The Division Non-Official Gameplay, Embargo lifted. - General

[QUOTE=lonefirewarrior;49537734]Was really hoping the RPG elements didn't involve increasing/decreasing the health of enemies. There are better ways to make RPG-Shooters without making bullet sponge enemies. The movement/cover system also looks too rigid. I thought it was going to be like Ghost Recon FS or Splinter Cell where you could hop from cover to cover really smoothly.[/QUOTE] The cover system looked really good to me, the way you just have like a marker that lets you just quickly move to any piece of cover nearby seems really useful. [editline]15th January 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=coolguy32;49537786]I know that , but it's just sad that devs started pulling Watch Dogs on us lately.[/QUOTE] The graphical downgrade was the least of that game's problems. Also that's been happening since forever.

I lost all my hype for this like a year ago, and now seeing it in action, I'm not getting hyped because the gunplay looks like shit.

[QUOTE=simkas;49537790]The cover system looked really good to me, the way you just have like a marker that lets you just quickly move to any piece of cover nearby seems really useful. [editline]15th January 2016[/editline] The graphical downgrade was the least of that game's problems. Also that's been happening since forever.[/QUOTE] As far as i know it has been wide-spread starting 4-5 years ago. Games like Half-Life 2 delivered on graphics and performance at release.

[QUOTE=coolguy32;49537803]As far as i know it has been started 4-5 years ago at best. Games like Half-Life 2 delivered on graphics and performance at release.[/QUOTE] Half-Life 2 is hardly a fair comparison. And back then, game visuals didn't really have that much space to move in. Now you can have it start with "almost photo-realistic" and go to "really fucking good looking". Before it was just like "looks good" to "looks good".

[QUOTE=simkas;49537790]The cover system looked really good to me, the way you just have like a marker that lets you just quickly move to any piece of cover nearby seems really useful.[/QUOTE] Yeah you're right. Only one of the videos has someone showing off the cover system better. Everyone else is running out in the open most of the time.

[QUOTE=simkas;49537812]Half-Life 2 is hardly a fair comparison. And back then, game visuals didn't really have that much space to move in. Now you can have it start with "almost photo-realistic" and go to "really fucking good looking". Before it was just like "looks good" to "looks good".[/QUOTE] Well , then what about Half-Life 2? It basically exploded everyone's mind with a really huge jump in graphics. I mean , just , holy-shit , imagine in 2003 when gaming is mostly like-this: [url]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/1pjiJ2pC6W8/hqdefault.jpg[/url] After which Half-Life 2 comes out of nowhere with-this: [url]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/yxYviVfwAHA/maxresdefault.jpg[/url]

[QUOTE=coolguy32;49537834]Well , then what about Half-Life 2? It basically exploded everyone's minds with a really huge jump in graphics. I mean , just , holy-shit , imagine in 2003 when gaming is mostly like-this: [url]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/1pjiJ2pC6W8/hqdefault.jpg[/url] After which Half-Life 2 comes out of nowhere with-this: [url]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/yxYviVfwAHA/maxresdefault.jpg[/url][/QUOTE] Yeah but HL2 was in development for 6 years and it was being made by Valve, who were basically wizards at that point. The Division was only announced 3 years ago.

[QUOTE=coolguy32;49537834]Well , then what about Half-Life 2? It basically exploded everyone's minds with a really huge jump in graphics. I mean , just , holy-shit , imagine in 2003 when gaming is mostly like-this: [url]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/1pjiJ2pC6W8/hqdefault.jpg[/url] After which Half-Life 2 comes out of nowhere with-this: [url]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/yxYviVfwAHA/maxresdefault.jpg[/url][/QUOTE] You realize the jump from 1 million polygons to 2 million is a almost unnoticable jump where as the jump we had in 2003 -2005 was a huge massive jump in comparison? these games didn't come out of vacuums, they're created by the technological limits of the tech at the time.

[QUOTE=simkas;49537859]Yeah but HL2 was in development for 6 years and it was being made by Valve, who were basically wizards at that point. The Division was only announced 3 years ago.[/QUOTE] "The new IP and tech has been in development for several years although development on the actual game began in the summer of 2012." Text from wiki. So the tech has been in developement for quite some time.

[QUOTE=coolguy32;49537866]"The new IP and tech has been in development for several years although development on the actual game began in the summer of 2012." Text from wiki. So the tech has been in developement for quite some time.[/QUOTE] Yeah, "tech", meaning just the engine and all that comes with that.

