Review cover Star Wars Battlefront (Xbox One)
Official GBAtemp Review

Product Information:

  • Release Date (NA): November 17, 2015
  • Release Date (EU): November 17, 2015
  • Release Date (JP): November 17, 2015
  • Publisher: EA
  • Developer: DICE
  • Genres: FPS
  • Also For: Computer, PlayStation 4

Game Features:

Single player
Local Multiplayer
Online Multiplayer
Co-operative
It’s the year of Star Wars, and the latest highly anticipated movie is coming soon. So in the meantime, how about we pass the time by finding out if DICE’s new Battlefront game is worth the money and the time sink? This is Star Wars Battlefront!

attachFull29952

A Long Time Ago... There were some really good graphics and sound effects

Battlefront takes place in the original trilogy of movies, meaning you don’t have to worry about Jar Jar Binks screaming in your ear, or Midi-chlorians making you angry at lore decisions.

I think the first thing I noticed about Battlefront was how cinematically pleasing it is, even when it has next to no cinematics in the game. The graphics are fantastically stylized and realistic and create this immersive atmosphere of placing you in the Star Wars universe. Every mark of land, every simple little nook and cranny of a rebel stronghold, and every weapon and NPC look like they were popped from the movie into this game.

And the sound design, oh lord, the sound design. Every pull of the trigger fires off that iconic laser blast sound effect and everything around you breathes Star Wars. I have to give the developer props for taking so many minor things about the universe and placing them into this game to create a fuller Star Wars experience.

But while the game makes everything look and sound good, the better question to be asked is how does it all play?

attachFull30016

Review image Review image Review image

In a Galaxy Far Far Away... There was some good and bad gameplay...

Well for starters, there is no offline single player, as we mentioned in a news post earlier this year. Battlefront instead contains 9 multiplayer modes ranging from hero vs villain 3 vs 3, Space craft dog-fights between X-wings and TIE fighters, and huge 40 player battles involving various objectives. Each of these game-modes takes place on either Tatooine, Hoth, the Forest Moon of Endor, or Sullest, with multiple maps on each area.

While the game differs itself from some of the Battlefront series’ original modes in favor of more Battlefield-esque gamemodes, many of them feel familiar to the veterans as well as welcoming to new players. Supremacy mode is one example, bearing similarities to Battlefronts’ original Conquest mode. Supremacy has you attempting to capture 5 control points in sequential order to achieve victory, all while fending off a team of 20 players manning turrets, various vehicles, or just running in on foot and punching you in the face, which unfortunately happened to me on several occasions.

All of these modes feature powerups that allow range from simple guns, to vehicles like the iconic AT-AT, or even spawning as a Hero or Villain character. The heroes included are Luke Skywalker, Han Solo and Princess Leia, while the Empire has access to Darth Vader, Emperor Palpatine and Boba Fett. All heroes and villains feature an arsenal of powerful abilities and can take considerably more damage than a regular player character.

Controlling the heroes is easy, and the range of abilities makes for interesting combat should you happen to pick up the powerup. Palpatine can blast people with force lighting, Boba Fett can fly around with his jetpack and fire his rockets at scurrying rebels, and even Princess Leia can perform some devastating critical shots with her blaster.

Picking up these powerups is completely random, which can be unfortunate and lead to you going multiple games without ever picking up a vehicle or a hero/villain spawn. I myself didn’t get to play as Boba Fett until having played 16 games, due to never being able to find the powerup anywhere near me. The randomization does help keep things balanced in a sense, but it would have been nicer if they had gone for a more streamlined killstreak experience that could reward you for solid play, or even give you powerups for lacking performance to help give you a better competitive edge. Either way, I’m not the biggest fan of the system in general.

That being said, there are game modes specifically for Hero Fighting and Vehicle dog fights. My most memorable experience in this game comes from playing the Fighter Squadron mode, where I was able to use my TIE fighter to suicide bomb the Millennium Falcon at the end of the game and win the match for my team.

