Luseth

It is yes, this been around a while then? It takes stats from EA’s own pro clubs website so you could go direct too if you wanted It does, I just clipped a few stats from there, there are other breakdowns on there as well such as your win percentage playing for the club and such.

So I got chatting with a new guy at work today and it turns out he plays quite a lot of clubs (in much better teams than us) however he has made me aware of a new website and I thought I would extract some bits off it from last night's session:- So for those wondering how we got on:- & then one for @DrCasket at the end:-

So I have been looking at these, I think it is difficult to say if the price is wrong or right as similar to the PC market there is such a wide range of price points based on the hardware and specs. The base model puts it similar to the OLED steamdeck and looking at reviews performance wise I don't believe they are too far apart. Where you lose out with the screen though the screen is still meant to be decent but you then get access to all gaming librarys a bit easier and game pass which is a lot trickier with the steam deck. The more expensive model comes in a little more affordable than the premium options such as the Legion Go 2 and the onexplayer and such. It has reviewed quite well and the Xbox ally X is an improvement on the Rog ally X that it was built upon. However the limiting factor seems to be the OS still, it's windows and it is just not optimised well enough. I am planning to upgrade my steamdeck (my brother is having it) and have my sights on the Lenovo Legion Go S. It is comparable to the base Xbox Ally specwise but performs much much better and by all accounts it is just down to the Steam OS and it's optimisation of games and such.

I think part of that is the spawns as well, I don't know if you have noticed but if you are capturing a base and people spawn in on said base they almost always spawn behind you. I think this is about trying to keep everything happening at a fast pace for players, you know the ADHD aspect of COD.

Yes sorry. Yes it is a bad thing, progression for this series should have been smarter maps, more tactical gameplay, improve upon the building elements of BFV, improving the destruction (which they have but the battle royale show's it could have gone further), develop naval warfare. They had to do it with BFV as well when they first attempted battle royale, this is becoming a recurring theme now and if it happens a third time around and is not successful then I know a few people who won't return to the series. This is CODafield currently and that's fine if that is the direction they go in and it works, but as you say if those COD fans go straight back to COD when it is realeased it will be all for nothing and will have further alienated the fan base that has kept this series going.

I think this show's your limited experience of COD, I can't believe it but I am agreeing with James twice in one day, it is the pacing. The game wants you in constant fire fights and does not appreciate there is gameplay in a slower gameplay style, looking for ways to flank the enemy or sneak around to objectives on the other side of the map adding a tactical element into the game. There have been a few times we have gone to take the base closest enemy HQ but to get there you have to essentially run through the main pathways of the map. On other battlefield games you saw it more in that you would get certain vehicles associated with a point, so say the team that captured point C would get an extra chopper or plane or tank for example. This game is much more COD than I think you realise, in fact I would say this is COD ground war moreso than old battlefield. Yes the gameplay is COD esque but that's not necassarily terrible, however most guns are like lasers, the guns don't feel weighty and there is no skill required i.e. trying to allow for recoil or bullet drop. The range finder as we were discussing last night is mad the way it basically makes it a piece of piss to hit a target with. I am enjoying it to some extent but whether it will have the longevity in it I am not sure, it will really depend on the maps.

I don't think it being a WoW alternative was the issue, I think it's as James mentioned above that it has lacked a true roadmap with ideas for it's future since launch. My favourite WoW alternative was Guild Wars, though I have not been back to it in some time that still continues going and has just released new DLC, similarly Final Fantasy 14 still does quite well amongst others. It is no different to most games albeit more extreme, it is more important than COD and the like to keep these sort's of games feeling fresh. I think it's a shame, I did play it and there were some good ideas in there but as you get further into the game it get's a bit repetitive and the end game was somewhat lacking.

I have not picked it up yet as I can't afford it and with other games I want at the moment it is not my priority. From the recent beta I experienced the missions are simple, go in collect something, destory a certain number of bots and collect components from them and that sort of thing. I did not see any 'bosses' as such but then again I was not very far into the game and only did a handful of the early missions really.

I think I am similar to James in that none really stand out apart from the god awful firestorm map, why they thought that was the one to bring back I have no idea and I think they really missed a trick in that they should have made the central tower fully destructable. I think I lean towards the siege of Cairo as my current favourite as the destruction is really good and there is plenty on that map. On the point above I thought they had said they were already exploring naval maps or have them in mind for future release? I will say if you compare them to maps in BF1 or V I think they still have a way to go with this game and you can certainly feel the COD elements that have been brought over with the current people in the design process, not necassarily to the benefit of the game either.

So I am giving this thread a nudge because spotify are increasing their price again, this is happening a lot with a lot of the streaming services at the moment, regular price increases and I don't think it will be long before we are being asked to pay £20 a month for music streaming. At what point does it begin to become unviable for the average person? I could afford a number of subscriptions however I am at the point now where I am regining them back in because if I enjoy and rely on them too much now then in 10 years time it may be a whole lot more difficult to draw myself back when prices are higher. So how many subscriptions do people have? Do you limit them to games or do you have games, music, multiple tv subscriptions too?

Ah legend! Thank you very much!

