Your supposed to makes choices. They don't want characters who can do everything as well as some one who specializes. I run a balanced build because I play mostly with randoms, so I can't predict what role I'll need to step into. But I'll never be as powerful a DPS as the guy with the 4000 firearms score, support as the guy with 3500 in electronics. People need to stop thinking that anything less than a perfect roll is useless.

[quote]1. RNG is a staple of this kind of game. Though Massive leaves you many options----other than drops---to get what you need from the game. Crafting. Vendors. End game currency.[/quote] I'm well aware, I've played Destiny, Diablo, Borderlands, WoW, etc. I know all about RNG. The Division falls into a category where getting a good roll is almost impossible due to the sheer number of bonuses and talents. They clearly want us to focus on certain builds with the upcoming armor sets, but how does bonus sticky bomb damage on my backpack help my medic build? Also with so much emphasis on a handful of talents and bonuses to maximize DPS, those who don't get those God rolls are left at a serious disadvantage. Crafting was a viable method of rolling for some decent stats, but in order to realistically have enough mats for that much crafting pretty much required the various loot exploits. Not to mention crafting is taking a huge nerf in the next patch. [quote]2. This is an action game. Not Fallout 4. In Diablo 3 you have NO ability to customize your characters appearance before the start of the game. 3. See point 2.[/quote] It was hyped as having more customization options than Destiny. Which is definitely true with clothing and gear, but the faces felt more like Black Ops 3. It's also very much a TPS RPG where other people are looking at your character. You face is almost always exposed (even partially with your mask on), so you want to have at least some feeling of self with your character. Any game with character customization [i]should[/i] allow you to tweak things later. As you never look quite the same in the game as you did in the creation screen. The Division even threw people for something of a loop by making your character creation a literal reflection of what you were going to look like. I'm not saying we should have had Bethesda levels of character customization, but we should have had a little more variety. Seeing 5 clones of yourself in the first 5 minutes was a bit frustrating. [quote]4. See point 2....You are playing in a game world that is supposed to be NYC in the near future. So the developers are limited to clothing items that it would be reasonable to see someone wearing in a modern military, first responder, or person walking the streets of NYC if you went there today.[/quote] I agree with you there, but so many of the jackets look almost the same, same for the pants. The shirts/hoodies actually have more variety than most of the outerwear. To get any real variety, you pretty much had to buy a special edition or purchase a clothing pack. Which I did, even then I had to mix and match to find an outfit that I both liked and felt unique. [quote]5. Staple of this kind of game. People only notice it beause you aren't fighting monsters or aliens or with swords and magic.[/quote] They had a golden opportunity to make really interesting and tense encounters. But it became a sponge-fest of epic proportions... I get that some bosses need to take punishment, but the sheer number of normal enemies who can take 100 headshots before they die is absurd. Yes, as you advance your power scales up and those old normal enemies die easily, but the game keeps scaling your opponents so you still feel like you've got that level 1 weapon while fighting endgame enemies. Granted, your weapon is much more accurate and has better perks, but still. I forgave Destiny, Diablo, WoW and Borderlands to an extent for their tough enemies, but at least many of those enemies looked tough. The machine gun guys in The Division do have some serious armor, but they should not be straight up mini-boss level opponents. In my opinion of course. [quote]6. Balance is not what this sort of game is about. These gaems are about power. Even the PVP. Who ever has the best gear...and the most efficient build....wins. [/quote] Don't get me wrong, I hate Destiny's attempts to balance out everything. Bungie did that as far back as Marathon, I found it just as annoying in 1994 as I did in 2014. What is bothering me in The Division is that there is one or two good weapons in each weapon class. e.g. A first wave M1A1 with balanced is pretty much the best marksman rifle in the game. The other marksman rifles really can't compete and even if you get one, without the balanced perk, you've got a subpar weapon compared to the guy who got lucky. I'm a big proponent of realism. I get that a "battle rifle" (aka 7.62mm military rifles) are going to shoot faster and do similar damage to a bolt action rifle of the same caliber. However, The Division fails at balance in some places and overcompensated in others. For instance, the SCAR-H and the MK. 17 are all but useless next to the M1A1, the M44 is still a nice weapon, but it's still subpar by comparison. In a game that touts is variety, they needed to tweak things so that weapons all had their own perks and disadvantages, allowing players to choose a weapon that feels good to them, not the flavor-of-the-patch OP weapon. As well as those weapon talents not being so influential on the performance of the weapons. Destiny has and continues to suffer with certain "must have" weapon perks, The Division walked straight into the same quagmire and in some cases made it worse. [quote]7. Hardly. The AI scales to the player, and the faction you are opposing. Rioters fight stupidly because they aren't trained. LMB is ruthlessly efficient in their fire-and-maneuver tactics. It also scales with the level of the enemy. I was in the DZ last night...taking on b group of Rikers...and had a half dozen Rioters HEAR the guns shots...and then swarm me from a block and half away. Spreading out and taking cover as aggressively and intelligently as any group of human opponents. The firefight quickly went from one where I had the element of surprise and the initiative.....to one that was I backpedalling and on the defensive. Anywhere other than DZ 01 or 02 I'd have either died or been sent running for safety. [/quote] I've had some of those same experiences. However, it's not really "smart" AI, it's random packs of enemies or sometimes enemies that respawn directly behind you during a fight that reacted to your gunfire. I was initially impressed by some of the enemies tactics. How they would work together to advance on you. But once I saw that every enemy did the same things, I felt less and less impressed as the game progressed. Many of the different factions had the same types. Shotgun rushers (who are only dangerous because they are bullet sponges), the heavy armor type, the grenadiers with 8 million grenades and the normal soldier types. They tactics became very similar and again, I get it, the game is supposed to be more realistic and there are only so many weapon types and tactics normal human opponents will use. But really, only the shield/axe guys and the flamethrower guys were the only opponents felt at all different. As for firefights. I found that enemies spent a lot of time behind cover (which they should), but then it became a game of forcing or luring them out... Only to get your butt handed to you because they are so spongy. Lastly, I've found that a good way to lure enemies out is to fire at their cover occasionally (not enough to suppress them of course). But yes, it generally devolves into shooting at enemies when they pop up. Then waiting for them to pop up again. I know making AI is hard... But I would really like to have seen more enemies rather than a handful of super thought ones. [quote]8. Fact of life in this day and age. The time of a game-as-fixed-product is over. Unless you want to pay the $100 in one lump sum that is the true market value of a AAA game these days. [/quote] Nah, I get that DLC is a thing. I'm also of two minds on the subject. Including inflation, most modern games should cost about $110. So cutting up or creating extra content for some extra money isn't inherently a bad thing. Again, it's more of an issue where people damn one game and forgive another for the same antics. Like Borderlands and Aliens Colonial Marines... Sure the story was a little weak, but the AI, loading screen/doors, black hole spawn points, terrible AI and awful graphics (the cel shaded art style has always looked bad to me and felt like a cop out). [quote]9. Smh. Were people just no paying attention while playing this game....or are they so focused on "beating" the game as fast as possible, that they skip half of it. I''ve seen MOVIES and read BOOKS with worse stories than this game. Military fiction may not be your thing....but this game's story was NOT poorly done, and was told as well as can be told in an open world game. [/quote] I didn't rush through the game until I hit about level 20 or so. I picked up most of the story artifacts and watched/listened to them. I followed the general narrative... Military fiction isn't my first choice, but I am a fan. The story felt a little recycled from various other bio weapon plots, much like the much touted The Last Of Us was just zombie genre tropes shoved into the vibe of The Road. Maybe I'm just getting jaded in my 3rd decade of gaming. Cont...