[QUOTE=coolguy32;49537866]"The new IP and tech has been in development for several years although development on the actual game began in the summer of 2012." Text from wiki. So the tech has been in developement for quite some time.[/QUOTE] Bullshots are done to sell people pre-orders. People are dumb enough to buy in. Bullshots are done not to lie to us, but to see where they can push the tech, then they scale it back to the point it'll run on the available systems well enough.

[QUOTE=simkas;49537873]Yeah, "tech", meaning just the engine and all that comes with that.[/QUOTE] Yup , and development of tech for HL2 also started in late 1999 , along with the game.

[QUOTE=coolguy32;49537889]Yup , and development of tech for HL2 also started in late 1999 , along with the game.[/QUOTE] Actually you know what, ignore that point, I don't even know where I was going with that. Read HumanAbyss' posts, that's making the point I wanted to make. That's just game development, you always start with a template with all the perfect things that you want and then you might make some kind of small test version of that which has all that stuff in it, but then as you continue to actually expand that, you notice that a lot of things are just not going to work in a full game so you scale back down on a lot of it. Hell, even with games like Doom or Quake or even HL1, some of the stuff we saw and we were told about early on was stuff that sounded amazing and perfect and they might have had that stuff working early on, but once they had to actually make a finished game, they had to take away a lot of that.

[QUOTE=simkas;49537898]Actually you know what, ignore that point, I don't even know where I was going with that. Read HumanAbyss' posts, that's making the point I wanted to make.[/QUOTE] Same , this argument doesn't look like it's going anywhere ._. . [editline]15th January 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=simkas;49537898]Actually you know what, ignore that point, I don't even know where I was going with that. Read HumanAbyss' posts, that's making the point I wanted to make. That's just game development, you always start with a template with all the perfect things that you want and then you might make some kind of small test version of that which has all that stuff in it, but then as you continue to actually expand that, you notice that a lot of things are just not going to work in a full game so you scale back down on a lot of it. Hell, even with games like Doom or Quake or even HL1, some of the stuff we saw and we were told about early on was stuff that sounded amazing and perfect and they might have had that stuff working early on, but once they had to actually make a finished game, they had to take away a lot of that.[/QUOTE] Oh , you talking about the Original-Storyline of the game , cut content and all? Well , the main reason for the most of the cut-content is that valve didn't have time , the tech was limited at the time for what they were trying to do , or it was cut because it wasn't seen fit. Half-Life 2 didn't won a lot of awards for just no-reason , Valve knew what they were doing. Oh and before you ask , yes i know everything about the beta stuff.

[QUOTE=coolguy32;49537912]\ Half-Life 2 didn't won a lot of awards for just no-reason , Valve knew what they were doing.[/QUOTE] It's not like game developers stopped knowing what they're doing. The industry, the tech, the market, it's all RADICALLY different than it was 12 years ago.

[QUOTE=coolguy32;49537912]Oh , you talking about the Original-Storyline of the game , cut content and all? Well , the main reason for the most of the cut-content is that valve didn't have time , the tech was limited at the time for what they were trying to do , or it was cut because it wasn't seen fit. Half-Life 2 didn't won a lot of awards for just no-reason , Valve knew what they were doing. Oh and before you see , yes i know everything about the beta stuff.[/QUOTE] It's kinda the same deal here, just that in this case it's all about the visuals, since with modern games that's the easiest part to scale back down on. It's usually about the situation of "okay we can have these super advanced graphics that we have done but they're really resource intensive so they only work properly in this small section of the game that we polished for a demo so we can either remove some features or make the levels smaller to keep the visual detail or we can just keep all the stuff in and just make the game look a little less pretty but still pretty".

[QUOTE=Makol;49537118]You can play it solo, but there some parts that require a group. But those parts are mostly the "dungeons" of the game. The "dungeons" do have matchmaking though.[/QUOTE] Oh no, griefing inbound. Any time a game forces coop there's usually a reason, and there's always those dickheads that exist only to prevent progress

Also, we still don't know what it looks like on PC. As far as I know, the very first original demo that was showed during the announcement was running on a PC.

I have a huge problem with RPG shooters. If I have to put full mag+ of bullets into an enemy in just warm clothes I'm turned off playing it (that applies to other games like Fallouts but they at least give you a lot character choices on top of that).

