criterion-sm dice-lg ea-starwars-lg instagram lucasfilm-lg motive-lg twitch you-tube
Community Calendar

Instant Action & PvE Feedback

13536384041153

Replies

  • Strogg1980 wrote: »
    mastery0ta wrote: »
    * pulls up chair* this will be my entertainment for the evening

    No it wont, Im done with drawn out arguements against a manchild (if you mean the usual flame wars between me and him lol) who admitted on a thread he simply comes here to troll us

    LOL I've saved this thread for so long. I used to be looking for skirmish news, now it's solid insanity. Maybe one day well get some more arcade, until then this thread is golden
  • ELIMELECH0401
    1463 posts Member
    edited January 2018
    bfloo wrote: »
    Do you all really enjoy playing against the ai in this game?

    I've tried arcade and it is just awful.

    I can't even be bothered for the free credits.

    Yes, I absolutely enjoy arcade. In split screen it is epic. The only reason I play online is to play HvV and unlock content for Arcade. If they put in hero Ai, gave me credits after each game and let me unlock the guns and gun attachments in Arcade, I doubt I'd play online again.
    I am the same user as Elimelech401, that account was not tied to the game. I am hoping for more Skirmish with split screen and hero AI.
  • Blazur wrote: »
    Strogg1980 wrote: »
    This game doesnt need to prove anything to any market, it just needs to be a content rich game for offline like DICE employees promised on reddit.

    You're right, it doesn't have to prove anything to you. All it needs to do is stay the course. Most players are expecting fostering of the MP through additional seasons and patches as part of its live service. Not SP content akin to Elder Scrolls and MGS. The campaign alone is a fraction of the content contained in Skyrim. Come on, let's be real here.

    Criterion thinks otherwise, hence adjusting DLC plans to fit offline requests. I'm sure we'll get some offline goodness in season 2.

    He knows that. Why do you think he's so triggered?

    That tweet is awesome!!!! My guess is we will have an update with in two weeks. Season one looks to end on Jan 15th. I think we will get an update when they announce Season 2. We will probably get some Arcade content in season 2.
    I am the same user as Elimelech401, that account was not tied to the game. I am hoping for more Skirmish with split screen and hero AI.
  • Strogg1980 wrote: »
    Blazur wrote: »
    Jesbro wrote: »
    Unfortunately people like @Blazur would rather see the game fail instead of seeing people actually have fun in the offline versions of those modes.

    If I am wrong than I dare you to prove it!

    Of course I don't want this game to fail, I want it to succeed in what it was designed to do.

    And believe me, I take no satisfaction in seeing this group fail. Just wish some of you can let go of the past and embrace the future. It must be exhausting trying to change this game into something it isn't.

    If I am wrong than I dare you to prove it!

    Id be more concerned about your own "group" at the moment tbh. With the miserable sales and reception from fans, critics, investors and gamers all around. This games MP will be near dead by Summer aside from a few 10,000 people or so.

    In all reality. Them winning back offline and coop people would be just as smart of a move as investing in the MP crowd, most are playing Destiny and COD and ignoring this game anyhow. Can't blame them, COD, despite loot boxes as well, is far more entertaining.

    Winning back the offline and coop folks would increase sales for sure. If they added All modes and maps offline, this game would sell like hot cakes.
    I am the same user as Elimelech401, that account was not tied to the game. I am hoping for more Skirmish with split screen and hero AI.
  • ELIMELECH0401
    1463 posts Member
    edited January 2018
    Blazur wrote: »
    Jesbro wrote: »
    Unfortunately people like @Blazur would rather see the game fail instead of seeing people actually have fun in the offline versions of those modes.

    If I am wrong than I dare you to prove it!

    Of course I don't want this game to fail, I want it to succeed in what it was designed to do.

    And believe me, I take no satisfaction in seeing this group fail. Just wish some of you can let go of the past and embrace the future. It must be exhausting trying to change this game into something it isn't.

    If I am wrong than I dare you to prove it!

    Thank you for your concern. It is not exhausting for me. This group's success is encouraging to me. I am embracing the future.

    I am the same user as Elimelech401, that account was not tied to the game. I am hoping for more Skirmish with split screen and hero AI.
  • Blazur wrote: »
    Jesbro wrote: »
    Unfortunately people like @Blazur would rather see the game fail instead of seeing people actually have fun in the offline versions of those modes.

