Somm-1 Posted June 18, 2008 Posted June 18, 2008 Pardon the necromancy, but I would like to throw in my two cents. I, like most Star Wars fans here, have an endless list of small improvements that I would like to see in Battlefront III. The one feature I would most like to see is some sort of an Offensive/Defensive position variable on Galactic Conquest Maps. In the current Galactic Conquest it doesn't matter if the Rebel Alliance is invading a Galactic Empire-held planet or the other way around, the Rebellion will always start off in the exact same position. There ought to be an invasion starting position and a defensive starting position held by whomever is currently invading or defending respectively. Quite frankly, I'd like to see the Rebels assault Echo Base for a change. That brings up another issue; what about strange, unlikely, non-canon battles? What if one assaulted Republic-held Geonosis as the Rebels? Or perhaps defended the Empire's garrison on Cloud City from the Confederacy? Fight the CIS as Rebels, fight the Republic as the Empire, ect... Even if it was just for Instant Action, mixed-era battles would be a nice addition.
Bokken Posted June 18, 2008 Posted June 18, 2008 One thing that would be really great? Different colored text for Public Chat, Team Chat, and Admin Messages. I know it seems either petty, small, or pointless, but I still think it's not a bad idea.
Bs|Rogue52 Posted June 19, 2008 Posted June 19, 2008 Thats not a bad idea, teams could be different colors, such as white and the currently used yellow. I am glad they put chat messages with the kill list though, i was going cross eyed on BF1 trying to read both.
Galizien Posted June 26, 2008 Posted June 26, 2008 Battlefront 3 should copy bf 1s excellent gameplay. For some reason, they downgraded it in bf2?
DeathKnight23 Posted June 26, 2008 Posted June 26, 2008 Galizien said: Battlefront 3 should copy bf 1s excellent gameplay. For some reason, they downgraded it in bf2? You mean like the commands? Yeah, dunno why they got rid of that. At least that gave you a chance to control the AI
Galizien Posted June 27, 2008 Posted June 27, 2008 No, not necessarily the commands. Battlefront 2 seemed to have changed for the worst. I don't know how to describe it. Maybe the rifle does less damage, or your movement is slower, but the gameplay has definately changed.
Gemini_Thunder Posted June 28, 2008 Posted June 28, 2008 It changed, BF I was clean and smooth in some ways, and BF II's picture was sort of rough and more realistic, but in some ways yes, BF II was worst, but not in all ways.
jawathehutt Posted June 28, 2008 Posted June 28, 2008 Im pretty sure the weapons do either the same or more damage in BF2 with a few exceptions.
darkjedimonkey Posted July 16, 2008 Posted July 16, 2008 i liked BF1 because it had maps that weren't from places that not a lot of stuff happened at. IN bf2 there was maps like the asteroid planet lea gave birth to the twins and things like that. That why i didnt enjoy it as much...
DeathKnight23 Posted July 17, 2008 Posted July 17, 2008 darkjedimonkey said: i liked BF1 because it had maps that weren't from places that not a lot of stuff happened at. IN bf2 there was maps like the asteroid planet lea gave birth to the twins and things like that. That why i didnt enjoy it as much... i dunno why they didn't keep some of the BF1 maps into BF2 like Rhen Var and Bespin
darkjedimonkey Posted July 17, 2008 Posted July 17, 2008 exactly. all the better maps were washed out by new maps that were... i dunno... not as good.
GeneralPloKoon Posted July 17, 2008 Posted July 17, 2008 The xbox version had the Battlefornt I maps for Downloadable Content.
RC-1183 Posted July 27, 2008 Posted July 27, 2008 true i liked the maps in bf 1 as well also the mixed era battles would be neat (sorry if im X number of posts late) but i think 1st person view fo bf 3 would be awesome also i liked the 501st story line in bf 2 they should add sumthing similar spt u name ur squad and u kinda like make ur own story say for example ur a republic ARC squad and ur orders r too take out a under cover cis installment ad there are to be NO civilian casualllties but u "acidentily" kill some then ur storyline and public image would change u know???
RC-1183 Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 yea especially on those days that u want to play it but u dont want to play with a bunch of people jus go on sp but if a game doesnt have a good sp then that takes away some of the game value
GeneralPloKoon Posted July 30, 2008 Posted July 30, 2008 I love single player games more than multiplayer, but its hard to find a good single player game nowadays. Good thing there are bots!
RC-1183 Posted August 9, 2008 Posted August 9, 2008 true true and if u DO happen to find a good single player game then the multiplayer sucks horribly so its either one or the other
Rogue Nine Posted August 13, 2008 Posted August 13, 2008 Enough with the off-topic posts, please. I have cleaned this thread up of the recent spamminess, but it will be shut down if more nonsense rises up. ~9
M@RS Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 okay, I think they should change the way your health depletes as a Jedi, I think you should be able to permanently be a jedi like in assault mode, also they should force heal, because healing a jedi is a pain in the %#@
jawathehutt Posted August 15, 2008 Posted August 15, 2008 Theres a reason for that, like I or someone else has said in probably about 75% of threads in this forum, the jedi are WAY overpowered, and there is no need to break an already broken part of the game even more.
RC-1183 Posted August 15, 2008 Posted August 15, 2008 i agree with M@RS be completely invincible but have a time limit on how long you can be jedi
Sigundr Posted August 15, 2008 Posted August 15, 2008 I rather enjoy the satisfaction when I'm a trooper or such and I kill a hero. I don't mind the health thing, but it would be nice to have Force Heal in BFIII.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.