefield 1942/Vietnam are beautiful. Great graphics, awesome animations, great controls, and and an emersion like no other game. SW Battlefront does not have a single one of those qualities.

 

I was so excited to play this game. I logged in and over the course of two hours, my excitement was killed by what I saw.

 

The game feels rushed. There are a number of problems with the game. The animations are terrible, Atari 2600 ish! The run animation is choppy, teckmo bowl for the NES looked better. Death and explosion animations are a joke, Droids explosions look pitiful. Shot or damage collision animations are non existent, you cant tell if I am hitting someone. Vehicles are sluggish and clunky feeling and moving, hover tanks are suppose to be fast and sleek NOT slow and awkward. Maps are not well done graphically or tactically. The in-game interface and HUD seems very plan and basic. You cant fire a weapon if you jump, no more jumping from a hi ledge on an un suspecting group and taking them out in the air.

 

And Jedi... Jedi are just the most unbalance element I have seen in a game... EVER!!!! The 1st game I played I saw a "RTJ Luke" running around with a lightsaber. I got excited! I shot at him and he deflected my shot back at me. I really got REALY excited! He ran up and cut me down with the saber. Some how I ignored the choppy animation of his swing. He was by a spawn point, so I selected a heavy trooper with a missile launcher so I could kill the Jedi. I tried to kill the Jedi but he reflected the missile. Not with a force push, but with his LIGHTSABER! As ridiculous as that is, I then tried to kill by shooting at the ground or walls by him so he would be killed by the blast radius. He was fully in the the explosion and didnt look like he took damage at all. After I ran out of missiles I used grenades. I threw them under his feet. he flew 50 in the air. I thought I finally found a way to kill Jedi... WRONG! As soon as he landed he got back up. Well by this time there were other team mates that had spawned around and we ALL (about 5-8 players) were trying to kill this Jedi. HE BLOCKED EVERY SINGLE SHOT AND MISSLE FROM ALL OF US! We bounced him around with at least 10 grenades and he still lived. From that point I put this next to Masters of Teras Kasi (Chewbacca and Vader doing round house kicks... COME ON!). Unfortunately the game just went down hill from that point.

 

I don't know how the developers or testers played this game and thought it was ready for launch. It looked and played like this at E3. The developers said it was a "ruff version". Obviously it was the finished version, or they just didnt care.

 

Outside of being a SW game... it's just not fun or exciting.

[Pad]

You know the drill.

 

* Merged *

[Jerol Seren]

Originally posted by The_Preacher

just offering some thoughts on teh Pc version.

 

well i myself have played it. and i would have to agree with IGN review to some extent. (dont believe the thing about the Bots though, there no where near as stupid as IGN makes them out to be)

 

its an ok at best PC game, but good for consoles. its so obvious this game was designed for consoles and ported to PC.

 

the controls for vehicles (Especialy flying vehicles) are terrible. there are no flight physics like BF1942. its more like rogue squadron 1, realy arcady twitchy. you cant simply land your vehicle like in BF1942. you have to press a Take off/ Land button that automatically lands or takes off the craft (computer does it for you )

 

the graphics imo look worse on PC than the PS2 or Xbox because the PC uses a monitor, therefore you have a higher resolution wich shows up the low poly models and textures much more than a TV does.

 

The game however is very fun as an infantry game, and imo they should have left it at that. OR come up with better code for the vehicles. maps like Mos eisly and rhen var, yavin temple etc, realy show how good an infantry game it is.

 

sound effects are great, and the maps are pretty good, if a little small. (hoth suffers greatly from this)

 

my advice would be if you have a console ANd a PC, go for the console version, as the Pc version just doesnt feel right in comparison.

 

it sounds strange i know, but as the game was made for consoles, if i were to score it, id give the console version a higher score than the PC version simply because it Feels right on a console, and feels like a cheap port on PC.

 

there both identicle, except that maps like endor have more vegitation on the PC version.

 

the major gripes not concerning controls or feel i have being a bit of a star wars nerd, are the fact that everything feels miniature. like little lego things or something. the scales of the At-AT's ships, and people seem to small and midget like. proportions just seem very odd, has anyone else felt that?

 

anyway thats my thoughts on the PC, if you have a console, go for the console version, the benefits of going for the Pc are not enough to justify the worse gameplay and feel.

 

however no one has to listen to my opinon, just thought id help those wondering where their money should go

 

cheers.

Preach

 

 

Wow..I have to disagree with 100% of your post. The graphics are insanely beautiful...better than most of the online fpsers out there. Of course I play with everything up full...

 

Just to prove you don't know what you are talking about...the console versions are the only ones that use low res textures and low polys. The PC uses high quality. Which is evident if you played it with full settings.

[The_Preacher]

you have to read my other posts, before giving a rash reply like that.

 

you obviously havent read them or you wuld understand where i was coming from.

 

if you had read the other posts, you would know my system specifications, and know that i was playing with full graphics aswell.

 

please read further in teh future. and yes i do know what im talking about.

[FpS_Vandal]

Battlefront=sexy.

 

I'll say again PC version>Console versions.

 

I know. I've played both.