    If I am wrong than I dare you to prove it!

    Of course I don't want this game to fail, I want it to succeed in what it was designed to do.

    And believe me, I take no satisfaction in seeing this group fail. Just wish some of you can let go of the past and embrace the future. It must be exhausting trying to change this game into something it isn't.

    If I am wrong than I dare you to prove it!

    Have to say this is the best reply I have seen from you.

    Having said that we are not trying to change the game into something it isn't.

    We are trying to change it back into how it was when the Battlefront games were actually for everyone and not just those who play online!
  • Just my personal opinion, but I believe we all do better when a triple A game has multiplayer, co op and single player options.
  • TheBearShow1
    291 posts Member
    edited January 2018
    Look at the highest grossing multiplayer games of the last few years. They have bots, co op, and multiplayer. They're are no debates over whether they should have it. It is just expected. COD, Overwatch have so much options and customazations. I don't think they can hold a candle to Dice's maps and levels. However they could learn a lot when it comes to filling out a game's options.
  • TheBearShow1
    291 posts Member
    edited January 2018
    I have realistic expectations. I would love to see the rest and future small maps variants added to Arcade. Along with the Starfighter mode they have talked about. Just like when Doom added offline options, they did not add all modes, but every map was included with TDM.

    I do believe every map besides Crait has a large and small variant. I believe they plan to add this in the future. So if they added the remaining small maps. They have a large chunk of the work finished. And they could add the future maps much easier as the dlc will probably come one at a time.

    I almost feel like Arcade acts as another mode similar to Blast, GA, Strike, and HvV. However they all released with every location. We just need the rest of the maps. That would not pull a lot of resources. Arcade is already a thing. Just add more maps. When the new heroes came out they were added. Basically Arcade is TDM with options. So new maps won't need an overall from devs.

    Many indie devs and modders put AI in games. They have already done it with 6 of the maps, and I trust every map (A least a variant will come to Arcade). Dice and the other studios involved did a great job with this game. Fill out the maps and I will say job well done! Online Co op would be appreciated as well.
  • Aryck-The-One
    1684 posts Member
    edited January 2018
    Jesbro wrote: »
    Blazur wrote: »
    Jesbro wrote: »
    Unfortunately people like @Blazur would rather see the game fail instead of seeing people actually have fun in the offline versions of those modes.

    If I am wrong than I dare you to prove it!

    Of course I don't want this game to fail, I want it to succeed in what it was designed to do.

    And believe me, I take no satisfaction in seeing this group fail. Just wish some of you can let go of the past and embrace the future. It must be exhausting trying to change this game into something it isn't.

    If I am wrong than I dare you to prove it!

    Have to say this is the best reply I have seen from you.

    Having said that we are not trying to change the game into something it isn't.

    We are trying to change it back into how it was when the Battlefront games were actually for everyone and not just those who play online!

    Yeah, it's as simple as this is a feature we really enjoyed from the original games (Instant Action) and it's something we want them to bring back. There are benefits to playing offline over playing online, namely customization and the freedom to choose the map, mode, era, and faction you want to play.

    It's like Halo fans wanting them to bring back classic Firefight mode. Warzone Firefight in Halo 5: Guardians not only forces you to play online despite it being a PvE mode, but is has no customization options.

    Meanwhile Firefight in Halo: Reach was infinitely customizable and could be played offline either in single-player or splitscreen with friends... does wanting that back mean they are living in the past? No, it means they want a game mode that they really loved to return to the franchise. Same deal with Instant Action.
    * * *

    Original Trilogy & Sequel Trilogy for Instant Action in Battlefront II!


    #soloplayersmatter #singleplayersmatter #offlinegamersmatter
  • Strogg1980 wrote: »
    mastery0ta wrote: »
    * pulls up chair* this will be my entertainment for the evening

    No it wont, Im done with drawn out arguements against a manchild (if you mean the usual flame wars between me and him lol) who admitted on a thread he simply comes here to troll us

    I'm also noticing a pattern in his behavior; he ducks out of this thread every time someone responds to him with reason and logic (@hansgrell knows what I'm talking about), then comes back a week or a month later and starts picking on some random person to vent his frustrations.

    yee i gave up on that boat, honestly i just hope this isnt the only star wars game we get, since its only been this one and the 2015 battlefront, with the one being canned, but idk, polish and content wise i just dont trust EA, especially with all the bugs this one launched with, the random lag/fps drops, sound going all over the place (clone trooper voice over going off for empire) the terrible rubber banding thats been going on since launch (though im not sure if thats been fixed as i havent played for a while) people getting stuck in boxes and the map (a branch stops an at-st whats going on with that) idk the way this game came out im worried about the amount of polish any new star wars game will get
  • Just my personal opinion, but I believe we all do better when a triple A game has multiplayer, co op and single player options.

