Jump to content
passwords have all been force reset. please recover password to reset ×
MFGamers

The Division 2


DisturbedSwan
 Share

Recommended Posts

I prefer the setting of the first game. It felt more real and the combat was new. Washington just doesn’t look appealing in a way I feel I want to investigate it. I think I played for about 30 minutes before feeling bored. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Sly Reflex said:

I put Anthem on after and it felt like it was running at a million miles an hour, it was easier to play, the shooting felt better. Anthem felt like the stronger game when you put them side by side. As much as I put Anthem on blast for how fucking shit it is in places at least it's doing something different. Division doesn't feel like it's progressed at all. Stuff has changed, but it still feels at the core what the original was. The health system is rejigged (I don't like it) and there's new gadgets. They made the gadgets more fiddly to use and the one I picked it wasn't immediately apparent what I was meant to be doing with it. I had to physically go in and read what it was about. I think that's bad game design for a skill that's meant to be exciting to use.

 

The menu's in this are bad as well. They look shit. The only saving grace is they don't take 30 seconds to load.

 

I said before that Anthem will be buried by this, but now I'm not so sure. It couldn't be less ambitious if it tried. There's fun to be had in co-op, but it feels very reheated. Sales wise this will do way better, but it's unclear now if this is the better game.

 

It was easier to play because you’ve put 30+ hours into Anthem and are used to it, it’s likely you’re still getting to terms with TD2’s controls. I strongly disagree about the shooting though, in the short time I had with TD2 the shooting and weaponry felt far superior and more involved than any of Anthem’s guns and gunplay which all feel the same and interchangeable with one another.

 

Just in some of the story missions in the TD2 beta there was more variation and more interesting enemy types to fight than Anthem. 

 

There is an awful lot of similarities and cross over with the first game, it’s a sequel so that makes sense. Didn’t have any issues with the menu, health or gadgets myself once I got used to them.

 

There’s no doubt about it Anthem will be buried by this. Whether you rate it more or not is still up in the air, but in terms of reviews and sales TD2 will be far superior.

 

I prefer the first games locale too @wiivo 2.0 I miss the snow. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I played this for almost five hours last night, having already put a bunch of time into the private beta. I've not done that for ages. I'll be on it again later tonight to do the story mission that wasn't included in the first beta.

 

I pre-ordered a digital copy for Xbox One last night on CD Keys for 45 quid. I like it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Blakey said:

Just in some of the story missions in the TD2 beta there was more variation and more interesting enemy types to fight than Anthem. 

 

Actually I just saw this. So far I've seen nothing special. It's all just dudes wearing armour plating or running at you and trying to stab you. I know Anthem has come in for some flak (rightly so) for the paint by numbers enemies and going off the usual fantasy tropes, but come on mate. Talk some sense. The enemies in this couldn't be more bland if they tried. By keeping it grounded there's not much they can do but add stuff we've already seen a million times before.

 

I played a tiny bit more and it's the very definition of safe. It's breaking zero ground and feels a bit homogeneous to the other Ubi games I've played or seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

38 minutes ago, Sly Reflex said:

 

Actually I just saw this. So far I've seen nothing special. It's all just dudes wearing armour plating or running at you and trying to stab you. I know Anthem has come in for some flak (rightly so) for the paint by numbers enemies and going off the usual fantasy tropes, but come on mate. Talk some sense. The enemies in this couldn't be more bland if they tried. By keeping it grounded there's not much they can do but add stuff we've already seen a million times before.

 

I played a tiny bit more and it's the very definition of safe. It's breaking zero ground and feels a bit homogeneous to the other Ubi games I've played or seen.

 

Maybe I should’ve been a little clearer in my previous post. I’m not saying the enemy types or designs are incredible in TD2 but they’re so much more intelligent and so much more of a threat on standard difficulties than in Anthem, that’s all. I do agree that the grounded nature of it there’s only certain routes they can go for enemy designs.