[The_Preacher]

<< even this smiley is getting tired of fanboy replies.

 

a nice objective opinion would be welcome for a change.

 

perhaps a nicely written long post with their reasons. so we have something nice and meaty to read instead of small posts with nothing usefull to say.

 

yes i do realise this is irnoic since this is a small post and COULd be considered none usefull

[JediCrow]

Originally posted by FpS_Vandal

Battlefront=sexy.

 

I'll say again PC version>Console versions.

 

I know. I've played both.

 

That's YOUR opinion. I just got the Xbox version and it's AWESOME.

[Dragnarr]

Everyone else have made such huge reviews mine is gonna be short and to the point, this is the PC version Im talking about:

 

The game starts as fun, everything seems perfect. Then the small balance issues or glitches of gameplay start to take notice. Maps are great, but not enough terrain to use as cover, vehicles are great, but offer little challenge as you can blast anything. Everyone just seems to run around with no point, just shooting at everything that moves. Im being a bit rough now, but the truth is untill I find challenge ( and I don't mean those invincible jedis ) and some depth ( as in things that you need to master ) this game will be average. I even tried playing as Hard, but there's no point as your own team bots are still as dumb and you have to run at every control point trying to cap em and then defend em. I can only hope that in future patches all these things are fixed and more things are added

 

I would give exactly the same 7.5 as the IGN reviewer gave

[Jerol Seren]

Originally posted by The_Preacher

you have to read my other posts, before giving a rash reply like that.

 

you obviously havent read them or you wuld understand where i was coming from.

 

if you had read the other posts, you would know my system specifications, and know that i was playing with full graphics aswell.

 

please read further in teh future. and yes i do know what im talking about.

 

you said the game used low res textures and low count polys. IF you play the game on high, then why did you say that?

The game is beautiful..it gives joint operations a run for its money.

[Jerol Seren]

Originally posted by Dragnarr

Everyone else have made such huge reviews mine is gonna be short and to the point, this is the PC version Im talking about:

 

The game starts as fun, everything seems perfect. Then the small balance issues or glitches of gameplay start to take notice. Maps are great, but not enough terrain to use as cover, vehicles are great, but offer little challenge as you can blast anything. Everyone just seems to run around with no point, just shooting at everything that moves. Im being a bit rough now, but the truth is untill I find challenge ( and I don't mean those invincible jedis ) and some depth ( as in things that you need to master ) this game will be average. I even tried playing as Hard, but there's no point as your own team bots are still as dumb and you have to run at every control point trying to cap em and then defend em. I can only hope that in future patches all these things are fixed and more things are added

 

I would give exactly the same 7.5 as the IGN reviewer gave

 

Vehicles ARE great...and they are a challenge. It just depends on who you play with. If you play on good public clan servers...you are going to get heavy teamplay...people who know your vehicles weaknesses and will USE those...

 

don't rate a game based on normal public servers...or else every game like this would get a 7

 

Also...as for the single player...don't rate that..it's only practice mode for the actual game. It's an after thought. The game is primarely online. Very little will likely be done to fix anything in the single player game since only a handfull even play it.

 

 

I would like to say the one and only thing I don't like about the game...

That blasted, stupid dumbed down auto-matic landing and take-off. I don't want a game to hold my hand while I play.

[The_Preacher]

because the game DOEs use low polygon models, and DOES use low res textures.

 

im willing to be that the majority of the textures are only 512 x 512.

 

BF1942 has alot of textures that are 1024 x 1024 and this game is 2 years old.

 

just because you think they look good, does not take away from the fact that are indeed low poly models, and low quality textures, when compared to the majority of new titles these days.

 

the texture sizes and poly counts, would be amazingly good, for 2 years ago. just not this day and age.

[Jerol Seren]

Originally posted by The_Preacher

because the game DOEs use low polygon models, and DOES use low res textures.

 

im willing to be that the majority of the textures are only 512 x 512.

 

BF1942 has alot of textures that are 1024 x 1024 and this game is 2 years old.

 

just because you think they look good, does not take away from the fact that are indeed low poly models, and low quality textures, when compared to the majority of new titles these days.

 

the texture sizes and poly counts, would be amazingly good, for 2 years ago. just not this day and age.

 

 

Now I KNOW there is something off here. This games textures EASILY blow away BF1942's. No doubt on that, everything is insanely detailed...a whole heck of a lot more than BF1942...infact, it's on par..maybe even better than Joint Operations. (one of the finest looking online fps out there)

 

I know textures (hello, artist?) and BF PALES in comparison to the detailed texture qualities in Battlefront. You can look at the ground and see the finely cut cracks in the ground...unlike bf1942..which had a slightly blurry look to it.

[The_Preacher]

there is nothing off at all.

 

i am also a texture artist and modeler myself.

 

and as i said, im willing to bet that the textures arent higher than 512 x 512.

[Jerol Seren]

Originally posted by The_Preacher

there is nothing off at all.

 

i am also a texture artist and modeler myself.

 

and as i said, im willing to bet that the textures arent higher than 512 x 512.

 

 

do you have any screenshots from your system that you can show me? How high are you running aniscopic filtering?