    Truth.
  • hansgrell wrote: »
    Strogg1980 wrote: »
    mastery0ta wrote: »
    * pulls up chair* this will be my entertainment for the evening

    No it wont, Im done with drawn out arguements against a manchild (if you mean the usual flame wars between me and him lol) who admitted on a thread he simply comes here to troll us

    I'm also noticing a pattern in his behavior; he ducks out of this thread every time someone responds to him with reason and logic (@hansgrell knows what I'm talking about), then comes back a week or a month later and starts picking on some random person to vent his frustrations.

    yee i gave up on that boat, honestly i just hope this isnt the only star wars game we get, since its only been this one and the 2015 battlefront, with the one being canned, but idk, polish and content wise i just dont trust EA, especially with all the bugs this one launched with, the random lag/fps drops, sound going all over the place (clone trooper voice over going off for empire) the terrible rubber banding thats been going on since launch (though im not sure if thats been fixed as i havent played for a while) people getting stuck in boxes and the map (a branch stops an at-st whats going on with that) idk the way this game came out im worried about the amount of polish any new star wars game will get

    http://www.respawn.com/game/star-wars
    It is published by EA though. I hope it has split screen.
    I am the same user as Elimelech401, that account was not tied to the game. I am hoping for more Skirmish with split screen and hero AI.
  • mastery0ta wrote: »
    Just my personal opinion, but I believe we all do better when a triple A game has multiplayer, co op and single player options.

    Truth.

    I am a huge fan of numerous options in my games as well.
    I am the same user as Elimelech401, that account was not tied to the game. I am hoping for more Skirmish with split screen and hero AI.
  • Jesbro wrote: »
    Blazur wrote: »
    Jesbro wrote: »
    Unfortunately people like @Blazur would rather see the game fail instead of seeing people actually have fun in the offline versions of those modes.

    If I am wrong than I dare you to prove it!

    Of course I don't want this game to fail, I want it to succeed in what it was designed to do.

    And believe me, I take no satisfaction in seeing this group fail. Just wish some of you can let go of the past and embrace the future. It must be exhausting trying to change this game into something it isn't.

    If I am wrong than I dare you to prove it!

    Have to say this is the best reply I have seen from you.

    Having said that we are not trying to change the game into something it isn't.

    We are trying to change it back into how it was when the Battlefront games were actually for everyone and not just those who play online!

    Yeah, it's as simple as this is a feature we really enjoyed from the original games (Instant Action) and it's something we want them to bring back. There are benefits to playing offline over playing online, namely customization and the freedom to choose the map, mode, era, and faction you want to play.

    It's like Halo fans wanting them to bring back classic Firefight mode. Warzone Firefight in Halo 5: Guardians not only forces you to play online despite it being a PvE mode, but is has no customization options.

    Meanwhile Firefight in Halo: Reach was infinitely customizable and could be played offline either in single-player or splitscreen with friends... does wanting that back mean they are living in the past? No, it means they want a game mode that they really loved to return to the franchise. Same deal with Instant Action.

    The more maps and modes we get offline the better.
    I am the same user as Elimelech401, that account was not tied to the game. I am hoping for more Skirmish with split screen and hero AI.
  • Look at the highest grossing multiplayer games of the last few years. They have bots, co op, and multiplayer. They're are no debates over whether they should have it. It is just expected. COD, Overwatch have so much options and customazations. I don't think they can hold a candle to Dice's maps and levels. However they could learn a lot when it comes to filling out a game's options.

    Its crazy because for the first, like 3 or so Battlefield games, DICE had AI enemies to fight against. And yeah now that I look at it, they truely are almost alone in that vast majority of MP based games have an option for solo play or practicing against bots.

