TheErebus. Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 http://www.gamespot.com/articles/destiny-the-taken-kings-strike-missions-get-new-in/1100-6429711/ So first off, the Taken King strike missions will be changed to make it a bit more different in meaningful ways. According to Game Informer, during any part of one of the Strikes, there are a few different encounters that might appear. So, you could be playing through the same part of the mission two or three different times and fight a different enemy each time. Ammo spawns and stationary turret locations will also shift between each playthrough. Additionally, you won't hear the same dialogue each time you play a Strike. Bungie has recorded several different versions of the dialogue for each Strike. Bungie is also working to make these missions more like mini-Raids than ever before. They'll require some strategy to complete. For example, one Strike tasks a player in a fireteam to run an object between parts of the map to weaken a boss, while the other players fired upon it. Matchmaking in Strikes is getting tweaked, as well. You'll now have a choice between three different types of playlists. The Vanguard Legacy playlist only includes Strikes from the base game and the first two expansions, Vanguard Marmoset only includes Strikes from The Taken King, and Vanguard Ursa is a random set of heroic Strikes with Legendary rewards. The old system of breaking up Strike playlists based on character level will be gone. I like what they're doing. Strikes are boring (and one of the few things that are necessary for increasing your Vanguard status) but this will make it much better. http://www.pcgamer.com/ea-skipped-star-wars-battlefront-campaign-because-nobody-would-play-it/ So Peter Moore (The COO for EA) has stated that they are skipping a proper Battlefront story because "No body would bother playing it". Well at least they're being honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WingedCrusade Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 Too disappointed with Battlefront's details to care. YESSSSSS, NEW STRIKE CONTENT AND REWARDS, GIMME NOW! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowiespoon Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 (edited) http://www.gamespot.com/articles/destiny-the-taken-kings-strike-missions-get-new-in/1100-6429711/ So first off, the Taken King strike missions will be changed to make it a bit more different in meaningful ways. According to Game Informer, during any part of one of the Strikes, there are a few different encounters that might appear. So, you could be playing through the same part of the mission two or three different times and fight a different enemy each time. Ammo spawns and stationary turret locations will also shift between each playthrough. Additionally, you won't hear the same dialogue each time you play a Strike. Bungie has recorded several different versions of the dialogue for each Strike. Bungie is also working to make these missions more like mini-Raids than ever before. They'll require some strategy to complete. For example, one Strike tasks a player in a fireteam to run an object between parts of the map to weaken a boss, while the other players fired upon it. Matchmaking in Strikes is getting tweaked, as well. You'll now have a choice between three different types of playlists. The Vanguard Legacy playlist only includes Strikes from the base game and the first two expansions, Vanguard Marmoset only includes Strikes from The Taken King, and Vanguard Ursa is a random set of heroic Strikes with Legendary rewards. The old system of breaking up Strike playlists based on character level will be gone. I like what they're doing. Strikes are boring (and one of the few things that are necessary for increasing your Vanguard status) but this will make it much better. http://www.pcgamer.com/ea-skipped-star-wars-battlefront-campaign-because-nobody-would-play-it/ So Peter Moore (The COO for EA) has stated that they are skipping a proper Battlefront story because "No body would bother playing it". Well at least they're being honest. They are right, I won't bother playing battlefront 3, how did they guess - oh wait - they removed all of the content that the previous games had to bring us battlefield: star wars edition. They know why I'm not getting their 'game' Edited August 14, 2015 by bowiespoon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdunSaveMe Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 (edited) Funny how everyone hates every single thing EA and DICE does and ignores all the things they've done right. Let's all jump on the hatewagon to say things like "it's a Battlefield reskin omgz" without actually doing any research, amirite? They do have a point, really. The majority of people didn't play the Battlefield games for the story. And Battlefront 2's campaign wasn't exactly amazing. Edited August 14, 2015 by AdunSaveMe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdunSaveMe Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 Also finally, some frigging variety in strikes. That'll be great. It only took them this entire time plus two DLCs to figure it out, and we all know they won't bother reworking the old crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheErebus. Posted August 14, 2015 Author Share Posted August 14, 2015 It only took them this entire time plus two DLCs to figure it out, and we all know they won't bother reworking the old crap. That's what they're doing though, they're changing up a lot of things from the base game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdunSaveMe Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 (edited) That's what they're doing though, they're