Vehicle controls work very well, and whether you prefer inverted flying mechanics or standard controls, all of that can be customized to your preference. Personally I didn't enjoy flying around in 1st person mode, so I was able to change the camera option to 3rd person to get a better view of the skies and keep track of targets. Fighter Squadron mode, or just using a vehicle in any game-mode in general is an absolute blast and keeps the pacing high and entertaining.

attachFull30017

Review image Review image Review image

Sprawling Credits of Gripes and Concerns 

But as far as normal gameplay goes, in and of itself it begins to feel very much like your average competitive FPS. When you’re not in a vehicle or controlling a special character, you are simply a grunt that runs around and shoots things in the same run-and-gun manor Battlefield and Call of Duty are known for. The pacing is quick enough and respawn time is minimal, but that doesn't detract from the overall boring tone the game begins to set if you never get a chance to try any of the cool stuff. In fact, gameplay will suddenly take a turn from wanting to win the match and complete the objectives, to simply running around looking for a powerup because you’re tired of getting shot down by the cooler things you aren't in.

The game has little to entice you into long term play, even with its offered progression systems. Rather than feature any sort of loadout progression and interesting combinations to enhance the multiplayer experience, Battlefront simply offers card based unlocks that mostly remain cosmetic. Credits can be earned by playing matches to buy these card packs, which may reward you with different hair styles, different colored helmets, emotes and maybe a few bonuses that can be used in game.

The only useful unlock I found myself using was a Jump-Pack, which allows you to reach higher ground with ease. This is useful for making quick escapes, and hoping to reach a powerup before one of your teammates takes it.

Weapon cards also exist to add a smaller breadth of options, albeit with very little variety. Temporary homing shots and the occasional pulse cannon can help you out in the long run, but these consumables do little to add to the lack of customization. Any weapon that is unlockable feels exactly the same as the last, which makes sense from the standpoint of everyone in the Star Wars universe being on par with the same blasters, but for a competitive multiplayer game it only makes the experience bland.

Battlefronts short-comings don’t stop at customization either. As mentioned previously, while no single player campaign is available, Battlefront does offer 5 training missions, 4 AI battles, and a typical wave based survival mode. All these really offered to me was an excuse to complain more about the lack of any kind of single player, considering the repetitive nature of the multiplayer.

Overall, Battlefront is the kind of game that I enjoyed for the first few hours of play, only to grow bored and annoyed with the small amount of content currently available. The scale of the game is large, but the offerings are a dime a dozen, the progression is short lived, and I honestly got all of my entertainment value out of it in about 6-8 hours of play.

attachFull30018

Review image Review imageReview image

Verdict

What We Liked ...
  • Fantastic graphics
  • Awesome sound design
What We Didn't Like ...
  • Incredibly repetitive
  • Lacking progression incentives
6
Gameplay
The controls work, the gameplay is fun, and it would all be so much better if it didn't feel like every match was exactly the same as the last one.
9
Presentation
I think the presentation is the greatest part of Battlefront. The game looks good, it sounds good, and it feels good.
6
Lasting Appeal
When the only options I'm given is to continually play the same modes over and over again on relatively the same maps and repetitively go through the same sequences of events, the experience gets old quickly. The initial play is incredibly fun, but the long lasting appeal just isn't long at all.
6.5
out of 10

Overall

Battlefront was a game I highly anticipated, played like mad, and probably won't revisit. It was fun for the time I got out of it, but the lasting appeal, the lacking sense of progression, and the repetitive nature quickly pushed me away from the game. It's a perfect title for a die-hard Star Wars fan that wants to enjoy a cool multiplayer experience, but only if they are ready to play the same thing over and over again for a long period of time.
I have been playing battlefront for a couple of days now and I have clocked up around 6-8 hours of playtime at least. I have to say my experience is slightly different and I think the game has been somewhat harshly reviewed by a lot of people. I cant understand how anyone could be bored of the game after just 6-8 hours, there are 9 multiplayer game modes, yes some are better than others, plus there is the single player trash to fool around in (I haven't even tried survival or battles yet). I haven't really explored or had my fill of even all the multiplayer modes in that time never mind played enough to get bored of them. Maybe I will grow tired of this game in a week or two, if I do I will report back, after all it took me about 15-20 hours of playing Destiny to make me grow to hate that and I liked it a lot at first. Considering the amount of fun I am having right now and despite Battlefronts obvious flaws I would say it is at least deserving of a 7.5-8 score.
 
I will reserve my final judgement when I actually get around to playing it, but considering all I've watched and read it just doesn't capture that iconic gameplay of the first two original Battlefront games. People were worried that it was basically going to be a pretty-looking Battlefield with a Star Wars skin and a couple new mechanics thrown in to match, and I'm afraid that may be exactly what we got. Like I said, I can't rightfully have a full opinion on it yet, but this was my concern (and the concern of others) when I heard who was going to be developing it.
 
