{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
9/5/2015 2:19:08 AM
17
-
Money grabbers like eA would rather not develop a story too.
-
The devs said the reason was because not enough people play campaign to have one, seriously who wouldnt play a star wars campaign?
-
They got a book coming out based on the game if that helps. Star Wars Battlefront: Twilight Company
-
It's frustrating. Even for games that I mostly bought for multiplayer or online, the campaign was a chance to learn all the mechanics, go through a story about the game world, and learn what the motivation was. It also adds variety. Sometimes you want to play a game, but not have to go all-out against other players at all times, sometimes you just want to mess around and enjoy what they've created. Titanfall looked like a really interesting world, but there's nothing to give a shit about. The fact that the gameplay was fresh and crisp only kept away my boredom for so long. It's two armies, some story about political stuff, now go fight. Evolve was the other one that really surprised me. Looked super interesting, was ready to explore this alien world, and it's all just a busy multiplayer mess with cool graphics and boring mechanics. I was expecting a much better Lost Planet with a great multiplayer. It seems like a lot of popular titles are going this way, but there's also been immediate pushback from critics and game communities. Maybe not enough to prevent it from happening, but hopefully enough to make developers think twice. All I want is a fully-developed single player world, a la Skyrim, Dark Souls, Dragon Age, Mass Effect, etc., or I want a multiplayer game that doesn't rely entirely on online multiplayer to be used. Sometimes I just want to play by myself, at my own pace. Sometimes my internet is down, and I don't want my games to be $60 coasters. You can go all one way, but not the other.
-
Because the majority of people who buy multiplayer shooters do not play campaigns. Why would a dev waste the money to make a campaign that only 5% of the player base will ever play?
-
That's why battlefront was good. It wasn't some generic shooter.
-
Nope, it was a generic shooter. Remove nostalgia from the equation and you will realize they were just average games. Nothing special about them.
-
Yes because galactic conquest is in every other shooter. It was unique.
-
Galactic conquest was not special. It was basically a playlist.
-
Edited by Dman2143658709: 9/7/2015 3:05:00 PMNo. You were the leader of an entire faction of Star Wars and led them to victory. Edit - With optional Co-Op
-
Edited by RJ956: 9/7/2015 3:07:19 PMThat boiled down to a playlist. Woopdedoo. Your commanding them was entirely ancillary.
-
BRO. I had fun. Apparently you didn't.
-
That's certainly an opinion.
-
It is, but it is based in objective truth. The game is objectively nothing special.
-
I don't think you know what objectively means.
-
I most certainly do. I made a whole thread concerning the difference between subjectivity and objectivity in gaming.
-