changing up a lot of things from the base game. I don't see many changes to stuff from the base game. Unless they make all the old bosses something other than giant bullet sponges with no phases, no unique aspects and a fight strategy that relies on more than popping out to unload into the boss and occasionally shooting adds, it will remain unimpressive. They went into HoW saying "we've heard feedback on bosses and we're gonna make them more interesting", and what did they do? Made big bullet sponges with ONE unique aspect, and locked it into the DLC without touching existing bosses that needed it more. Edited August 14, 2015 by AdunSaveMe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade343 Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 (edited) Funny how everyone hates every single thing EA and DICE does and ignores all the things they've done right. To be honest though, EA did do quite a bit of shady things with regards to customers and games. But leaving that aside, I do hope that the PC version of Star Wars Battlefront does not pull an Arkham Knight on release. Edited August 14, 2015 by Renegade343 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(XBOX)Grihaly Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 And Battlefront 2's campaign wasn't exactly amazing. Battlefront 2 had a campaign?! I don't remember that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheErebus. Posted August 14, 2015 Author Share Posted August 14, 2015 I don't see many changes to stuff from the base game. Unless they make all the old bosses something other than giant bullet sponges with no phases, no unique aspects and a fight strategy that relies on more than popping out to unload into the boss and occasionally shooting adds, it will remain unimpressive. https://forums.warframe.com/index.php?/topic/508004-destiny-taken-king-changes/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdunSaveMe Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 (edited) To be honest though, EA did do a few shady things with regards to customers and games. But leaving that aside, I do hope that the PC version of Star Wars Battlefront does not pull an Arkham Knight on release. Well yeah, DICE and EA have both pulled out some crap, but jumping on the hatewagon purely for the sake of it without actually doing any comparisons or research is just plain stupid. Especially with this "Star Wars: Battlefield" crap. They're saying it without actually noticing that the upcoming Battlefront game has less similarities with Battlefield than Battlefront 2 did. Calling people out on this also makes me look like a fanboy, which bugs me to no end. https://forums.warframe.com/index.php?/topic/508004-destiny-taken-king-changes/ I'm talking about OLD STRIKES and OLD BOSSES. That made up 90% of my post. Battlefront 2 had a campaign?! I don't remember that... It was a bunch of missions with AI on the various maps to recreate bits of the movies or something Edited August 14, 2015 by AdunSaveMe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade343 Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 Especially with this "Star Wars: Battlefield" crap. They're saying it without actually noticing that the upcoming Battlefront game has less similarities with Battlefield than Battlefront 2 did. At least it has a single-player battle mode, which I would enjoy, because I did enjoy the previous Battlefront single-player battle modes, if only for the AI chucking grenades everywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheErebus. Posted August 14, 2015 Author Share Posted August 14, 2015 I'm talking about OLD STRIKES and OLD BOSSES. That made up 90% of my post. And what they've announced today applies to all Strikes and bosses, not just the ones in the Taken King. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdunSaveMe Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 And what they've announced today applies to all Strikes and bosses, not just the ones in the Taken King. "The three new Strikes coming in the expansion will meaningfully change between different playthroughs." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheErebus. Posted August 14, 2015 Author Share Posted August 14, 2015 "The three new Strikes coming in the expansion will meaningfully change between different playthroughs." Hm, regardless. The new strikes and changes will improve on the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdunSaveMe Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 Hm, regardless. The new strikes and changes will improve on the game. A portion of it. In an expansion. Even Blizzard unbuggered their game without charging extra when they removed the AH and fixed loot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheErebus. Posted August 14, 2015 Author Share Posted August 14, 2015 A portion of it. In an expansion. Even Blizzard unbuggered their game without charging extra when they removed the AH and fixed loot. And then bring the other changes and content and the game becomes even better (assuming they actually deliver on their promises) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaRDeMoN787 Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 I really liked battlefront 2's story line....heh, this sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdunSaveMe Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 And then bring the other changes and content and the game becomes even better Unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheErebus. Posted August 14, 2015 Author Share Posted August 14, 2015 Unlikely. And why exactly? From what they've said, it seems like the game will become what it was originally supposed