So whats your opineon on ANTHEM?

[Legion-Shields]

19 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

Ironically the game fails if we all do that and Bioware subsequently gets shut down.

I mean, what else are EA going to do if people sit there for months watching them after the release to see if the game is good, no one will know if it's good to pass on the info. We all then become the reason Anthem failed, not EA or Bioware.

And yes, we get it, Caveat Emptor, Caveat Emptor, Caveat Emptor. You've literally posted it 7 times now, we really get it.

Caveat Emptor

 

*ducks for cover*

Edited February 9, 2019 by Legion-Shields

[Vox_Preliator]

7 hours ago, DeMonkey said:

Ironically the game fails if we all do that and Bioware subsequently gets shut down.

I mean, what else are EA going to do if people sit there for months watching them after the release to see if the game is good, no one will know if it's good to pass on the info. We all then become the reason Anthem failed, not EA or Bioware.

And yes, we get it, Caveat Emptor, Caveat Emptor, Caveat Emptor. You've literally posted it 7 times now, we really get it.

And if that happens, it's still EA that ruined its own reputation that caused that customer reaction.  Nobody is obligated to keep Bioware in business, especially in the not-unlikely case that EA actually does taint Anthem.  At this point all we have is their word saying "Look just trust us it's not going to be bad, okay?" which is worth basically nothing.

[DeMonkey]

2 hours ago, Vox_Preliator said:

And if that happens, it's still EA that ruined its own reputation that caused that customer reaction.  Nobody is obligated to keep Bioware in business, especially in the not-unlikely case that EA actually does taint Anthem.  At this point all we have is their word saying "Look just trust us it's not going to be bad, okay?" which is worth basically nothing.

Bit pedantic, I'm not suggesting we are obligated to keep them in business or anything of the sort. 

I'm simply pointing out the irony of the mindset.

"I suggest we all check to see if the game is a good investment by doing something that guarantees it won't be a good investment".

[taiiat]

On 2019-02-08 at 12:21 AM, DeMonkey said:

At least it isn't The Division 2. 

hello beep boop this is me having been spending basically every waking moment playing Division 2
i cleared my schedule to play this.

[DeMonkey]

3 minutes ago, taiiat said:

hello beep boop this is me having been spending basically every waking moment playing Division 2
i cleared my schedule to play this.

I know it's not the thread for it, but what did you think?

[taiiat]

37 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

I know it's not the thread for it, but what did you think?

A: this is Off Topic land, where most of the rules don't apply (lol)

 

 

B: i'm sorta excited. i was so worried some of the 'we heard your complaints loud and clear' changes were going to make the game bland as hell. luckily, they did the exact opposite.
the main thing being people that DON't play the game complaining about TTK. it certainly is shorter overall technically now, but higher Difficulties still allow Enemies to be relevant enough to do something. and it was not because they just made the Health Bars shorter, but mostly by taking their second Health Bar ("Armor") and making it actual Armor! locational Body Armor that can be destroyed or you can shoot between. plus the good ol' Weakpoints stuff for detonating Explosives/Ammo or stunning or disabling certain Attacks.

i'm pleasantly surprised that some of the Guns are portrayed realistically now. handling as the actual Weapon it is modeled and named after does, and demanding that the Player can control it.
granted i'm scratching my head a bit as to why that greatness happened with Weapons, yet aiming out of Cover (and ergo logically bracing the Weapon against what is effectively the ground) doesn't stabilize your Weapons. that would be... exactly what one would expect to happen.

Weapon Mods are a one time global unlock rather than something you farm forever - which sounded potentially dubious but it means they no longer take up any Inventory Space and you don't need to strip Weapons before Selling/Destroying them. and all of the Weapon Mods are now uh.... Corrupted Mods, if you will. with all of the good and bad things that comes with that. in some situations the negatives don't affect the Weapon, are a fine trade, or just inappropriate for that Weapon. there's still plenty of types, so you pick what suits your Weapon.

we can't be sure about what Endgame Gear there will be if what we've seen is maybe not it, but what we have seen is no more 6pc Sets that take up all of your Gear to get something. instead 3pc Sets, meaning a lot more mixing is possible. the Sets are 'just Stats', but it IS an RPG Shooter so Stats are nice.
i do wonder if we'll see unique Sets like before too. they were released over time in the first title rather than just there on release so perhaps with any luck we will see unique Sets still. maybe if we're lucky they won't be 6pc or we'll have some way to get double credit so we can mix unique Sets as well. was always the one main gripe i had with unique Sets in the first title - since the major bonuses were 4 and 6 pc, the most mixing you could do was either 4/2 or with one specific item 4/3 by it being able to give double credit to all Gear Sets you have on(you'd wear 3/2 and then put it on the last Slot and get 4/3).

way more Enemy variety, Dark Zone being structured in a different way that should feel less like a cheesefest and more like chaos.