    It really boggles my mind that COD, a game with majority of its fanbasr online, includes offline mp without question or demand from fans, yet Battlefront, which has a far larger offline following than COD, gets put aside....idk,I guess it makes since, DICE hasnt had a good game since Bad Company 2 imo, not surprised they havent managed to get their heads out of their ****

  • Strogg1980 wrote: »
    Look at the highest grossing multiplayer games of the last few years. They have bots, co op, and multiplayer. They're are no debates over whether they should have it. It is just expected. COD, Overwatch have so much options and customazations. I don't think they can hold a candle to Dice's maps and levels. However they could learn a lot when it comes to filling out a game's options.

    Its crazy because for the first, like 3 or so Battlefield games, DICE had AI enemies to fight against. And yeah now that I look at it, they truely are almost alone in that vast majority of MP based games have an option for solo play or practicing against bots.

    It really boggles my mind that COD, a game with majority of its fanbasr online, includes offline mp without question or demand from fans, yet Battlefront, which has a far larger offline following than COD, gets put aside....idk,I guess it makes since, DICE hasnt had a good game since Bad Company 2 imo, not surprised they havent managed to get their heads out of their ****

    I think it's the investors causing the problem. I hope the stock drop means the investors against offline sold their shares so we get tons of offline content.
    I am the same user as Elimelech401, that account was not tied to the game. I am hoping for more Skirmish with split screen and hero AI.
  • Strogg1980 wrote: »
    Look at the highest grossing multiplayer games of the last few years. They have bots, co op, and multiplayer. They're are no debates over whether they should have it. It is just expected. COD, Overwatch have so much options and customazations. I don't think they can hold a candle to Dice's maps and levels. However they could learn a lot when it comes to filling out a game's options.

    Its crazy because for the first, like 3 or so Battlefield games, DICE had AI enemies to fight against. And yeah now that I look at it, they truely are almost alone in that vast majority of MP based games have an option for solo play or practicing against bots.

    It really boggles my mind that COD, a game with majority of its fanbasr online, includes offline mp without question or demand from fans, yet Battlefront, which has a far larger offline following than COD, gets put aside....idk,I guess it makes since, DICE hasnt had a good game since Bad Company 2 imo, not surprised they havent managed to get their heads out of their ****

    I think it's the investors causing the problem. I hope the stock drop means the investors against offline sold their shares so we get tons of offline content.

    I dont think the investors are to blame as much as EA upper management pushing to release games as quick as possible. Also I do blame the Devs too. You had a little over 2 years and 3, three, THREE teams lol. There is no excuse as to why we couldnt have had everything for offline. At least Criterion realize this and are delaying their own game for a bit to give us a more complete experience. Shame its just not all on disc at launch again
  • Blazur
    4468 posts Member
    edited January 2018
    Strogg1980 wrote: »
    You had a little over 2 years and 3, three, THREE teams lol. There is no excuse as to why we couldnt have had everything for offline.

    The only excuse you need to accept is a business plan that excludes you. Obviously they could have done it in 3 years with 3 studios if they wanted to.
    The greatest teacher, failure is.
  • Last night I played battlefront 2 got my daily crate then I played battlefront 2 and played a large scale battle offline. I had fun in the first battlefront 2 I didn't have to grind
  • SAM4XE
    381 posts Member
    [
    Blazur wrote: »
    Strogg1980 wrote: »
    You had a little over 2 years and 3, three, THREE teams lol. There is no excuse as to why we couldnt have had everything for offline.

    The only excuse you need to accept is a business plan that excludes you. Obviously they could have done it in 3 years with 3 studios if they wanted to.
    Blazur, If their is one thing worse than a troll, it's a corporate apologist gamer and you qualify as both. You're a perfect example of what I loathe about the gaming community.
  • [
    Blazur wrote: »
    Strogg1980 wrote: »
    You had a little over 2 years and 3, three, THREE teams lol. There is no excuse as to why we couldnt have had everything for offline.

    The only excuse you need to accept is a business plan that excludes you. Obviously they could have done it in 3 years with 3 studios if they wanted to.
    Blazur, If their is one thing worse than a troll, it's a corporate apologist gamer and you qualify as both. You're a perfect example of what I loathe about the gaming community.

    LMAO
  • Blazur
    4468 posts Member
    edited January 2018
    Blazur, If their is one thing worse than a troll, it's a corporate apologist gamer and you qualify as both. You're a perfect example of what I loathe about the gaming community.