It looks great but again another remake / remaster and honestly I am a bit sick of it ^_^ So many triple A game's these day's are just remakes or remasters and for some reason everyone is happy to keep rebuying the same games and if this is the future of triple A gaming there is really going to be a point where it all comes crashing down. Indie games seem to get things so right these day's it's a wonder that any major studio keep's managing to turn out a profit.

I enjoyed the first game, will pick this up as well at some point but I'm not sure when. Maybe will have to ask the missus for it as a christmas gift or something ^_^

I don't suppose this is still going is it Phil? Be a good game to play on my steamdeck if so ^_^

I have watched a couple of videos and people are actually saying good things about it with particular praise on the combat I am still leaning towards picking it up as I want a sizeable RPG to play. A lot of the issues are that it's nothing like the original, but in all fairness the original came out so long ago any sequal was going to be very different from the original.

I did give it a try and if you like tarkov I think you will quite enjoy this as it has the same sort of atmospheric vibe, it's great visually. Think my only downside is that the game is played in raids as far as I can see so you sort of start at a hub, buy things, craft things etc and then move into a round, find a load of stuff and leave again. The gameplay is great and some of the bots are genuinely scary to come up against.

I picked it up but going through it very slowly, once I get to it I will let you know. That said I don't know how it works but might be worth checking out this in the meantime:- Pokémon Legends Z-A Trade Codes | VGC WWW.VIDEOGAMESCHRONICLE.COM All the trade codes you need for Pokemon Legends Z-A.

I won't lie that video is a hard watch, it's just some guy ranting about a game he does not like and complaining that people are enjoying it... It was never going to be quite old school battlefield in part due to the people that have recently been employed to try and reboot the series and in part due to gamers wants being very different today. I think the biggest criticism currently for me is the maps, if you compare to old school Battlefield the maps are actually somewhat lacking. Operation firestorm (though I am not such a fan) is much more reminiscent of the series, plenty of infantry combat spaces but a larger map with scope for vehicles to really be utilised. They feel very COD esque generally but I understand why because of the people making the game and trying to lure in new fans. Server browser was taken out during the last game wasn't it? Portal will help to mitigate that I suppose and the complaint around skill based matchmaking, it is there but games are not prioritised on that. Heck if it was I think Macca, Lee and I would have been bumped right up to the best players last night as we finished 1, 2 & 3 almost every match. My only other gripe and I had a play with it last night trying to unlock the spawn beacon but the assault class is kind of pointless and the shotgun is stupidly overpowered but then there are always balancing issues when a game like this is first launched so we will see how it is in a few weeks. I may give the single player a go at some point, I am after a meaty rpg to play at the moment but nothing is really jumping out at me currently.

I am having a lot of fun with this game, it's not quite old Battlefield but it's got some of the good aspects of it. Firestorm is one of my least enjoyed maps purely because of the snipers sitting on the fekkin tower. I think they should increase the bullet drop on sniper's to add some more skill to them and that would probably help resolve my gripes with it. Generally the maps are pretty good, I really like Manhattan with the bridge and generally the gameplay is pretty good, I am finishing in the top 4 or 5 spaces most matches so I haven't lost my edge with the Battlefield games which is always a plus. I have not used tanks as much as I did on the past few games either. I think you can see a lot of COD players on the game, the way they move, the lack of utilising the classes, videos online moaning about mines and such and there is often a lack of thinking about how you play, understanding that taking bases closer to enemy HQ in some game modes pulls enemies towards them allowing your team to recapture bases and such. In addition I have also been playing with map editor, it's a bit fiddly but I am getting used to it and despite it's crudeness in terms of just plonking objects down I had my first map published last night so I can now host it in portal. I have every intention to try and create some smaller COD influenced maps just for FG use and maybe we could get them going on FG Friday's if anyone's interested?

You joke about it and whether or not it is another topic of conversation but I suspect we will see it go round full circle. Digital is great and conveniant and has been for some time however as prices of all these subscriptions increase and mount up they won't hold their appeal forever. We are seeing it now with people returning to vinyl with music again, people also like to own things.

I am cautiously optimistic, I want it to do well and I want it to be good however we obviously had our fingers burnt last time around. I have intentionally bought physical on PS so I can sell it if it turns out crap. That said my beta experience it felt like a middle ground with battlefield and COD so not quite Battlefield as I have always loved and enjoyed it but it has some of it in there so an improvement on the last game.

I have nosed at game pass recently there are a few games on there I could quite happily play and may still pick up (not ultimate mind). That said you can see that there must be issues behind the scenes financially with everything they produce at the moment going up and up in price, I do think that with some of their recent acquisitions they must not have made anywhere near the amount of money they needed to, to justify the purchases. That said if Sony keep their subscription as is I can see it really pushing Microsoft's Xbox side of things further down the crapper.

I do wonder if with the 'inclusivity' in Mass Effect and Dragon Age with regards to genders and same sex relationships if the next games do come to fruition if we will see that side of things scaled back in the next games. That said I think this purchase is about the multiplayer and esports side of things and can see a lot of their single player stuff disappearing over the coming years.

I honestly don't think much will change, the games won't improve but they will want to continue making a profit, this is all part of them trying to diversify income by moving away from just oil. They have taken steps into the gaming industry elsewhere and I suspect they may push esports more on the EA titles as well.