Weapons have some more descriptive Stats, including a Damage falloff Graph, real numbers for Optimal Min and Optimal max Ranges.

in some ways a nicer UI, in some ways a bit annoying. also way more sorting and toggleable options.
the Map looks significantly cooler, IMO (the way it displays things)

Edit: in reference to the two previous things, we can toggle Stat Normalization on/off now, thankfully. basically meaning, you can turn it off and never use it again now that we don't have to.

the world seems to feel 'more alive' than it did in the previous title - while both feature roaming Allies and Enemies that are 'doing things', here they seem to have actual goals (whether that be just basic roaming, going to __ place to attack it(or defend it), Et Cetera). just something about them makes it seem more like they're "actually fighting" instead of putting on a show for you.

sadly we lost the beautiful snow D:
truly the deepest of wounds.

 

it's not all daisies though, since the preview build has numerous technical issues(and also an Anti-Cheat suite that is.... well it has quite the pedigree from what i can see but in Division 2 it seems to be horrid - flagging the games' own Files at times - i've even had it literally flag itself, and adding an extra like 15sec to initialization, Et Cetera). but provided that those are resolved (if they aren't already, who are we kidding big money games that put out preview builds select a build and refine that while simultaneously still working on the game, so any Beta or Demo or w/e is super out of date to the actual game by the time you receive it and yadda yadda - it's great PR though when you "super quickly fix a bunch of the Bug Reports and Feedback that people gave", later on. their complaint totally wasn't probably already fixed weeks or a month before people even played it. *whistles*

sadly i probably won't be playing it at 1440p, unless performance goes up a fair amount on Release. the previous title also had abysmal performance scaling with Resolution so not much is changing there it seems.

or all in all, you could say like..... Division, but a new game.

 

 

i already knew i was interested, i'm still interested after playing and i'm pretty confident i'll be buying it sometime - when depends on their pricing over time and whether technical issues do infact get resolved, and such.

i disappear again, back to Division 2. _{i should probably finish up the last few Shield assignments in the previous title that i was willing to complete for the free transferable goodies even though i'm pretty sure i won't like the Cosmetics that i get for doing it just like how i don't like most Cosmetics}

Edited February 10, 2019 by taiiat

[(XBOX)YoungGunn82]

33 minutes ago, taiiat said:

hello beep boop this is me having been spending basically every waking moment playing Division 2
i cleared my schedule to play this.

 

31 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

I know it's not the thread for it, but what did you think?

Curious too.

[(XBOX)YoungGunn82]

3 minutes ago, taiiat said:

A: this is Off Topic land, where most of the rules don't apply (lol)

 

 

B: i'm sorta excited. i was so worried some of the 'we heard your complaints loud and clear' changes were going to make the game bland as hell. luckily, they did the exact opposite.
the main thing being people that DON't play the game complaining about TTK. it certainly is shorter overall technically now, but higher Difficulties still allow Enemies to be relevant enough to do something. and it was not because they just made the Health Bars shorter, but mostly by taking their second Health Bar ("Armor") and making it actual Armor! locational Body Armor that can be destroyed or you can shoot between. plus the good ol' Weakpoints stuff for detonating Explosives/Ammo or stunning or disabling certain Attacks.

i'm pleasantly surprised that some of the Guns are portrayed realistically now. handling as the actual Weapon it is modeled and named after does, and demanding that the Player can control it.
granted i'm scratching my head a bit as to why that greatness happened with Weapons, yet aiming out of Cover (and ergo logically bracing the Weapon against what is effectively the ground) doesn't stabilize your Weapons. that would be... exactly what one would expect to happen.