 

I also agree that it is very safe. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it though and I’d argue the original game was such a solid foundation that there wasn’t an awful lot they needed to do here. For me, it feels like one of the most distinct Ubi games - as the original did too, maybe Ghost Recon Wildlands feels similar but I haven’t played that - there are certain small elements of cross over sure but nothing homogenised apart from a lot of elements from TD1 obviously.  The world itself is huge and so rich with life too compared to Anthem, I really dug it, don’t know what else to tell ya. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't feel that at all, they're more of a threat maybe because you're squishy, but for intelligence they're dumb as fuck. I had a few instances where I've gone to a "?" and the only ones that posed a threat are the ones that run right at you. The others run between cover needlessly so you can shoot them in the back. Those free floating heavy guys that push you out of cover from the first game are dangerous as well, but mainly because they're pressuring you out of your safe hidey hole.

 

Small said that they try to flank and stuff but I've not seen that. I've certainly seen new enemies come in from a different side or even behind, but I've not seen any moments where it's like "Oh, this mob is actually doing something intelligent". They're as brain dead as the stuff in Anthem, it's just they're more dangerous because you're not on roids. Those crossfire and pincer situations only happen because of how they spawn the mobs in, not because the mobs assess what's going on and try to manoeuvre into those position, unless the map dictates it.

 

Hey, if that smoke and mirrors convinces you, more power to ya, but it's a bit fucking lame from what I've witnessed. If I do see something impressive I'll be back to crow on about it and admit I was in the wrong. I hope I am wrong, because I want to be surprised by the AI, it makes things more interesting in the long run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Sly Reflex said:

Those free floating heavy guys that push you out of cover from the first game are dangerous as well, but mainly because they're pressuring you out of your safe hidey hole.

 

I've certainly seen new enemies come in from a different side or even behind.

 

Isn’t that literally what flanking is? ?

 

Quote

Hey, if that smoke and mirrors convinces you, more power to ya, but it's a bit fucking lame from what I've witnessed. If I do see something impressive I'll be back to crow on about it and admit I was in the wrong. I hope I am wrong, because I want to be surprised by the AI, it makes things more interesting in the long run.

 

I guess it does ?‍♀️?. Finish the beta missions - assuming you actually want to of course - and the small Endgame taster and then see what you make of it then. ?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sort of, but it's not intelligent flanking, is it? It's not like the AI's gone, I should attack from this side, it's more a case of the the reinforced enemies coming out of spawning from the sides or behind.That's not intelligent AI, it's just the designers putting in spawns where your focus isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Enemies definitely flank and go wide. They'll loop round and suddenly appear to have popped up behind you. I've watched them and thought "you fuckers, you didn't do that in the first Division".

 

Anyway it's bought and I'll be playing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, because they have to. They're not doing it because they're smart, they're doing it because the level design is making it so they do that.

 

This is what I was saying about smoke and mirrors. You put the cover in a big circle or  put a big object in the way that blocks line of sight and they're going to have to do that. If there's cover in the centre  and it's the closest then they use that because that's the way they're designed. They're going to take the shortest route to their intended target.

 

And they did that in the first Division, it's just you having a selective mind. The cover is in a circle. They want to get close to you by going cover to cover. If the only cover is on the sides then it looks like they're flanking, but this is not an intelligent choice by the AI, it's the only choice. A good example of that is the shopping centre that's on fire. You have that big open ground where the boss stomps around and all the adds filter into the sides and push forwards that way because they're programmed to make use of cover. The end of Times Square is the same. The end of Russian consulate is the same.

 

Do you guys even pay attention to the level and enemy design in games?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Sly Reflex said:

Yeah, because they have to. They're not doing it because they're smart, they're doing it because the level design is making it so they do that.

 

This is what I was saying about smoke and mirrors. You put the cover in a big circle or  put a big object in the way that blocks line of sight and they're going to have to do that. If there's cover in the centre  and it's the closest then they use that because that's the way they're designed. They're going to take the shortest route to their intended target.

 

And they did that in the first Division, it's just you having a selective mind. The cover is in a circle. They want to get close to you by going cover to cover. If the only cover is on the sides then it looks like they're flanking, but this is not an intelligent choice by the AI, it's the only choice. A good example of that is the shopping centre that's on fire. You have that big open ground where the boss stomps around and all the adds filter into the sides and push forwards that way because they're programmed to make use of cover. The end of Times Square is the same. The end of Russian consulate is the same.

 

Do you guys even pay attention to the level and enemy design in games?

 

Using the best cover and best route to get somewhere is what humans would do. Ok the game designers have cleverly placed the cover, so what? That's game design. Still doesn't mean we won't get agressively flanked. And my feeling is that this time round they're better at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...