    Since we're sharing what we loathe, I'll tell you all how much I hate people who are blindly entitled. You've been given SP content when none of it was even necessary and still you don't appreciate that. Some of you will never be satisfied, and will spend months whining about this game and the developers despite how generous they've been to a very small audience which doesn't help their bottom line and goes against the philosophies of EA.

    I've been openly critical of this game where it matters, but at the same time are pragmatic with my criticism. You all are fighting for something which is not in their long term plans and never has been. You are the kind of people that would argue the sky isn't blue. And yet you'll still buy the next game too.

    That is why you fail.
    The greatest teacher, failure is.
  • Blazur wrote: »
    Blazur, If their is one thing worse than a troll, it's a corporate apologist gamer and you qualify as both. You're a perfect example of what I loathe about the gaming community.

    Since we're sharing what we loathe, I'll tell you all how much I hate people who are blindly entitled. You've been given SP content when none of it was even necessary and still you don't appreciate that. Some of you will never be satisfied, and will spend months whining about this game and the developers despite how generous they've been to a very small audience which doesn't help their bottom line and goes against the philosophies of EA.

    I've been openly critical of this game where it matters, but at the same time are pragmatic with my criticism. You all are fighting for something which is not in their long term plans and never has been. You are the kind of people that would argue the sky isn't blue.

    But but the original classic star wars battlefront 1 and 2 still sales at 30 to 120 dollars depending on eBay and Amazon. For ps2 Xbox and PC. I'm sure it's not for online content for PS and Xbox seeing that there are no servers.

    See how the price went up? On a old game that was offline heavy? And ea battlefront 1 is like 15 bucks not offline heavy? Hmm
  • Blazur
    4468 posts Member
    KlownShueS wrote: »
    See how the price went up? On a old game that was offline heavy? And ea battlefront 1 is like 15 bucks not offline heavy? Hmm

    Why aren't you playing that then? These games share the same name but not the same audience. Nor do they even share the same developers or even decade. To expect them to be carbon copies of one another is a pipe dream.

    How many times must I drive home this fact before it sinks in? Why did you even buy this game? LOL...
    The greatest teacher, failure is.
  • I play all 6 battlefronts. Because I love large scale battles in the star wars universe.

    And at my age I don't have to let your generation tell me what to sink in.

    But on that not you are right about one thing the new battlefronts are not made for the offline player nor was it in the plans. I think they should of named it battlefront 3 and 4 as not to give everyone the Ideal that it would have they same dedication for the offline gamer that it's predecessor had.
  • Not is note.
  • Blazur
    4468 posts Member
    KlownShueS wrote: »
    And at my age I don't have to let your generation tell me what to sink in.

    Lady, I'm probably older than you. My generation laid the foundation for video games and witnessed its evolution to what we have now.
    The greatest teacher, failure is.
  • You played pong also when it came out? Remember that one coffee table game can't remember the name but it was the best
  • Blazur
    4468 posts Member
    KlownShueS wrote: »
    You played pong also when it came out? Remember that one coffee table game can't remember the name but it was the best

    Pong, warlords, you name it. Even programmed games on the Commodore 64 using Basic.
    The greatest teacher, failure is.
  • So you know
  • I'm a man.
  • Blazur
    4468 posts Member
    KlownShueS wrote: »
    I'm a man.

    My bad, I assumed wrong. Thought I saw an earlier thread where you eluded to being a woman. Apologies.
    The greatest teacher, failure is.
  • hansgrell
    249 posts Member
    edited January 2018
    Blazur wrote: »
    KlownShueS wrote: »
    See how the price went up? On a old game that was offline heavy? And ea battlefront 1 is like 15 bucks not offline heavy? Hmm

    Why aren't you playing that then? These games share the same name but not the same audience. Nor do they even share the same developers or even decade. To expect them to be carbon copies of one another is a pipe dream.

    How many times must I drive home this fact before it sinks in? Why did you even buy this game? LOL...

    most people only bought this game because it was star wars, if it wasnt star wars, the sales would have been horrible, especially with the depth of the game and the terrible polish it received

    i actually prefer playing the psp versions, especially over this, i love the turbo laser gun, especially the flamethrower, too bad they never made a pc version of elite and rogue squadron
  • Blazur
    4468 posts Member
    hansgrell wrote: »
    most people only bought this game because it was star wars

    Anybody doing this should not openly admit it. Those are the kind of consumers companies prey upon. All of you claiming the MP folk are ruining game integrity should instead point their claws at blind fanboyism, not the well informed audience which clearly none of you are.

    All of these arguments are desperate measures to justify why I game should be something other than what you bought.
    The greatest teacher, failure is.
  • TheBearShow1
    291 posts Member
    edited January 2018
    I would love to see a tentative roadmap for future seasons and content. If they add the remaining maps to Arcade we will see a first for Arcade/Skirmish (every ground location represented in the game) Plus all future dlc could be tackled one map at a time.

    To me that is why I am pushing for the remaining small maps to come first. They could be included easier and faster then any other other, while still giving us a taste of every map. Then if they offer SA at a later date great!

    I think dice was smart to make their small maps variants of larger ones. Every mode has a unique variant. I think of Arcade as another mode! We just need every location like the other modes. Arcade offers them a way to bring this to us without having to program alot of moving parts or objectives.
  • Blazur wrote: »
    hansgrell wrote: »
    most people only bought this game because it was star wars

    Anybody doing this should not openly admit it. Those are the kind of consumers companies prey upon. All of you claiming the MP folk are ruining game integrity should instead point their claws at blind fanboyism, not the well informed audience which clearly none of you are.

    All of these arguments are desperate measures to justify why I game should be something other than what you bought.

    wat? i bought the game because i semi enjoyed the online of the last one, which i now admit is better then this one, im only simply saying the only reason this game is semi popular is because its star wars, take the star wars out and its not really a strong game
  • Blazur Logic-
    Online people- "hey can we get that patch that tweaks and balances the game a bit?
    DICE- "sure"
    Blazur-"yeah thanks DICE!"

    Offline people- "Hey can we get a few more maps unlocked and maybe that starfighter mode?"
    Criterion (aka the team not taking away resources from online)- "Sure, we'll see what we can do early next year"
    Blazur-" OMG STOP!!! Why are you giving them stuff to enjoy?! They deserve nothing!"

    Entitled because DICE and Criterion said they want to please both offline and online people on Reddit and Twitter out of their own free will? Please...
    Blazur wrote: »
    KlownShueS wrote: »
    See how the price went up? On a old game that was offline heavy? And ea battlefront 1 is like 15 bucks not offline heavy? Hmm

    Why aren't you playing that then? These games share the same name but not the same audience. Nor do they even share the same developers or even decade. To expect them to be carbon copies of one another is a pipe dream.

    How many times must I drive home this fact before it sinks in? Why did you even buy this game? LOL...

    Then dont name it battlefront lol. Thats like calling a country the New Soviet Union then telling all the communists that come in "leave! This isnt 1965, why would you expect us to be like the old country we are named after?!".

    Or its like yelling at Indiana Jones fans when they go to see a reboot and it has Action but none of the history.

    EA/DICE could have stopped us all from being on here if they called it "Star Wars-Galactic Civil War" or something like that.

    Stop being a corporate apologist.
  • Blazur wrote: »
    KlownShueS wrote: »
    And at my age I don't have to let your generation tell me what to sink in.

    Lady, I'm probably older than you. My generation laid the foundation for video games and witnessed its evolution to what we have now.

    For a Gen X'er, you sure act like someone who isnt a day out of 12th grade with your limited understanding of "People liking/wanting different things than me". I call **** on that. If your in your late 30s or 40s and get a kick out of trolling like you do on here, thats insanely Immature for an adult of that age.
  • I'm 45 years young I love star wars not so much at all of the new trilogy or new games.

    But I love to play games that don't have me playing with other people all the time because life.
    Not that I need to get gud or anything like that but I love to kill stormtroopers. Their aim was bad they were clueless just like I like my bots.

    Give me large scale bots and some space battles offline. I want to play out my star wars fantasy without being suicide by a y-wing when I'm not even a hero but a grunt.

    I love fighting bots it's fun it's enjoyable I laugh. Online a yell rage and curse talk mess when I kill 6 in a roll. To me that's not fun I feel like I'm deployed again. I feel like I have to keep everyone alive I feel like I have to....

    Online sometimes brings up too much of a bloody past.

    So if people can't understand that then oh well go bleep yourself some of us just want to relax and have fun in a galaxy far from this one and a very long ago. Because yes the title star wars holds a weight and standard and the title battlefront has that standard and honor that should be respected for all types of fans not just online but offline. And ea has disrespected every fan. Even the multi-player on this forum there a lot of complaints . Offline we ask less but still both sides of the fence there are more reasons to ask why this and that then any game I ever seen in my life.

