The Division 2 (BETA)

These days, signing up for a BETA even months in advance doesn’t usually mean jack, not when they’re pushing pre-orders to guarantee access or doing key give-aways via social media for promotion. Which is why I was kind of surprised to receive a BETA key for The Division 2. I played the original in BETA and eventually picked up the game in a sale. You can read my review here.

And honestly, after playing my way through this BETA, it feels like I could just repost my review of the original with a few tweaks and get away with it. Everything The Division did well, the Division 2 also does well. And everything The Division didn’t do so well . . .

The Division 2 is set some time after the events of the original. The virus that plagued New York has now spread and society as we know it has almost completely collapsed. The game is set in Washington D.C and like the original, The Division 2 makes good use of its setting. One of the best things about The Division was exploring the world, and the same remains true in the sequel.

The map is broken down into various sectors, each with a level recommendation. The BETA offered a fairly generous quantity of content with three main (story) missions and several side quests to complete. There was no character creator – only a limited randomisation tool – although I must say, I don’t recall the characters in the original looking quite as goofy as they do here.

 

There were three entire sectors to explore, with random events popping up to earn extra experience, and several enemy outposts to capture. Like the original, each sector has a similar pattern of content, so once you’ve completed one, you’ll know exactly what to expect in the next.

And I guess that’s my first real issue with The Division 2 – the lack of surprise. Like the original, the content is structured in a very repetitive manner, as is your progression. This isn’t an issue that’s unique to The Division 2 – I had the same concern about the upcoming Anthem.

The ‘games as a service’ model is about keeping people engaged – keeping them playing. So you build a repetitive gameplay loop which is simple, familiar and fun. And there’s nothing inherently wrong with that approach, but it also means your game, your story and its world can never really surprise the player.

One of my criticisms of the original was that the world never really changed – you never really saw any impact as a result of your actions. And whilst The Division 2 has sought to address this by expanding upon the main base and outpost ‘upgrades’ (which can visually change how those locations appear) the world, as a whole, remains static and unchanged as you progress.

 

Because it has to. Because it’s not just a game but a service model designed to keep you playing and engaged. And you can have fun within that model. It’s mindless and repetitive and you know it’s not really going to surprise you or lead you anywhere particularly exciting, but it can be fun.

The original never really wrapped up its story and I doubt The Division 2 will, either. These aren’t the types of games that are designed to ‘end’. And like the original, The Division 2 seems like it’s going to fall a little flat in the story / character aspects, at least from what I’ve seen in this BETA.

Moving onto something more positive is the combat which, like the original, is pretty fun. There’s nothing special about it – it’s a typical cover based third person shooter. But the shooting feels good, the weapons feel good and the movement feels smooth and responsive. What more can I say? I like the shooty shooty bang bang.

 

As you complete missions and kill bad guys you’ll earn experience and level up allowing you to unlock new skills. You’ll discover or purchase new weapons and equipment which, like the original, are rated on the familiar ‘standard – uncommon – rare – legendary’ style colour coded system. You can also mod weapons, although this felt more restricted in this BETA than I recall in the original.

I’ve probably said ‘like in the original’ a dozen or more times in this post. Sorry about that. But the reality is, from what I’ve seen in this BETA, everything The Division did – both good and bad – the Division 2 does exactly the same. It’s essentially the same game in a new location, and I’m sure that’s going to be enough for many fans of the original.

And – just one more, I promise – like the original, it’s a game I’m sure I’ll eventually pick up on sale, play through the main story so I can have fun shooting bad guys in nice locations and then a week or so later, forget I even played it. It’s The Division 2, ladies and gentlemen – it’s exactly what you expected, nothing more, nothing less.

Total War: Three Kingdoms

Total War: Three Kingdoms is set to be released in a month or so, yet I don’t think I’ve ever mentioned it on this blog. That may seem strange because, if you’ve followed this blog, you’ll know I’m a pretty big fan of the series. So why, unlike previous Total War releases, haven’t I shown much interest?

You might think it’s the setting. Am I just not very interested in this period of history? Well, it’s true that I’m not very familiar with it, but I wouldn’t say I’m not interested in learning. No, I think the main reason I’ve had a lack of interest in the title is because of the Total War: Warhammer games.

The Warhammer games are fantastic, offering what I consider to be the most enjoyable battles of the entire Total War series. I just don’t see how historical titles are going to be able to compete with a game full of monsters and magic. No historical title, particularly one set within a single country, is ever going to be able to compete with the massive variety of units and play styles of Warhammer.

In a way, CA is a victim of their own success. They’ve done such a great job with the Warhammer games that it kind of makes the historical games feel rather limited and dull to play in comparison – at least in the battles.

For Three Kingdoms, or any future historical title to really grab my attention in the battle side of things, I think CA really need to up their game and offer us something we haven’t seen before. That’s not to say 3K doesn’t have some new battle features of its own – such as the duels or the character banter – but from what I’ve seen overall, the battles are pretty much exactly what I expected.

