Angry Joe Battlefield Hardline Review.

[RejZoR]

Dead Space 2 was actually pretty good. The atmosphere of the space station was really good and the gameplay was refreshed but not all that different. In DS3 I just can't be bothered with the stupid crafting system which is entirely unnecessary and annoying...

 

[ShiBDiB]

It's a $60 DLC... the end...

 

[Frag_Maniac]

I meant that a lot of people say Mass Effect 2 is the best the trilog

Yes I know, just saying I don't agree with them that it was best in series.

Back on current topic, this link excludes PC sales but it shows Dead Space and Dead Space 2 sold about the same in the first five weeks with Dead Space 3 failing miserably:

Not showing PC sales, which can't even be fully accounted for anyway due to the majority of them being DDL, and only accounting for 5 weeks, doesn't begin to tell the whole story. I chatted on Aegis 7, the unofficial DS3 forum, for several months after launch of DS3, and the interest in the game definitely picked up.

I feel a lot of it had to do with many of us clarifying how crafting works, and reminding people that only 3 missions (vs 7 for sp) were coop only, and that the darkest content was in many of the optional sp missions (dungeons) .

It also picked up even more when the Awakened DLC was announced, esp near and after it's release. The DLC had more of a so called survival horror feel many were looking for. I say so called because I still feel it's a bit of a misconception that DS1 was survival horror. They've all had intense action, whether it be via random encounters, waves that are triggered, or boss fights.

One of the most common questions and complaints on the forum was in regard to understanding how the weapon crafting worked, and trying to make the best weapons possible with the least amount of resources. That is a survival horror feature in itself when you have to carefully manage resources to build adequate weapons, and I feel DS3 did that better than the other two.

Another misconception was that you had to have a heavy arsenal at your disposal. There's a Classic Mode for DS3 that restricts you to only stock DS1 weapons with no upgrading allowed. The game plays much differently on that mode, because you never feel overpowered, esp in the dungeons.

Even though I don't feel DS3 was quite as good a game as DS2, I actually played through it more times than any of them, because there are so many ways to play it. Replay value counts a lot for me in horror games, because the ones that lean more toward survival horror lose a lot of their effect on subsequent play throughs.

Honestly, the story isn't as good as the other two, esp the cheesy love triangle dialog, but that only accounts for a very small part of the game. I just feel DS3 initially got a lot worse reviews than it deserved, and in the end, the change in reception proved that.

 

[Black Haru]

So... battlefield?
I feel like im the only person who likes it... but im also the only one who owns it.

So by those numbers 100% of TPU who own hardline are satisfied with it.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Not showing PC sales, which can't even be fully accounted for anyway due to the majority of them being DDL, and only accounting for 5 weeks, doesn't begin to tell the whole story. I chatted on Aegis 7, the unofficial DS3 forum, for several months after launch of DS3, and the interest in the game definitely picked up.

EA said they needed 5 million sales for DS3 to be considered a success and it fell very short of that. DS3 is considered a failure and there are no plans to launch DS4.

 

[Octopuss]

I don't like this guy very much, but watched the full video and laughed really hard. Seems to be spot on based on what I heard/read from random sources.

And meanwhile, Levelcap went on 20 minutes of fanboying the game as awesome, breakthrough innovative revolution blablabla...

 

[Frag_Maniac]

EA said they needed 5 million sales for DS3 to be considered a success and it fell very short of that. DS3 is considered a failure and there are no plans to launch DS4.

Initially they did yes, but then they later publicly acknowledged that expecting 5 mill was being unrealistic. I think they got ahead of themselves after DS2 grossed twice as much as DS1. They also clarified many months after release when rumors of series cancellation circulated after their having said sales were less than the originally expected, that the sales had picked up over time, esp nearing and after the release of the Awakened DLC.

A lot of us that chatted on the unofficial forum Aegis 7 saw the interest in the title being sustained and even increasing, esp when we explained how to craft decent weapons using minimal resources. The more complex weapon crafting is what frustrated a lot of people when they first played it.

Just because DS4 hasn't been announced doesn't mean it isn't happening. When Visceral clarified that the plans to cancel the series weren't true, they said they still take a lot of pride in Dead Space. I don't think they would feel that way if the sales weren't big enough to continue the series.

The funny thing is, despite all the smack talk and unsubstantiated speculation and rumors about the fate of Dead Space, it's probably more likely EA will lose money on the abysmal BF Hardline, than any installment past or future of the DS series. That's something to think about.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Obsidian had a lot of pride in Alpha Protocol but SEGA, when asked if there would be a sequel, pretty much said "absolutely not." EA has to make that decision, not Visceral, because EA owns it. Disappointing initial sales is typically all a publisher needs to shelve a sequel indefinitely. It could come back in a decade like Syndicate but we all know how that worked out.

I'm pretty sure Hardline was dirt cheap to produce because most assets are borrowed from Battlefield 3/4. In other words, the game doesn't have to get many sales to turn a profit. I bet the marketing cost more than production.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

Obsidian had a lot of pride in Alpha Protocol but SEGA, when asked if there would be a sequel, pretty much said "absolutely not." EA has to make that decision, not Visceral, because EA owns it. Disappointing initial sales is typically all a publisher needs to shelve a sequel indefinitely. It could come back in a decade like Syndicate but we all know how that worked out.

I'm pretty sure Hardline was dirt cheap to produce because most assets are borrowed from Battlefield 3/4. In other words, the game doesn't have to get many sales to turn a profit. I bet the marketing cost more than production.