    Just my two cents come crush me now I know here comes the hate.

  • SAM4XE
    381 posts Member
    Strogg1980 wrote: »
    Blazur wrote: »
    KlownShueS wrote: »
    And at my age I don't have to let your generation tell me what to sink in.

    Lady, I'm probably older than you. My generation laid the foundation for video games and witnessed its evolution to what we have now.

    For a Gen X'er, you sure act like someone who isnt a day out of 12th grade with your limited understanding of "People liking/wanting different things than me". I call **** on that. If your in your late 30s or 40s and get a kick out of trolling like you do on here, thats insanely Immature for an adult of that age.
    Well said Strogg!
    q39ppyyrv9io.jpg
  • Jesbro
    640 posts Member
    Strogg1980 wrote: »
    Blazur Logic-
    Online people- "hey can we get that patch that tweaks and balances the game a bit?
    DICE- "sure"
    Blazur-"yeah thanks DICE!"

    Offline people- "Hey can we get a few more maps unlocked and maybe that starfighter mode?"
    Criterion (aka the team not taking away resources from online)- "Sure, we'll see what we can do early next year"
    Blazur-" OMG STOP!!! Why are you giving them stuff to enjoy?! They deserve nothing!"

    That is probably the best example I have ever seen.

    He has Galactic and Starfighter Assault available online.

    All we are asking for is for those same things already in the game to be available for Arcade as well.

    And he calls us entitled?

    Criterion already said that they are changing stuff around in order to do this and if that is true than I call it a victory for us. And nothing he can say will change that!
  • Blazur wrote: »
    Blazur, If their is one thing worse than a troll, it's a corporate apologist gamer and you qualify as both. You're a perfect example of what I loathe about the gaming community.

    Since we're sharing what we loathe, I'll tell you all how much I hate people who are blindly entitled. You've been given SP content when none of it was even necessary and still you don't appreciate that. Some of you will never be satisfied, and will spend months whining about this game and the developers despite how generous they've been to a very small audience which doesn't help their bottom line and goes against the philosophies of EA.

    I've been openly critical of this game where it matters, but at the same time are pragmatic with my criticism. You all are fighting for something which is not in their long term plans and never has been. You are the kind of people that would argue the sky isn't blue. And yet you'll still buy the next game too.

    That is why you fail.

    I love playing Skirmish and Arcade with friends via split screen. I am hoping to be able to fight as and against heroes and ships in split screen co op so I ask for the AI and mode to do so. I appreciate Arcade (and Skirmish from the last game). When I said this in the past, you told me "Skirmish sucks and I know it". Asking for them to add more content is not a lack of appreciation. The devs said at the beginning of this game that they were going to care for offline as well as online gamers. This makes us an audience. There are enough offline gamers that adding the offline content would help their bottom line far more than you think. If offline gamers were not going to help their bottomline Criterion would have never adjusted their DLC plans in response to offline requests.
    I am the same user as Elimelech401, that account was not tied to the game. I am hoping for more Skirmish with split screen and hero AI.
  • The skirmish wars continue
  • This message is in response to Blazur

    I love playing Skirmish and Arcade with friends via split screen. I am hoping to be able to fight as and against heroes and ships in split screen co op so I ask for the AI and mode to do so. I appreciate Arcade (and Skirmish from the last game). When I said this in the past, you told me "Skirmish sucks and I know it". Asking for them too add more content is not a lack of appreciation. The devs said at the beginning of this game that they were going to care for offline as well as online gamers. This makes us an audience. There are enough offline gamers that adding the offline content would help their bottom line far more than you think. If offline gamers were not going to help their bottomline Criterion would have never adjusted their DLC plans in response to offline requests.
    I am the same user as Elimelech401, that account was not tied to the game. I am hoping for more Skirmish with split screen and hero AI.
  • This message is in response to Blazur

    I love playing Skirmish and Arcade with friends via split screen. I am hoping to be able to fight as and against heroes and ships in split screen co op so I ask for the AI and mode to do so. I appreciate Arcade (and Skirmish from the last game). When I said this in the past, you told me "Skirmish sucks and I know it". Asking for them too add more content is not a lack of appreciation. The devs said at the beginning of this game that they were going to care for offline as well as online gamers. This makes us an audience. There are enough offline gamers that adding the offline content would help their bottom line far more than you think. If offline gamers were not going to help their bottomline Criterion would have never adjusted their DLC plans in response to offline requests.

    well said also a developer said they don't differentiate between mp or sp. So we still considered as important by Criterion. #SoloPlayersMatter
  • Jesbro wrote: »
    Strogg1980 wrote: »
    Blazur Logic-
    Online people- "hey can we get that patch that tweaks and balances the game a bit?
    DICE- "sure"
    Blazur-"yeah thanks DICE!"

    Offline people- "Hey can we get a few more maps unlocked and maybe that starfighter mode?"
    Criterion (aka the team not taking away resources from online)- "Sure, we'll see what we can do early next year"
    Blazur-" OMG STOP!!! Why are you giving them stuff to enjoy?! They deserve nothing!"

    That is probably the best example I have ever seen.

    He has Galactic and Starfighter Assault available online.

    All we are asking for is for those same things already in the game to be available for Arcade as well.

    And he calls us entitled?

    Criterion already said that they are changing stuff around in order to do this and if that is true than I call it a victory for us. And nothing he can say will change that!

    Yep.

    Great news Blazur,you dont have to wait 7 months to look like an Id iot, telling us they wont add offline content like last time. They made you look the fool right out the gate.
  • Jesbro wrote: »
    Strogg1980 wrote: »
    Blazur Logic-
    Online people- "hey can we get that patch that tweaks and balances the game a bit?
    DICE- "sure"
    Blazur-"yeah thanks DICE!"

    Offline people- "Hey can we get a few more maps unlocked and maybe that starfighter mode?"
    Criterion (aka the team not taking away resources from online)- "Sure, we'll see what we can do early next year"
    Blazur-" OMG STOP!!! Why are you giving them stuff to enjoy?! They deserve nothing!"

    That is probably the best example I have ever seen.

    He has Galactic and Starfighter Assault available online.

    All we are asking for is for those same things already in the game to be available for Arcade as well.

    And he calls us entitled?

    Criterion already said that they are changing stuff around in order to do this and if that is true than I call it a victory for us. And nothing he can say will change that!

    That's why he's so triggered. If he had his way, Criterion would completely ignore us... lucky for us, Criterion doesn't listen to him.
    * * *

    Original Trilogy & Sequel Trilogy for Instant Action in Battlefront II!


    #soloplayersmatter #singleplayersmatter #offlinegamersmatter
  • TheBearShow1
    291 posts Member
    edited January 2018
    Something I was thinking about as a quick alternative to see more maps come to Arcade is the variants of each planet is different with HvV, Strike, and Blast. So if GA is not in our future, perhaps we could get the different variants of small maps. Such as the Naboo Courtyard, Palace, and the room in HvV where the Jedi fight Darth Maul. A lot of the small maps differ for each planet depending on the mode. I think that would be good as well, but really I would love to see at least one map per location.
  • Blazur wrote: »
    Blazur, If their is one thing worse than a troll, it's a corporate apologist gamer and you qualify as both. You're a perfect example of what I loathe about the gaming community.

    Since we're sharing what we loathe, I'll tell you all how much I hate people who are blindly entitled. You've been given SP content when none of it was even necessary and still you don't appreciate that. Some of you will never be satisfied, and will spend months whining about this game and the developers despite how generous they've been to a very small audience which doesn't help their bottom line and goes against the philosophies of EA.

    I've been openly critical of this game where it matters, but at the same time are pragmatic with my criticism. You all are fighting for something which is not in their long term plans and never has been. You are the kind of people that would argue the sky isn't blue. And yet you'll still buy the next game too.

    That is why you fail.

    I love playing Skirmish and Arcade with friends via split screen. I am hoping to be able to fight as and against heroes and ships in split screen co op so I ask for the AI and mode to do so. I appreciate Arcade (and Skirmish from the last game). When I said this in the past, you told me "Skirmish sucks and I know it". Asking for them too add more content is not a lack of appreciation. The devs said at the beginning of this game that they were going to care for offline as well as online gamers. This makes us an audience. There are enough offline gamers that adding the offline content would help their bottom line far more than you think. If offline gamers were not going to help their bottomline Criterion would have never adjusted their DLC plans in response to offline requests.
    I am the same user as Elimelech401, that account was not tied to the game. I am hoping for more Skirmish with split screen and hero AI.
Sign In or Register to comment.