Weapon Mods are a one time global unlock rather than something you farm forever - which sounded potentially dubious but it means they no longer take up any Inventory Space and you don't need to strip Weapons before Selling/Destroying them. and all of the Weapon Mods are now uh.... Corrupted Mods, if you will. with all of the good and bad things that comes with that. in some situations the negatives don't affect the Weapon, are a fine trade, or just inappropriate for that Weapon. there's still plenty of types, so you pick what suits your Weapon.

we can't be sure about what Endgame Gear there will be if what we've seen is maybe not it, but what we have seen is no more 6pc Sets that take up all of your Gear to get something. instead 3pc Sets, meaning a lot more mixing is possible. the Sets are 'just Stats', but it IS an RPG Shooter so Stats are nice.
i do wonder if we'll see unique Sets like before too. they were released over time in the first title rather than just there on release so perhaps with any luck we will see unique Sets still. maybe if we're lucky they won't be 6pc or we'll have some way to get double credit so we can mix unique Sets as well. was always the one main gripe i had with unique Sets in the first title - since the major bonuses were 4 and 6 pc, the most mixing you could do was either 4/2 or with one specific item 4/3 by it being able to give double credit to all Gear Sets you have on(you'd wear 3/2 and then put it on the last Slot and get 4/3).

way more Enemy variety, Dark Zone being structured in a different way that should feel less like a cheesefest and more like chaos.

Weapons have some more descriptive Stats, including a Damage falloff Graph, real numbers for Optimal Min and Optimal max Ranges.

in some ways a nicer UI, in some ways a bit annoying. also way more sorting and toggleable options.
the Map looks significantly cooler, IMO (the way it displays things)

the world seems to feel 'more alive' than it did in the previous title - while both feature roaming Allies and Enemies that are 'doing things', here they seem to have actual goals (whether that be just basic roaming, going to __ place to attack it(or defend it), Et Cetera). just something about them makes it seem more like they're "actually fighting" instead of putting on a show for you.

sadly we lost the beautiful snow 😧
truly the deepest of wounds.

 

it's not all daisies though, since the preview build has numerous technical issues(and also an Anti-Cheat suite that is.... well it has quite the pedigree from what i can see but in Division 2 it seems to be horrid - flagging the games' own Files at times - i've even had it literally flag itself, and adding an extra like 15sec to initialization, Et Cetera). but provided that those are resolved (if they aren't already, who are we kidding big money games that put out preview builds select a build and refine that while simultaneously still working on the game, so any Beta or Demo or w/e is super out of date to the actual game by the time you receive it and yadda yadda - it's great PR though when you "super quickly fix a bunch of the Bug Reports and Feedback that people gave", later on. their complaint totally wasn't probably already fixed weeks or a month before people even played it. *whistles*

sadly i probably won't be playing it at 1440p, unless performance goes up a fair amount on Release. the previous title also had abysmal performance scaling with Resolution so not much is changing there it seems.

or all in all, you could say like..... Division, but a new game.

 

 

i already knew i was interested, i'm still interested after playing and i'm pretty confident i'll be buying it sometime - when depends on their pricing over time and whether technical issues do infact get resolved, and such.

i disappear again, back to Division 2. _{i should probably finish up the last few Shield assignments in the previous title that i was willing to complete for the free transferable goodies even though i'm pretty sure i won't like the Cosmetics that i get for doing it just like how i don't like most Cosmetics}

Thanks. 

[DeMonkey]

9 minutes ago, taiiat said:

~snip~

You've certainly paid more attention to it than I have.

I didn't particularly enjoy the first Division, the combat never felt particularly meaty. Enemies, despite having variety, felt like targets at a shooting gallery. Not in a "they lack threat" but just that they felt really bland.

I know a lot of that has changed in the Division 2, where they have some interesting lines and are less bland, but I still got the same feeling. I don't know whether it's the perspective, the gun feel or what, but I find the combat really really boring.

The skills all seem interesting, but aiming them feels ridiculously clunky. Accurately placing AoE's kinda needs the camera to be higher up, hence why many games use top down views for this sort of thing. Common sense also dictates that you don't want to be aiming the AoE through a wall, which is annoying given that it's a cover shooter.

I dunno, I owned and played the first one, I played the demo of the new one and I'm... struggling to see the appeal, personally. Even YouTube's I enjoy watching seem to be having a hard time making it look interesting, although I'm certain I'm just projecting here.