to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdunSaveMe Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 (edited) And why exactly? From what they've said, it seems like the game will become what it was originally supposed to be. Patterns. They do things ridiculously slowly. Gamebreaking bugs aren't patched for weeks or months. Most 'improvements' to the game have been done separate to the original game, like attempts at less rubbish bosses and improved story missions. "What they've said" is not a promising thing to go off. These are the people who think Destiny's story is epic and the bosses are fun and the game areas are huge and expansive. Edited August 14, 2015 by AdunSaveMe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheErebus. Posted August 14, 2015 Author Share Posted August 14, 2015 Patterns. They do things ridiculously slowly. Gamebreaking bugs aren't patched for weeks or months. Most 'improvements' to the game have been done separate to the original game, like attempts at less rubbish bosses and improved story missions. "What they've said" is not a promising thing to go off. These are the people who think Destiny's story is epic and the bosses are fun and the game areas are huge and expansive. The improvements made are good, so far. I've been getting a lot of good loot, I've actually been enjoying myself and the second DLC was fun. That is why I am optimistic about the upcoming changes, because even if it's slow or if it doesn't apply to the base game, it has improved my overall enjoyment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WingedCrusade Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 And why exactly? From what they've said, it seems like the game will become what it was originally supposed to be.We all know Activision as a Publisher is to blame for Destiny's barebones and paywall DLC for things already in the game from start.I have faith in Bungie... Activision? Not so much. Funny how everyone hates every single thing EA and DICE does and ignores all the things they've done right. Let's all jump on the hatewagon to say things like "it's a Battlefield reskin omgz" without actually doing any research, amirite? They do have a point, really. The majority of people didn't play the Battlefield games for the story. And Battlefront 2's campaign wasn't exactly amazing. I never called it Battlefield, and I infact know it will be nothing like it... I've done my research, and that's what makes me turn away from it. No CIS or Republic? No thank you. No space battles? Eh. I'm actually okay with that. No campaign? BS. They can freaking /make/ one. I'm not letting this turn into Titanfall. No Conquest? ... I'm sorry... NO CONQUEST? That's where I draw the line. This sounds more like another Titanfall only with a single player option. No thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdunSaveMe Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 We all know Activision as a Publisher is to blame for Destiny's barebones and paywall DLC for things already in the game from start. I have faith in Bungie... Activision? Not so much. You can't blame the publisher for Bungie's continued poor design choices and lack of communication. I never called it Battlefield, and I infact know it will be nothing like it... I don't remember mentioning you at all. So good for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WingedCrusade Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 (edited) Patterns. They do things ridiculously slowly. Gamebreaking bugs aren't patched for weeks or months. Most 'improvements' to the game have been done separate to the original game, like attempts at less rubbish bosses and improved story missions. "What they've said" is not a promising thing to go off. These are the people who think Destiny's story is epic and the bosses are fun and the game areas are huge and expansive. I wish all developers could be more like Indie Game developers, like DE. We get speedy weekly updates with tons of bug fixes, changes, and even nice little Tenno Reinforcement additions, not to mention their haste when there's something that is gamebreaking and needs patching which they can get out almost within the day even. They listen to their community for the most part and don't go too out of touch like some AAA companies... (Ubisoft. Yes. You.)I miss the old days of gaming when it was simple. No DLC, no microtransactions, no purchases... Just... Fun... You play the game, you enjoy it, the developers actually put something /into/ making it... Everyone would be happy. Now? Eh... There's an increasing amount of lackluster games being shoved out for seemingly the purpose of just garnering money, and on top of that, DLC and micro purchases up the bum.. You can't blame the publisher for Bungie's continued poor design choices and lack of communication. I don't remember mentioning you at all. So good for you. No need to be so hostile. And yes, Activision is part to blame as a publisher, as publishers also handle release, what gets released, when, and some other decisions regarding things not main or core to the game itself. Bungie was great when they were with Microsoft and handled Halo. They move to Activision because Microsoft wants them to continue Halo when they don't want to. Suddenly, their quality in game design has decreased, they've become less and less in touch with community... It's either coincidence, or it's not. Take it as you will.This publisher they've taken under is the handler of CoD, the copy and paste terrible game series that has declined after 5 in quality and yet still gets copy and pasted into new titles because it sells, mind you. Edited August 14, 2015 by WingedCrusade Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts