Closed alpha finished up no too long ago. Fair amount of video and screens came out despite the NDA I get a kind of Destiny vibe from it now though with one large location rather than different planets. Really looking forward to it
In what way? I actually enjoyed Watch Dogs, but I think people's expectations reached an unrealistic level. Was the game 'perfect'? Nah, but if the Division offers some improvements, over Watch Dogs, I'd be happy with it
In what way? I actually enjoyed Watch Dogs, but I think people's expectations reached an unrealistic level. Was the game 'perfect'? Nah, but if the Division offers some improvements, over Watch Dogs, I'd be happy with it
I mean it as a general term, I don't trust Ubisoft's marketing anymore.
I see a lot of complaints, in the comments, to JackFrag's video, and I already see people making the visual comparisons to the E3 demo. While I understand the complaints, I don't see it as reason to throw out the idea of playing this game. It still looks good (graphically). I thought gamers were a bit more educated now, and knew how studios up graphic details, when demonstrating at conferences
I see a lot of complaints, in the comments, to JackFrag's video, and I already see people making the visual comparisons to the E3 demo. While I understand the complaints, I don't see it as reason to throw out the idea of playing this game. It still looks good (graphically). I thought gamers were a bit more educated now, and knew how studios up graphic details, when demonstrating at conferences
You don't really think that's the norm do you? You see a game at e3 and ASSUME that the actual game won't look like what they showed you? Yes, it happens. That doesn't mean I think everything a studio puts out is a lie.
I'm not saying it's a lie. I'm saying that games change, as development continue. Not to mention, they usually demo on a very high end PC, and then details get reduced, for consoles
You don't really think that's the norm do you? You see a game at e3 and ASSUME that the actual game won't look like what they showed you? Yes, it happens. That doesn't mean I think everything a studio puts out is a lie.
I think most of the people that get upset are PC gamers that feel like they are getting a crappier version of what the game could of been, if it wasn't for consoles. But their wants and expectations are a very simplified versions of reality, visual downgrades are a much more complicated issue, it's much easier to polish a vertical slice of a game, especially when you are showing basically a single path, but the real game is an entire city that can't get that level of polish, and cuts have to be made for performance reasons, even on beefy PCs.
I see a lot of complaints, in the comments, to JackFrag's video, and I already see people making the visual comparisons to the E3 demo. While I understand the complaints, I don't see it as reason to throw out the idea of playing this game. It still looks good (graphically). I thought gamers were a bit more educated now, and knew how studios up graphic details, when demonstrating at conferences
That last sentence... nope. They've been comparing every single video released and somehow through Youtube and all the ~pixels~ they can see what's been downgraded. I've seen people comparing gameplay to the pre-rendered Blur trailers too. Perhaps what bugs me the most is the fact that these people come off as sounding like the developers 'downgrade' games because they want to screw over gamers or are just plain bad at making games.
Aside from the negativity from the casual gamer, my only issue so far with what we've seen is that it seems like the game mechanics have shifted over the years. Originally, it seemed more like an open-world, DayZ-ish type of game with lots of PVP. But now it seems like a primarily PVE game, even in the dark zone. There's supposedly a full-blown story with cinematics and I spent a lot of time in Destiny, so I don't think I won't enjoy the game still. Definitely still picking it up on day 1.
As much as I liked Destiny, I hated the random co-op aspect if I wasn't playing with people I knew. I either got a great fire team or a team that constantly had to remind me that they all had sexual relations with my mother.
From watching a few videos, it seems like you can kill other players which is always a bad thing. Sure you apparently get marked as rogue and being killed while labeled as such apparently is harshly penalized, when has that ever stopped some 10 year old twit? It also sounded like your entire team could be labeled as rogue, but what if you didn't do anything and you just got paired with fuckwits?
As long as you aren't 100% forced to play with others, then my interest is still high with this game. If the only way to do missions is only with a full fire team, then I pass. I just want to play an hour or so of a great game and not have my ears constantly assaulted with pre-teens cussing and breathing into the microphone. I don't think some developers know how seedy and 4th world online gaming really is.
The devs are claiming that you will be able to play as an individual, or as a group. We'll see how true that is, once the game is released... because in Destiny, you can play as an individual too, but you won't get all the cool shit
The Division takes place in a time where everyone opens their hood, trunk, and doors, after parking their cars? The animation is cool, but I find it funny that literally every vehicle seems to be set up, so you could utilize the animation
The first one was pretty terrible (acting-wise), but the other three are pretty cool. It feels like it should be a TV series. Thanks for sharing, since I didn't see them previously
Did anyone else try the beta? I was kind of 'meh', during my first play, but after spending a bit more time in the game, and getting to understand where/how to find things, it began to draw me in. I did find it lacking in content, but I'm hoping that's just intentional limitations of the beta (can anyone involved with this confirm?)
Did anyone else try the beta? I was kind of 'meh', during my first play, but after spending a bit more time in the game, and getting to understand where/how to find things, it began to draw me in. I did find it lacking in content, but I'm hoping that's just intentional limitations of the beta (can anyone involved with this confirm?)
I played the beta for about 10 hours and I agree it started slow but once I played a little more I just couldn't stop. After beating the main mission and all the side missions I spent the majority of my time in the dark zone. I thoroughly enjoyed the experience the dark zone offers but there are a few things that really bother me with it. The first one is the lack of npcs there. Sometimes I found myself wondering around for 30 mins before I would run into npcs that spawned back in. Personally I feel there should be more firefights than there currently are. The second thing that bothers me is the rogue system that is established. I like the idea of the system but when you become a rogue and try to defend yourself your timer increases. I would like the idea of the timer increasing only when your rouge rank increases. Overall I will definitely get the game when it is released because it is a ton of fun to play but how long I will continue to play the game after completing all it has to offer is the big question.
I do agree, on your points. The rogue system is a bit flawed. I think it should take more than one hit, to trigger a rogue status (or the early 'red' status). Several times, I accidentally hit someone (because a random walked in front of me), while we were attacking other rogue agents. That caused our group to start shooting at me. I would also like something to warn you about someone who has been rogue recently. If you were rogue, 2 minutes ago, and you respawned (and now clear), I think you should appear yellow, as a 'warning'. The potential for trolling, at an annoying level, is huge here, and I'd like to know if someone was just trolling, instead of giving them a complete reset, and allowing them to do it again.
But yeah, I felt both zones were really lacking in NPCs. Like I mentioned, hopefully this is due to the beta status, and more will were planned for the final version. I felt like the closed beta was truly a beta, to test server loads. Maybe that included reducing NPCs.
They did reduce NPC numbers, to encourage PVP I think. In my opinion they should have left NPC spawns in to give a better idea of what the DZ would be like in the final game, as it is supposedly the endgame and I've seen many players complaining about it, but if they wanted to stress test PvP specifically then I guess that's fair enough
As for me, the graphics and prop dressing were the best part, there was a large amount of detail in places where you wouldn't expect, such as on the Garden mission under staircases and even in areas where you wouldn't go if you were directly following the objective. The snow shader and atmospheric fog added a huge amount of immersion. The fact you could walk inside most buildings was very impressive as well, along with the whole seamless transitions into hubs and the DZ. As for the combat I could see it getting repetitive as you're fighting mostly human combatants, but maybe some of the more varied enemies weren't included in the beta (I did see one shield and axe wielding enemy). The content was obviously limited for the beta (only one wing of the base could be improved, and only 2 upgrades for that wing) I liked the base building mechanic and doing encounters but didn't really care about the people I was recruiting - story seems to be the weak point, though the intro mission was removed for the beta. All in all, I probably won't pick up the game at full price, but that's mostly because I don't know many people getting it and don't have a 'crew' to run with, but still want to check it out.
For those of you who missed it, there is supposed to be an open beta, at the end of the month. Hopefully more is available at the time, since open betas are essentially demos of the game. I'd hate to see people turned off by the open beta, as I've seen by the closed beta.
I read something, the other day, that claimed NPCs were removed, for the beta, because they wanted to see online players battling each other (and to test server loading). We'll see
The rogue system sounds like it could get really annoying fast. Hopefully they have a way to tag people who are constantly going rogue and putting them in servers with other assholes. It sounds like a game could just be a online version of Dog the Bounty Hunter and screw the actual missions going on.
yeah, I understand why they are trying a rogue system, but I think it just encourages trolls too much (and there are plenty out there), and I just picture it getting REALLY out of control, once the game is released (I'm sure we'll see in the open beta).
I'd like to see the suggestions I made earlier, or a passive mode, like GTA has
@VelvetElvis That's the point of the DZ though, right? Risk/reward? I've seen a lot of people trying to suppress the entire point of the DZ, wanting rogue agents to be marked or punished for simply making use of the free fire environment In the final game or even hopefully the open beta the DZ should be much bigger and with more NPCs, lessening the likelihood of a PvP battle and increasing the chance for you to get loot. When you think "Dark Zone" you should get a little worried. Absolutely anyone could start gunning you down, you could even decide to take someone out once in a while without any long term repercussion, and I think that's how it should be.
@VelvetElvis That's the point of the DZ though, right? Risk/reward? I've seen a lot of people trying to suppress the entire point of the DZ, wanting rogue agents to be marked or punished for simply making use of the free fire environment In the final game or even hopefully the open beta the DZ should be much bigger and with more NPCs, lessening the likelihood of a PvP battle and increasing the chance for you to get loot. When you think "Dark Zone" you should get a little worried. Absolutely anyone could start gunning you down, you could even decide to take someone out once in a while without any long term repercussion, and I think that's how it should be.
I agree with this. It's not meant to be a place you feel safe. It's all about the risk vs reward. From what I noticed in the playtest, aside from dropping the decontaminated stuff, it's not like dying really hurts you. There were quite a few helicopter points where no one ever went and when I called one in, 95% of the time, I had people come up around me and help out with the NPCs and drop off their loot as well.
It takes awhile to kill someone, making it easier to get out of fights and run away. And whenever someone is rogue, they're extremely visible.
How does the rouge system work when someone walks in front of your gun? Say you are fighting a group of NPC's and just before the last one dies, one of your team gets too excited for loot and sprints to be first and it doing so runs right in front of your fire? You just put a clip of bullets into this person's back. Are you now rogue or does that only kick if if you actually kill them? It's not like you wanted to shoot the guy, he just exercised poor tactical judgement.
How does the rouge system work when someone walks in front of your gun? Say you are fighting a group of NPC's and just before the last one dies, one of your team gets too excited for loot and sprints to be first and it doing so runs right in front of your fire? You just put a clip of bullets into this person's back. Are you now rogue or does that only kick if if you actually kill them? It's not like you wanted to shoot the guy, he just exercised poor tactical judgement.
yeah, as I mentioned above, if I accidentally clip someone, who had danced around a little too much, and it made me red (pre-rogue). That was enough to make everyone behind me freak out, and start shooting me. I stayed focus on the rogue players, and eventually the guys behind me caught on, but they had wounded me so much, that I died rather quickly afterward.
Overall, I didn't dislike rogue, I just feel like it needs some additions. I feel like a warning should exist, if you were recently rogue. I don't feel it's fair to be free and clear, because you were killed, especially if you have a habit of going rogue. I also found it very difficult to outgun someone who had gone rogue. It may be that he had higher armor than me, but when they stood their ground, they would kill me much faster, even if I had started shooting first (or had a friend assisting). It almost felt as though they received an armor buff, for being rogue. Maybe I'm wrong though.
How does the rouge system work when someone walks in front of your gun? Say you are fighting a group of NPC's and just before the last one dies, one of your team gets too excited for loot and sprints to be first and it doing so runs right in front of your fire? You just put a clip of bullets into this person's back. Are you now rogue or does that only kick if if you actually kill them? It's not like you wanted to shoot the guy, he just exercised poor tactical judgement.
From personal experience it can go both ways. Self defense can initiate a rogue status if you're not careful. Some players actually baited other players to fire at them by shooting at them, but not hitting them. The shocked player fires back, marking him as rogue and then gets taken out by the aggressor and his buddies with no penalty. That said, I have seen some genuine mistakes, followed by apology over comms and nothing came of it, but you can always get those opportunists that see a red name and can't help but open up.
Generally, it's best to just play clever to mitigate your risks. If you're solo, use stealth to your advantage (e.g. that neat skill mod that makes you invisible to scan pulse). If there's someone running towards an extraction zone without any DZ loot (the visible yellow bag under their backpack) then you know they're up to no good - switch evac zone. If you're in a team of more than one, cover each other in sequence when you extract your loot. It'll all go smoothy as long as you play as safe as you can. Being pursued is actually really fun anyway, weaving in between cars and down alleys to break line of sight
edit: ah, I didn't see you say "one of your team." As long as you're in a squad, friendly fire is disabled
Pretty damn impressive Chris. Thanks for sharing. I have to admin, I'm kind of craving the game, now that the beta is over. I think this will be my go to game, once it's released
That really sounds kinda dickish, no matter how beatiful the game might be on console, to stakenate the PC and limit how well it looks. Anyone who can sheed some light over this, if there is no improvements to the PC version over the console?
I didn't hear anything, during the video, that said they were doing something to 'not make the console look bad'. Maybe I missed it, but all I heard him say was that they couldn't push the PC build too far, because of console. It sounds like the PC version is still going to have graphical advantages, over the consoles. They also mentioned that the consoles would have to turn down lighting, to gain framerate. I suspect the PC would allow the lighting AND the higher framerate
Replies
Engine looks fantastic.
http://www.polygon.com/2014/5/15/5720806/tom-clancys-the-division-delayed-2015
and on a more serious note:
http://www.gamesradar.com/why-didnt-ubi-mention-divisions-dog-pooping-tech/
Really looking forward to this! Seems like it could be a fun co-op game to play with friends.
I see a lot of complaints, in the comments, to JackFrag's video, and I already see people making the visual comparisons to the E3 demo. While I understand the complaints, I don't see it as reason to throw out the idea of playing this game. It still looks good (graphically). I thought gamers were a bit more educated now, and knew how studios up graphic details, when demonstrating at conferences
Aside from the negativity from the casual gamer, my only issue so far with what we've seen is that it seems like the game mechanics have shifted over the years. Originally, it seemed more like an open-world, DayZ-ish type of game with lots of PVP. But now it seems like a primarily PVE game, even in the dark zone. There's supposedly a full-blown story with cinematics and I spent a lot of time in Destiny, so I don't think I won't enjoy the game still. Definitely still picking it up on day 1.
No Player Trading , and only Manhattan. Really get the feeling the game is no where near done but still being pushed
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/the-division-wont-have-player-trading-system-at-la/1100-6433917/
From watching a few videos, it seems like you can kill other players which is always a bad thing. Sure you apparently get marked as rogue and being killed while labeled as such apparently is harshly penalized, when has that ever stopped some 10 year old twit? It also sounded like your entire team could be labeled as rogue, but what if you didn't do anything and you just got paired with fuckwits?
As long as you aren't 100% forced to play with others, then my interest is still high with this game. If the only way to do missions is only with a full fire team, then I pass. I just want to play an hour or so of a great game and not have my ears constantly assaulted with pre-teens cussing and breathing into the microphone. I don't think some developers know how seedy and 4th world online gaming really is.
(Polycount...why you no embed!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJeJe_AKuwg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X40CTplhI9s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0kaj-eqqsE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUWNBPVRjTw
The rogue system is a bit flawed. I think it should take more than one hit, to trigger a rogue status (or the early 'red' status). Several times, I accidentally hit someone (because a random walked in front of me), while we were attacking other rogue agents. That caused our group to start shooting at me.
I would also like something to warn you about someone who has been rogue recently. If you were rogue, 2 minutes ago, and you respawned (and now clear), I think you should appear yellow, as a 'warning'. The potential for trolling, at an annoying level, is huge here, and I'd like to know if someone was just trolling, instead of giving them a complete reset, and allowing them to do it again.
But yeah, I felt both zones were really lacking in NPCs. Like I mentioned, hopefully this is due to the beta status, and more will were planned for the final version. I felt like the closed beta was truly a beta, to test server loads. Maybe that included reducing NPCs.
As for me, the graphics and prop dressing were the best part, there was a large amount of detail in places where you wouldn't expect, such as on the Garden mission under staircases and even in areas where you wouldn't go if you were directly following the objective. The snow shader and atmospheric fog added a huge amount of immersion. The fact you could walk inside most buildings was very impressive as well, along with the whole seamless transitions into hubs and the DZ. As for the combat I could see it getting repetitive as you're fighting mostly human combatants, but maybe some of the more varied enemies weren't included in the beta (I did see one shield and axe wielding enemy). The content was obviously limited for the beta (only one wing of the base could be improved, and only 2 upgrades for that wing) I liked the base building mechanic and doing encounters but didn't really care about the people I was recruiting - story seems to be the weak point, though the intro mission was removed for the beta. All in all, I probably won't pick up the game at full price, but that's mostly because I don't know many people getting it and don't have a 'crew' to run with, but still want to check it out.
I read something, the other day, that claimed NPCs were removed, for the beta, because they wanted to see online players battling each other (and to test server loading). We'll see
I'd like to see the suggestions I made earlier, or a passive mode, like GTA has
In the final game or even hopefully the open beta the DZ should be much bigger and with more NPCs, lessening the likelihood of a PvP battle and increasing the chance for you to get loot. When you think "Dark Zone" you should get a little worried. Absolutely anyone could start gunning you down, you could even decide to take someone out once in a while without any long term repercussion, and I think that's how it should be.
I agree with this. It's not meant to be a place you feel safe. It's all about the risk vs reward. From what I noticed in the playtest, aside from dropping the decontaminated stuff, it's not like dying really hurts you. There were quite a few helicopter points where no one ever went and when I called one in, 95% of the time, I had people come up around me and help out with the NPCs and drop off their loot as well.
It takes awhile to kill someone, making it easier to get out of fights and run away. And whenever someone is rogue, they're extremely visible.
http://www.usgamer.net/articles/the-divisions-dark-zone-a-recipe-for-vigilantism
How does the rouge system work when someone walks in front of your gun? Say you are fighting a group of NPC's and just before the last one dies, one of your team gets too excited for loot and sprints to be first and it doing so runs right in front of your fire? You just put a clip of bullets into this person's back. Are you now rogue or does that only kick if if you actually kill them? It's not like you wanted to shoot the guy, he just exercised poor tactical judgement.
Overall, I didn't dislike rogue, I just feel like it needs some additions. I feel like a warning should exist, if you were recently rogue. I don't feel it's fair to be free and clear, because you were killed, especially if you have a habit of going rogue.
I also found it very difficult to outgun someone who had gone rogue. It may be that he had higher armor than me, but when they stood their ground, they would kill me much faster, even if I had started shooting first (or had a friend assisting). It almost felt as though they received an armor buff, for being rogue. Maybe I'm wrong though.
Generally, it's best to just play clever to mitigate your risks. If you're solo, use stealth to your advantage (e.g. that neat skill mod that makes you invisible to scan pulse). If there's someone running towards an extraction zone without any DZ loot (the visible yellow bag under their backpack) then you know they're up to no good - switch evac zone. If you're in a team of more than one, cover each other in sequence when you extract your loot. It'll all go smoothy as long as you play as safe as you can. Being pursued is actually really fun anyway, weaving in between cars and down alleys to break line of sight
edit: ah, I didn't see you say "one of your team." As long as you're in a squad, friendly fire is disabled
edit2: here's a successful 2v5 lmao
I have to admin, I'm kind of craving the game, now that the beta is over. I think this will be my go to game, once it's released
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.934230-The-Divison-PC-Port-Was-Kept-In-Check-With-Consoles-Says-Ubisoft
That really sounds kinda dickish, no matter how beatiful the game might be on console, to stakenate the PC and limit how well it looks. Anyone who can sheed some light over this, if there is no improvements to the PC version over the console?
http://tomclancy-thedivision.ubi.com/game/en-GB/beta/index.aspx
p.s. PC version is much prettier than console, with a lot more graphics options... Just sayin
Especially the tiles and glass