[taiiat]

1 hour ago, DeMonkey said:

The skills all seem interesting, but aiming them feels ridiculously clunky. Accurately placing AoE's kinda needs the camera to be higher up, hence why many games use top down views for this sort of thing. Common sense also dictates that you don't want to be aiming the AoE through a wall, which is annoying given that it's a cover shooter.

I dunno, I owned and played the first one, I played the demo of the new one and I'm... struggling to see the appeal, personally. Even YouTube's I enjoy watching seem to be having a hard time making it look interesting, although I'm certain I'm just projecting here.

that's certainly true. trying to aim just a Grenade in Division 2 can be a complicated task of finding where to point to get it to aim at what you want to aim at. since aiming directly at it probably won't get you there.

the appeal is the grind, making all sorts of different Loadouts, taking on challenges to grind some more.
and ofcourse one of the strongest parts of the appeal from my perspective, is that there's a ton of Endgame Content, infact probably actually more Endgame Content than otherwise, which is usually not how that goes. and of that Endgame Content, you can pick and choose whatever is fun to you and still make progression on that grinding. if you really love or hate this or that Gamemode, you can or can not play it, if you want. suddenly in the mood for a different Gamemode? you're still grinding towards that progression. play whatever you want, whenever you want (almost, technically some things like Daily or Weekly Content can't be played all the time anytime but most of the game can).
the Enemies weren't incredibly diverse no, but when playing on the higher Difficulties or Et Cetera, you're focused on completing the Mission and executing in Combat correctly, moreso than whether Enemy #23498723278356 is a lot like Enemy #29323857628.

Edited February 10, 2019 by taiiat

[DeMonkey]

2 minutes ago, taiiat said:

that's certainly true. trying to aim just a Grenade in Division 2 can be a complicated task of finding where to point to get it to aim at what you want to aim at. since aiming directly at it probably won't get you there.

the appeal is the grind, making all sorts of different Loadouts, taking on challenges to grind some more.
and ofcourse one of the strongest parts of the appeal from my perspective, is that there's a ton of Endgame Content, infact probably actually more Endgame Content than otherwise, which is usually not how that goes. and of that Endgame Content, you can pick and choose whatever is fun to you and still make progression on that grinding. if you really love or hate this or that Gamemode, you can or can not play it, if you want. suddenly in the mood for a different Gamemode? you're still grinding towards that progression. play whatever you want, whenever you want (almost, technically some things like Daily or Weekly Content can't be played all the time anytime but most of the game can).
the Enemies weren't incredibly diverse no, but when playing on the higher Difficulties or Et Cetera, you're focused on completing the Mission and executing in Combat correctly, moreso than whether Enemy #23498723278356 is a lot like Enemy #29323857628.

That's all fair, and I'd love to be able to play all that, I just find the actual gameplay itself kills it for me, which is a shame. 

Been thinking more, and the reason I think I dislike the enemies so much is because they're basically a number. Not in the way you posted, but due to how when you look at them you highlight their health, armour, class and level. 

I guess I feel like I'm shooting at a Ui pop-up instead of a bad guy more often than not.

[Mr.Fluffins]

23 hours ago, DeMonkey said:

Ironically the game fails if we all do that and Bioware subsequently gets shut down.

I mean, what else are EA going to do if people sit there for months watching them after the release to see if the game is good, no one will know if it's good to pass on the info. We all then become the reason Anthem failed, not EA or Bioware.

And yes, we get it, Caveat Emptor, Caveat Emptor, Caveat Emptor. You've literally posted it 7 times now, we really get it.

If so many people would rather wait and see whether the game is good instead of playing it, then the game is simply not appealing enough to begin with and in fact is a failure, so the end result is justified.

I have watched videos of Anthem, played the demo, was not greatly impressed, hence would only CONSIDER playing the game later, when it gets various fixes, the monetization model becomes clear and it goes on a sale.

I am not EA's investor to pay money first wth a hope to get something decent later on. It's either worthwhile to me now, or it gets a pass.

[DeMonkey]

2 minutes ago, Mr.Fluffins said:

If so many people would rather wait and see whether the game is good instead of playing it, then the game is simply not appealing enough to begin with and in fact is a failure, so the end result is justified.

I have watched videos of Anthem, played the demo, was not greatly impressed, hence would only CONSIDER playing the game later, when it gets various fixes, the monetization model becomes clear and it goes on a sale.