Yeah that's the sad thing, the publishers are in complete control, but EA ARE doing a lot better than SEGA. SEGA's lucky they're still afloat given all the times they crapped on customers leaving them with no titles for systems they made and abandoned. SEGA's last big title was Alien: Isolation, and while it's getting fairly good reception, being a horror genre game it's a niche market at best. It isn't enough to pull them out of last years over 50% profit loss. EA by comparison are def in the green with their stock, giving shareholders more confidence than hesitation.

I really think you're understating the sales figures for DS3 though. Keep in mind PC sales aren't accurately factored due to DDL. Horror is not an easy genre to profit off, but if there is a DS4 and it has content similar to DS3's Awakened, which was hinted at by the cliffhanger ending of Awakened, it will bring back a lot of die hard DS fans. The Awakened DLC did pretty well. Most that played it said it brought back memories of old DS.

And it takes more to make a game than rehashed assets. That argument kinda gets lost anyway because the same can be said for a DS sequel, or most ANY sequel that uses same assets, engine, etc. Core assets, engines, etc, are only the foundation. It takes tons of art design, level design, skinning, AI pathing, etc. If it were nothing but a quick and easy skin job they wouldn't have even needed Visceral's help. I'm not disinterested in Hardline for it being a BF reskin, I'm disinterested in it because it just doesn't look fun to play.

It's not DS that's killing EA, it's their greed over pushing out BF releases too often. Even DICE have stated that. http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Battlefield-Hardline-Bad-Idea-DICE-Said-2011-64729.html

 

[mastrdrver]

I hear the double bullet damage bug made it in to Hardline.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

And it takes more to make a game than rehashed assets. That argument kinda gets lost anyway because the same can be said for a DS sequel, or most ANY sequel that uses same assets, engine, etc. Core assets, engines, etc, are only the foundation. It takes tons of art design, level design, skinning, AI pathing, etc. If it were nothing but a quick and easy skin job they wouldn't have even needed Visceral's help. I'm not disinterested in Hardline for it being a BF reskin, I'm disinterested in it because it just doesn't look fun to play.

Hardline not only used the same assets (sounds, textures, and models), it used the same engine. Hardline was developed like an expansion because under the skin, that's effectively all it is (new maps, new script, new characters). It likely took no more than two years to develop and I'm sure a lot of that came from utilizing under utilized resources at EA. The game was extremely cheap to produce.

DS4, on the other hand, would have to change engines because it is based on Visceral Engine which has zero support for Xbox One nor PlayStation 4. EA would most likely update it to use Frostbite 3 (maybe even 4 assuming DICE can't add DX12 support to Frostbite 3). That effectively translates to starting over from scratch with the game because few resources (except perhaps some textures) can be recycled.

As you already pointed out, horror games do not make much money and Dead Space 4 will undeniably cost a lot more than Dead Space 3 did. EA would have to be desperate to try Dead Space 4 and that desperation is better directed in a lot of known-to-be-successful properties than Dead Space 4. Case in point: they could revive Command & Conquer which already had at least some preliminary work done on Frostbite. Except StarCraft 2, there's a gapping hole for traditional RTS games right now because the Earth series off'd itself with 2160, Age of Empires isn't doing much better, while Dawn of War and Supreme Commander turned into something else. Most likely the only reason why they don't is because making the game work on a console delivers and underwhelming performance while it destroys the keyboard & mouse version. But, I digress. Point is, there are zero indicators right now Dead Space 4 is even in consideration at EA. Visceral is currently busy on another Star Wars game which is likely to generate a whole lot more money than Dead Space.

 

[BumbleBee]

Visceral is working on a Star Wars game so it doesn't even matter. stop talking about Dead Space!!!!!

Hardline isn't a bad game.. it's just the cousin Eddie of the series lol

 

[Steevo]

So pay 120 to watch a slightly interactive tv show?

 

[JunkBear]

Still playing BF2 multiplayer thats a safe bet this game.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

Visceral is working on a Star Wars game so it doesn't even matter. stop talking about Dead Space!!!!!

LOL, you want me to stop talking about Dead Space, when the title you're referring to has yet to even be named? That's rich.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Seems pretty definitive:
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/viscerals-star-wars-game-be-set-during-new-trilogy-films-1490222

Getting the opportunity to work an IP as cool as Star Wars is really exciting to all of us here, but what's more exciting working that closely with the licensor is that they're really interesting in leaning into our expertise from a game development perspective.

Papoutis is likely directing, producing, or both.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

Seems pretty definitive...

More so the project than the title, otherwise that article's title wouldn't have ended in a question mark.

My point is, nothing that's been said is proof of DS being canned. It's pure speculation until they SAY it has. It's the equivalent of saying HL2 Ep 3 or HL 3 or HL in general has been canned.

 

[Black Haru]

Visceral is working on a Star Wars game so it doesn't even matter. stop talking about Dead Space!!!!!

Hardline isn't a bad game.. it's just the cousin Eddie of the series lol

I would say that hardline is good, but everyone seems to think it should have been revolutionary to the series.

Its not battlefield 5. Its not even bad company 3. Its a spinoff developed by a different studio. And they did a good job of making it fun. I thought thats what games were about.

 

[StartBeforeYouStop]

For the first time ever, I have zero interest in a game with word Battlefield in it's title, and it makes me sad

What makes me sad is that this is the first time you were not intrested in a battlefield game Sure the franchise is overall good, but not every single game