They also look pretty rough. There’s a lack of polish to the battles in terms of combat and movement animations that’s very odd to see, especially when compared to how fantastic the battles look in Warhammer. To be fair, we haven’t yet seen a finished build, but it’s strange to see the battles looking as rough as they do at this stage.

Visually, the battles also look odd. In some videos it doesn’t seem as if the shadows are properly enabled, making everything look flat and lifeless. In some, the textures look very low quality. There’s a very heavy depth of field effect applied across all of the battle maps which not only blurs the background to a ridiculous degree, but also makes it appear as if the textures of the map haven’t properly loaded. In some videos there’s a sharpening effect which is way too strong. And in some the graphics look very washed out, as if the saturation levels are set way too high.

It’s just weird to see the battle side of things looking so rough in 3K when they’ve done such a fantastic job with the battles in Warhammer. Oh, and I’m really not a fan of the green and red unit icons – they’re far too garish. I know a lot of players prefer the floating banners as opposed to icons, but I’m okay with icons, as long as they don’t look totally out of place. The current icons in 3K are pretty jarring to look at it. I think they either need to be changed, or at least tone down the colours to a deeper and darker green and red.

This may all sound very negative, but I’ve actually become far more interested in picking up 3K over the last few weeks despite these concerns. Why? Well, I always knew that 3K would struggle to match Warhammer in terms of battles, but if there’s one area it can (and should) surpass Warhammer in, it’s the campaign.

The Warhammer campaign is a pretty streamlined and simple campaign, which I’m okay with because it perfectly facilitates those fantastic battles, which is the real strength of that series. But if 3k can’t match Warhammer for battles, it really needs to step up in the campaign, and from what I’ve seen, that’s exactly what CA have done.

The campaign of 3K is looking great in pretty much every area. In terms of visuals and audio, it may just be the best looking Total War campaign yet. The expanded diplomatic options, the spying mechanic, the focus on characters and their interactions . . . it’s not only a wonderful way to immerse the player within this period, it also mixes up the traditional Total War campaign formula in a new and refreshing way.

It’s the campaign that’s really got me interested in Three Kingdoms, but am I ready to pull the trigger and pre-order? No, not yet. As much as I like what I’ve seen of the campaign, we still haven’t seen how well it operates in practice. And I obviously have my concerns about the battle side of things. But the good news is that we should be seeing far more of both sides of the game prior to release. I’m cautiously optimistic.

Anthem (BETA)

I can’t honestly say I was very excited for Anthem, but when I saw there was going to be an open demo/beta or whatever you want to call it, I decided to give it a spin. I guess what I’m really trying to say is – I didn’t expect much, but I was still disappointed.

The demo doesn’t open where you’d expect – at the beginning of the game. Instead, it drops you into the game at level 10, presumably after the initial tutorial and plot/character introductions. I guess it allows players to test out more content/upgrades than they’d typically experience during the early missions, but it’s also pretty strange to be dropped into the world without any sort of proper introduction.

Because I’ve not followed Anthem or read anything about it, I really had no clue what was going on, where I was, who anyone was or what the f**k they were all talking about. The demo skips over all of the story / plot / world / character intros, so unless you’ve read all about this stuff in advance, the demo will just leave you feeling confused.

You begin in a large hub area full of npcs, the majority of whom you can’t interact with aside from a message box popping up to tell you that they’re not ‘available’ in the demo. The hub area does look nice, but it’s a pretty lifeless and static area that feels totally disconnected from the actual gameplay. You just (slowly) walk around in first person, following a quest marker to an npc who gives you a mission.

 

Doors magically open as you approach which is really bloody bizarre, and when I tried to enter a bar by passing through a cloth partition, I discovered the cloth was as solid as stone and I had to walk around it. Why even put it there if you’re not going to simulate cloth physics?

I kind of wish I’d stayed out of the bar though, because the one dude I could interact with inside turned out to be an insufferable twat who I just wanted to punch so he’d stop talking. And when you do talk to people in the hub you’ll get the occasional ‘dialogue choice’ although this doesn’t appear to have any real impact on the plot or gameplay.

After navigating this pretty but empty maze of dead eyed weirdos you’ll eventually find your way to your ‘Javelin’ which is basically an Iron Man suit. Entering the javelin triggers a mission start, but before you can begin you must first navigate an even more convoluted maze of menus to customise your javelin and your weapons, but also set up things like mission difficulty and player squads.

The UI/menus in Anthem are clearly console/controller orientated and trying to navigate them with a keyboard and mouse is a real pain in the ass. But once you do finally drop into the open world to begin your first mission, Anthem does begin to improve.

Because there’s no proper tutorials you’ll probably struggle with the flying controls for a little while as you get used to switching between flight and combat. Traversing the open world of Anthem like Iron Man is easily the best thing about the game once you get the hang of it. That said, as fun as flying is, the ‘overheat’ mechanic really got on my tits.