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49537863]You realize the jump from 1 million polygons to 2 million is a almost unnoticable jump where as the jump we had in 2003 -2005 was a huge massive jump in comparison? these games didn't come out of vacuums, they're created by the technological limits of the tech at the time.[/QUOTE] It's not as much about polygons as it is about normal maps. People started using normal maps in games in 2004, that's why the graphics became much better around that time

I have good vibes. All this gameplay footage. No one's really saying anything negative about it. The embargo has been lifted this early, there's a beta coming up. So Ubisoft has faith, and aren't pulling a Watch Dogs bait and switch on us. High hopes It looks like Destiny, but with people and no aliens, and in New York, and in Third Person, with an actual story, better Co-op mechanics, and no fucking loading screens once in-game, and some pop in and out PvP with some pretty sweet mechanics on its own. I can dig it

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;49538012]It's not as much about polygons as it is about normal maps. People started using normal maps in games in 2004, that's why the graphics became much better around that time[/QUOTE] Yeah I won't pretend to know the nitty gritty specifics of it all, but tech around that time started being able to make larger jumps and better use of what was available. the important part is that we're not likely to see such a similar jump in terms of visual upgrade so suddenly because we're at a point where really pushing to that next level of "realism" is just outside of our boundaries but we're able to make stuff pretty enough that we're convinced by it by and large. [editline]15th January 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=TheTalon;49538018]I have good vibes. All this gameplay footage. No one's really saying anything negative about it. The embargo has been lifted this early, there's a beta coming up. So Ubisoft has faith, and aren't pulling a Watch Dogs bait and switch on us. High hopes It looks like Destiny, but with people and no aliens, and in New York, and in Third Person, with an actual story, better Co-op mechanics, and no fucking loading screens once in-game, and some pop in and out PvP with some pretty sweet mechanics on its own. I can dig it[/QUOTE] I'll dig it if it's not as bullet spongey as it looks to be. It looks more bullet spongey than BL2 NG+, I don't like pumping in literally hundreds of rounds to do anything to a guy.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49538028]Yeah I won't pretend to know the nitty gritty specifics of it all, but tech around that time started being able to make larger jumps and better use of what was available. the important part is that we're not likely to see such a similar jump in terms of visual upgrade so suddenly because we're at a point where really pushing to that next level of "realism" is just outside of our boundaries but we're able to make stuff pretty enough that we're convinced by it by and large. [editline]15th January 2016[/editline] I'll dig it if it's not as bullet spongey as it looks to be. It looks more bullet spongey than BL2 NG+, I don't like pumping in literally hundreds of rounds to do anything to a guy.[/QUOTE] I think it's going to depend on levels, your weapon, and your headshots, and the type of enemy. Some of those guys went down in less shots than people do in R6 Siege, and others act more like elites that takes 200 rounds from your group to down

[QUOTE=TheTalon;49538018]I have good vibes. All this gameplay footage. [B]No one's really saying anything negative about it.[/B] The embargo has been lifted this early, there's a beta coming up. So Ubisoft has faith, and aren't pulling a Watch Dogs bait and switch on us. High hopes It looks like Destiny, but with people and no aliens, and in New York, and in Third Person, with an actual story, better Co-op mechanics, and no fucking loading screens once in-game, and some pop in and out PvP with some pretty sweet mechanics on its own. I can dig it[/QUOTE] Most of the videos are Sponsored, so I doubt any of them will say anything bad for a while. But I really want this game to be good.

I think it certainly shows promise. It's not a Watch Dogs scenario from what I can tell.

[QUOTE=simkas;49536860]I would imagine that's just cause they didn't play the PC version and that's not what they were showing off during the event.[/QUOTE] in one of those videos they say they played the pc verison, but where not allowed to talk about it.

Looks like they ruined some perfectly good-looking gunplay with the sponginess of everything. I'd accept it if it was just a few special types of enemies who are visibly well-armored or whatever but some guy in a hoodie soaking up two magazines is just silly. The PvP looks awkward as shit with people standing there unloading their guns on each others faces from less than a meter away.

The sponginess is reminding me of Resident Evil Operation Raccoon City. This is not a good thing.

[QUOTE=QueenSasha24;49538838]The sponginess is reminding me of Resident Evil Operation Raccoon City. This is not a good thing.[/QUOTE] That was the least of that game's problems.

I like the customization. I'm wondering if playing as a woman will make the game easier like in L4D, Zoey was always healed