I am not EA's investor to pay money first wth a hope to get something decent later on. It's either worthwhile to me now, or it gets a pass.

See above, I don't care for the justifications, I'm just pointing out the irony.

Irony isn't inherently bad, there's no need to be defensive and feel like you need to justify it. It's a humourous observation on the situation.

Edited February 10, 2019 by DeMonkey

[rune_me]

17 minutes ago, Mr.Fluffins said:

If so many people would rather wait and see whether the game is good instead of playing it, then the game is simply not appealing enough to begin with and in fact is a failure, so the end result is justified.

I have watched videos of Anthem, played the demo, was not greatly impressed, hence would only CONSIDER playing the game later, when it gets various fixes, the monetization model becomes clear and it goes on a sale.

I am not EA's investor to pay money first wth a hope to get something decent later on. It's either worthwhile to me now, or it gets a pass.

Anthem will have plenty of players at launch, though. That won't really be a problem for them. The real test is if it will release enough content to keep those early players once they have finished the main story and moved on to the endgame. It appears to release with very little endgame content, but a lot is scheduled for release, so the question is if it will be enough.

[Mr.Fluffins]

6 minutes ago, rune_me said:

Anthem will have plenty of players at launch, though. That won't really be a problem for them. The real test is if it will release enough content to keep those early players once they have finished the main story and moved on to the endgame. It appears to release with very little endgame content, but a lot is scheduled for release, so the question is if it will be enough.

We shall see. If they are smart, they already have made enough content to keep updating the game regularly to keep players hooked. Hopefully the game gains its share of people and develops into something interesting, but who knows. EA is ridiculous, so I woudln't put it past them to pull the plug on both Anthem and Bioware early if they don't end up profitable enough for the ravenous shareholders.

[taiiat]

13 hours ago, DeMonkey said:

I guess I feel like I'm shooting at a Ui pop-up instead of a bad guy more often than not.

hm, i would say don't look at their Health and Level information as a replacement of the Enemy, but as a description of what the Enemy is.

just like how the Health and Level information of an Enemy in Warframe, is information about the Enemy you're pointing at, but not taking the place of the Enemy.

[DeMonkey]

7 hours ago, taiiat said:

hm, i would say don't look at their Health and Level information as a replacement of the Enemy, but as a description of what the Enemy is.

just like how the Health and Level information of an Enemy in Warframe, is information about the Enemy you're pointing at, but not taking the place of the Enemy.

Doesn't change it though, sadly, although I wish it did.

The enemies just seem so, inhuman. I can deal with a bit of spongeyness if the enemy is deserving of it, but I find Division takes it to an extreme. Shield enemies make sense taking extra shots, same for enemies with weakpoints. Generic dudes in flannel t-shirts getting shot in the head 20 times and surviving? Meh.

They barely react to being shot, the guns don't feel all that great and the enemies... Don't behave like people.

Like I said earlier, it really just feels like I'm shooting generic targets at a shooting gallery, instead of battling actual humans across DC. I kind of feel the movement exacerbates this. No crouching, no jumping, no prone. Usefulness aside, this gives pretty limited animations and variety of positions to shoot from. You either stand there, or you shoot from cover. Perhaps I'm just bored of cover shooters.

I can't get any enjoyment out of it anyway, which isn't a problem ofc, plenty of other games to play. This one just isn't my cup of tea.

[(XBOX)YoungGunn82]

20 minutes ago, DeMonkey said:

Generic dudes in flannel t-shirts getting shot in the head 20 times and surviving? Meh.

Exactly how I felt during the first Division demo.

Couple buddies I was playing with were drawing agro so I out flanked the NPC came up right behind, double tapped the back of his dome. He stood up turned around and downed me.  At that point I uninstalled the demo and never gave the division another thought. Fin. 

[taiiat]

7 hours ago, DeMonkey said:

I can deal with a bit of spongeyness if the enemy is deserving of it, but I find Division takes it to an extreme. Shield enemies make sense taking extra shots, same for enemies with weakpoints. Generic dudes in flannel t-shirts getting shot in the head 20 times and surviving? Meh.