The idea is that if you fly for too long your javelin ‘overheats’ so you have to cool off. There are times you can do this whilst flying by passing through water or (I think) going into a powerless glide, but when you can’t, you’ll find yourself enjoying the flying before dropping back to the ground, waiting for your suit to cool and then taking off again – it’s not so much flying as it is taking really long jumps.

The world looks nice, I guess, and the variety of wildlife is okay, but I don’t know jack about this world and the game doesn’t tell me anything. The opening mission (in fact, all of the demo missions) isn’t very inspiring. You fly a little, land at a cave entrance and then immediately get a loading screen. The world isn’t exactly seamless.

You enter the cave, but then get stuck by a locked door so you have to leave the cave (another loading screen) and then go shoot some bad guys. I don’t know who they are or why they’re bad but you shoot them because they’re red dots on your radar and that usually means they’re bad. It’s the typical ‘stay in this area whilst we hack or download data thing’ as wave after tedious wave of enemies spawn into the map out of thin air.

You eventually kill enough enemies (or they simply vanish into nothing, which happened to me a few times) and then get immediately teleported back to the hub, from third person action game to slow paced first person walking sim. The disconnect between the hub and the open world gameplay is pretty jarring. There were three missions to complete in the demo and none were very exciting.

They also didn’t feel very balanced for a solo player, as during the second mission I encountered a boss enemy that was a frustrating and ridiculous bullet sponge, clearly designed for more than one player. It was one of those bosses who just keep spawning endless waves of supporting enemies. I took the f**ker down, but I must have been slowly whittling down his health for about 5 minutes.

The combat is okay, I guess. It’s not good but it’s not terrible, either. There were moments I had some fun, but that was mostly by exploiting the poor AI and just bunching up enemies for easy multi-kills. Trying to fly and fight can be fun, but it only really works in open areas. Trying to manoeuvre in smaller spaces is a bloody nightmare so it’s often easier to just fight on foot.

The weapons are exactly what you’d expect, as are the special abilities. There’s nothing here you haven’t seen before. The combat can also be incredibly messy. There’s way too many effects popping off at times, making it hard to see what the f**k is going on. And combat just doesn't feel that satisfying. Enemies are just bullet sponges who each take a set amount of shots to kill. They’re not very smart and they don’t do anything interesting. They just stand still or slowly follow you around, continually respawning in waves until the game’s decided it’s time to stop.

It probably sounds like I really hated Anthem or something, but I really didn’t. I just found it so uninspired and by the numbers. There’s nothing unique or interesting about it. Not the world. Not the characters. And certainly not the mission design or combat. Maybe if we’d actually started the game at the beginning and was introduced to these things in turn, I might have actually cared.

Metro: Exodus & The Epic Store

Okay, so let’s break this down and try to keep it simple. Metro: Exodus, the third game in the Metro series was, until a few days ago, available to pre-purchase upon Steam and at least three other PC digital distributors. But now, within only a few weeks to go until release, the game has been pulled from these stores to become a timed, Epic Store exclusive.

Steam released a statement upon its store page for the game describing this move as ‘unfair’ and it’s been strange to see many people – including game media sites – suggesting this is just ‘sour grapes’ from Steam. But Steam are entirely correct. This move is unfair to consumers and the timing is no coincidence.

The exclusivity deal between Epic and Deep Silver (the publishers of Exodus) did not happen overnight. Pulling the game from rival stores mere weeks prior to release is a cynical ploy to drive desperate, last minute pre-purchases (good for Deep Silver) and to generate publicity for Epic’s growing store.

Epic and Deep Silver claim this move is good for consumers as the increased profit margin of the Epic Store can be passed directly onto consumers in the form of lower prices – $10 lower than Steam. But this only applies if you’re living in the United States. If you’re not, then the price of Exodus on the Epic Store remains the same as it was on Steam or, in some regions – because the Epic Store does not match Steam for regional pricing – more expensive.

How anyone can see this as a good move for consumers absolutely boggles my mind. I don’t expect much from game media these days, but their reporting on this situation is an absolute shambles. They seem to be missing the most important point – this isn’t just about Steam, but the removal of Exodus from all rival stores.

I’ve also seen some people equate this situation to console exclusives, but they’re also missing the point. It’s not about platform exclusivity. It’s about store exclusivity. Console exclusives may be locked to a platform, but the consumer still has a choice from which store to purchase the game. With Exodus, that choice has now gone – you pay what Epic charge or you don’t get the game.

This isn’t competition – it’s a monopoly. At least one of the other distributors was offering Exodus at a lower price than the now ‘consumer friendly’ Epic Store. Consumers can no longer shop around, seeking out more competitive prices or discounts. Trying to spin this situation as being purely about Epic vs Steam is lazy and disingenuous.

If Epic want to compete with other distributors they should try offering not only lower prices but a better service. Instead, they’re using their financial clout to try to force people to use their platform. And let’s not forget Deep Silver, who likely timed this announcement to maximise sales prior to the game being pulled from rival stores.

This move isn’t good for consumers. It’s only good for Epic and Deep Silver and that’s why it sucks balls.