"Cons
- Incredibly repetitive
- Lacking progression incentives"

ITR: Someone who has to be force fed mindless "rewards" for playing to enjoy it.

I was very surprised to see that Battlefront actually turned out pretty good. I don't think anyone saw that coming. I wouldn't necessarily say it's a direct improvement over the original, but it's not really a step backwards either. People seem to be so stuck on how amazing Battlefront 2 is. Go replay it, it wasn't actually that great of a game lol. I mean it was good and fun but it wasn't blow your balls off amazing. This game has done well by the series as far as i'm concerned. 6.5 is a pretentious as hell score, but then again that's once again why number scores are completely useless and arbitrary.
 
"Cons
- Incredibly repetitive
- Lacking progression incentives"

ITR: Someone who has to be force fed mindless "rewards" for playing to enjoy it.

I was very surprised to see that Battlefront actually turned out pretty good. I don't think anyone saw that coming. I wouldn't necessarily say it's a direct improvement over the original, but it's not really a step backwards either. People seem to be so stuck on how amazing Battlefront 2 is. Go replay it, it wasn't actually that great of a game lol. I mean it was good and fun but it wasn't blow your balls off amazing. This game has done well by the series as far as i'm concerned. 6.5 is a pretentious as hell score, but then again that's once again why number scores are completely useless and arbitrary.
I will completely agree number scores are always skewed by the person reviewing the game, and hence their arbitrary nature. And I'll also agree that the first two Battlefront games aren't the most amazing thing ever, even for their time. But they were different and they were fun. It was my hope and the hope of many others that the legacy of the original games would carry on, and we'd get a version for the modern age of gaming. Better graphics, some new useful mechanics, etc. But sadly all it seems to be is a McGeneric shooter with Star Wars paint, albeit very damn nice paint. As I said before I'll play it before forming a 100% solid opinion, but I'm not holding my breath any longer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chavosaur
"Cons
- Incredibly repetitive
- Lacking progression incentives"

ITR: Someone who has to be force fed mindless "rewards" for playing to enjoy it.

I was very surprised to see that Battlefront actually turned out pretty good. I don't think anyone saw that coming. I wouldn't necessarily say it's a direct improvement over the original, but it's not really a step backwards either. People seem to be so stuck on how amazing Battlefront 2 is. Go replay it, it wasn't actually that great of a game lol. I mean it was good and fun but it wasn't blow your balls off amazing. This game has done well by the series as far as i'm concerned. 6.5 is a pretentious as hell score, but then again that's once again why number scores are completely useless and arbitrary.

I suppose the average scoring of the game being 7 and the countless 6's and 7's mixed in with the very VERY rare 8's and 9's make all of those scores pretentious as well?

I don't need to be force fed mindless rewards, what I would rather have is an actual continuous unlock system that entices me to continue playing the game. What is there to motivate my continued dedication to the multiplayer other than mindless enjoyment for the gameplay, for gameplay I already stated got incredibly repetitive merely hours later?

And also hopefully to my credit, most reviews have already stated that they gave it the score they did, whether high or low, based on the fact that they'd probably only play it for a week before never touching it again. Why would I

Usually I ignore your comments as the typical Hells Malice being Hells Malice again but I figured I would at least try to give you a solid answer to your comment.

Ah, and to credit my claim of multiple 6's and 7's.

http://opencritic.com/#!game/1511/star-wars-battlefront

Even looking at the first 5 echo the same complaints I had. Lack of content and overly repetitive. Either we are all in on a conspiracy or this is a legit concern.

Perhaps my opinion is a bit harsh on the game but I kept an open mind to what was available and gave my opinion. I'm not a fan of the scoring system either and would much prefer to leave it off but hey, we have to have some standard for rating video games. I'd like to see it go from numeric to just general recommendation with explanation to who would enjoy it, but that's just a pipe dream.

Oh, and just for reference, I never played Battlefront II so I can't attest to any claims of its enjoyment. I reviewed this game solely as its own game, not based on the bearings of the franchise.
 
but hey, we have to have some standard for rating video games.
Problem being this Standard is not standardized.
Angry Joe's and Jimquisitions ideology of scores is "5 = Average" however most gaming sites have the "ideology of 7 = average" (which is stupid af. but okay).
And then there are those who just skip the review look at the score and leave without knowing why the reviewer gave such score.
Really, what I would consider a more useful information than scores is this: http://puu.sh/lrIpn/3dfea83830.jpg even though I dunno if that number is automated (in which case it's probably buggy af.).
 