TTK wise both games can be pretty """responsive""" once one acquires Gear, upgrades it, Et Cetera.

if people are looking for hyper-realism out of it, that's definitely not the sort of game Division is, or is trying to be. and almost nobody actually wants that in a Shooter anyways, as can be seen when most actually play one and don't like that either(no names, just talking in general). >.>

Edited February 11, 2019 by taiiat

[DeMonkey]

2 minutes ago, taiiat said:

if people are looking for hyper-realism out of it, that's definitely not the sort of game Division is, or is trying to be. and almost nobody actually wants that in a Shooter anyways, as can be seen when most actually play one and don't like that either(no names, just talking in general). >.>

Hey now, I love some of the more realistic ones. Recently been playing some Insurgency Sandstorm, love it. Nice to see they've kept to what they originally made as well as opposed to going more mainstream.

I think the issue I'm presenting is that these are human enemies, I perceive them as human enemies and I expect them to behave like human enemies. The fact that they don't I find somewhat jarring, at a guess.

Warframe/Anthem etc enemies are all sci-fi, and thus suspension of disbelief has a greater effect and it's easier to ignore it.

I'm really just guessing at this point, never been good at figuring out why I dislike or like something.

[(XBOX)peachfarmers]

If it’s free like warframe then I would get it.

[(XBOX)YoungGunn82]

1 hour ago, (XB1)peachfarmers said:

If it’s free like warframe then I would get it.

The updates in Anthem are supposed free?

Edited February 11, 2019 by (XB1)RDeschain82

[taiiat]

9 hours ago, DeMonkey said:

Recently been playing some Insurgency Sandstorm, love it. Nice to see they've kept to what they originally made as well as opposed to going more mainstream.

(i don't really feel the same way, but the Insurgency i think of was waaaaay back a long time ago when it was still a Sourcemod rather than a production Source game, and where suffice to say that everyone always fought over the Weapon Classes that had the most precision because penalties for not playing like actual Soldiers were much, much, much greater than it is nowadays >.>)

 

 

but anyways, if it's not for you there's tens of thousands of other games out there.
even though i found Equipment grinding in Division pretty enjoyable compared to most big budget titles. no BS, able to just play since there was so much variety in content.

[Jorframj]

On 2019-01-28 at 10:30 PM, Borg1611 said:

I'm waiting for the open demo, but I was shocked to learn there is no text chat, even in the PC version. Some claim it's in order to comply with a law, but that same law requires voice chat have STT, which they don't seem to have, so it would make no sense to use that law as an excuse not to have text chat when you're clearly not complying with the law anyway in your voice chat system.

For PC gamers, no text chat will be a deal breaker. Many people either don't want to use or can't use voice chat and will essentially have no way to communicate at all. I expect many who buy the game but haven't been keeping up on any details of it will be blown away by having no text chat in an online PC game that has a lot of group content. It's just the most insanely poor development choice I've ever seen made in gaming history if it's going live without such a basic feature. I expect it will result in a lot of refund demands from PC gamers.

For text chat you need moderation (either automatic by bots* or manual by moderators**). Both cost money. cost money. EA. *cost money*. Do I have to draw a picture?

* Automoderation algorithms cost money. You can license them from companies like Amazon.

** People usually don't work for free.

Voice chat does not need moderation, as no court anywhere in the (relevant) world has ever held Voice service providers responsible for actions of their users. They only require them to provide "lawful interception" access, which is trivial and does not cost a lot of money.

[Jorframj]

On 2019-02-04 at 10:03 PM, (PS4)Boardtodeath_TV said:

Graphics, Maybe, not so much more though, and TOO much graphics makes it really annoying to be in a tunnel or halways with blasts of energy everywhere and you can't see what is going on, also, makes for lots of loss of frames.

Coloring? Warframe has hundreds of colors, compared to the few I saw in Anthem (so far)

Graphics? You are comparing a 8 year old game made by a small "indie" comany with a current (well, actually next gen as it is not released yet) engine from a AAA company.

And still: Warframe's graphics is very good. Best particle system i've seen so far. And it's not that DE is lazy, they are reworking the graphics and all the samples they showed off during devstream of the new Cloud tilesets look very modern and are definatly on par with anything else.

 

Coloring? Warframe has many duplicates in the palettes and you need to unlock the colours (pay-to-fashion) or play it every day for a year to get the free event palettes.

Warframe completely lacks any form of texture and material customization (which Anthem had TONS of).

 

That's about it. This really sums up the two points where you can actually compare these two otherwise completely different games.