  • Like
Reactions: chavosaur
Problem being this Standard is not standardized.
Angry Joe's and Jimquisitions ideology of scores is "5 = Average" however most gaming sites have the "ideology of 7 = average" (which is stupid af. but okay).
And then there are those who just skip the review look at the score and leave without knowing why the reviewer gave such score.
Really, what I would consider a more useful information than scores is this: http://puu.sh/lrIpn/3dfea83830.jpg even though I dunno if that number is automated (in which case it's probably buggy af.).
I agree, I don't think 6.5 is indicative of a bad score at all. I usually think of 5 as the middleground average, 7 being the recommended dependent on audience, and 9+ being the EVERYONE NEEDS TO EXPERIENCE THIS GAME. But again, like you said, because it is so objective, no one would see my score that way. They would see it as below average and immediately question credibility, which is unfortunate :/
 
I agree, I don't think 6.5 is indicative of a bad score at all. I usually think of 5 as the middleground average, 7 being the recommended dependent on audience, and 9+ being the EVERYONE NEEDS TO EXPERIENCE THIS GAME. But again, like you said, because it is so objective, no one would see my score that way. They would see it as below average and immediately question credibility, which is unfortunate :/
That's sort of how I tend to look at the scoring systems. My comment about such things being arbitrary was meant to encompass the idea that each individual has different tastes, so a score is never quite accurate.
 
"Cons
- Lacking progression incentives"

ITR: Someone who has to be force fed mindless "rewards" for playing to enjoy it.

I must admit I find the idea of progression systems in instanced multiplayer games to be an odd one and I would have to consider things long and hard should I be implementing such a system in a game I am responsible for. With that said it does seem to be the way things are done these days and noting it, or indeed a lack thereof, in some capacity.
 
The biggest problem I have with this game is they took an iconic series and tried to reboot it in a lackluster manner. I mean I understand they wanted to go for new and modern gameplay mechanics but as it stands now this feels more like Battlefield: Starwars Reskin Edition. It's not a bad game but it's nothing like battlefront and that may be why some reviewers are giving it such a hard score.

tl;dr: If you're going to reboot a game franchise at least make it similar to the origonals.
 
Does anyone else find it frustrating that for the first bunch of hours that you are just canon fodder until you level up to around rank 10 and get some half decent weapons????
 
I somewhat disagree with the "progressive incentives" point - in my opinion, multiplayer games should have no progression other than leaderboards and maybe character/weapon skins. Games like CoD that have a leveling system implemented create an unbalanced playing field for newbies - every participant should have access to the same arsenal from the get-go - competitive gameplay is about skillfully using the arsenal to your advantage, not "unlocking" guns that guarantee victory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CathyRina
My issue with this game is that I find the card system breaks the multiplayer. When I'm playing I tend to be killed by cards more than guns, which shouldn't be the case in a shooter game. The cards are basically free kills that you don't need to do anything to earn. I think they should've either made the cards have a limited amount of uses per life, or have it so you need to recharge them by killing opponents. A good shooter game should largely be gun-on-gun, not card-on-card. That's just my opinion though.
 
Review cover
Product Information:
  • Release Date (NA): November 17, 2015
  • Release Date (EU): November 17, 2015
  • Release Date (JP): November 17, 2015
  • Publisher: EA
  • Developer: DICE
  • Genres: FPS
  • Also For: Computer, PlayStation 4
Game Features:
Single player
Local Multiplayer
Online Multiplayer
Co-operative

Reviews

  1. Step into post-apocalyptic Northern Finland in Rauniot, Act Normal Game’s debut point-and-click title. Let’s click away!

  2. Australia-based indie developer Drop Bear Bytes’ debut title, Broken Roads, launches today on PC and consoles. Does this new cRPG have what it takes to stand toe-to-toe to its contemporaries?

  3. Ereban: Shadow Legacy is Baby Robot Games’ debut title that merges classic stealth mechanics with a fast-paced ability to merge with shadows. Should you allow it to sneak into your PC gaming library?

  4. South Park is back in the gaming sphere with the followup to Obsidian’s hit duo of RPGs, South Park: Snow Day!

  5. Capcom’s latest JRPG, Dragon’s Dogma 2, takes you on a mediaeval fantasy adventure as The Chosen One. Should you take on this quest?

Site & Scene News

General chit-chat
Help Users
    SylverReZ @ SylverReZ: @Sonic Angel Knight, Yes.