The Division - Review Thread
- Thread starter digitalrelic
- Start date
Most entertaining enemies in quite some time for me. Motivation and gameplay are just so dead-on for the setting.
Krappadizzle
Member
It's been my experience with it too. It's a beautiful, fun game with some rather impressive story missions. But at the end, after I had hit 30 and were in all purples, I have lost all motivation to KEEP playing. I just don't care, the shooting is pretty mediocre and it bores me after too long. I had a fun weekend with it, and will play with buddies that haven't gotten the chance to play it w/ a new character, but end-game is very boring and the DZ just doesn't scratch the MP itch I'd like in the way GTAV or Rainbow 6:Siege do.
Pop
Member
There's more than just dailies. And again, that repetitive line doesn't fly even if they threw a "serious" in front of it. Every game is repetitive.
jim2point0
Banned
orthodoxy1095
Banned
Which is what? The missions are very well designed, but I don't know how much longer I can keep replaying them. The DZ can be enjoyable in a group, but I can't see the lasting appeal, especially with how slow the drop rate of useful gear is.
Massive's number one priority should be to crank out new content ASAP.
They are? There is new content coming every month.
Have they mentioned anything besides the two raids though? The game needs more content similar to the main missions, as that is where the game's strengths lie.
The DLC doesn't sound inspiring either.
Mass_Pincup
Banned
Has RexNovis posted yet?
Comrade Crunch
Member
The one in May is apparently adding some new content to the Dark Zone.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
He certainly has a lot to say about the game on twitter.... >_>
Chobel
Member
How so?
grandwizard
Member
Same feelings here. All loot games in the end kind of are the same concept but the Division's is the most transparent about it simply being higher numbers to do more damage to enemies that have higher numbers, and it just goes on and on.
From the short descriptions, they don't sound like they are gonna add anything really substantial to the game:
Adds some sewer levels.
You have to drink that water more often now.
Either a horde mode or something story related, the cynic in me says its a horde mode.
This is of course just by going by those short descriptions and being cynical as fuck, but that is what the AAA-game industry have done to me over the years. If I wanna look forward to meatier "expansions" like they used to be, I look over to developers like Obsidian and CD Project.
SlickShoes
Member
Really good that the OP is being kept up to date with all these scores...
Seems like it's evening out a bit anyway, I quite liked the look of the game but I need some sort of compelling end game, if it's just repeated content then no thanks, they would need to diablo3 it and adapt to not just be a repeat of what you've just played.
Seems like it's evening out a bit anyway, I quite liked the look of the game but I need some sort of compelling end game, if it's just repeated content then no thanks, they would need to diablo3 it and adapt to not just be a repeat of what you've just played.
Laughing Banana
Weeping Pickle
Although... when the game has been marketed and indeed, designed, heavily towards its multiplayer elements, wouldn't it to be expected that you wouldn't value it high if you are approaching it as strictly single player game when *everything* about it screams "go play MP!"...?
Nah Eurogamer are done with scores so you cannot assign a number to it.
It's recommended game in their opinion, end of.
Was wondering this when I posted Eurogamers review yesterday.
OP is sleeping, and we can't have that with these online games that review really late.
texhnolyze
Banned
Why does it matter anyway?
Eventhough the OP is filled with all 6 and 7 reviews, the open/metacritic will still be sitting at 83 right now.
Lanrutcon
Member
Well, it's a review thread
the reviews matter.Glad the metacritic has stabilised though.
WaterAstro
Member
Wow, the first page of posts was like "Great Reviews!" and there's a lot of not great reviews afterwards.
Standard fare for these big games, some publications are a wee bit too eager to get out in front with their reviews
digitalrelic
Banned
OP has been updated w/ current Metacritic/Opencritic scores and Polygon/PC Gamer reviews.
I can't find any info from Massive that claims they'll add new missions through the expansions.
From the Year One trailer, it only shows that the DLC will focus on exploring the subway, converting the entire map into the Dark Zone, and some type of tower defense mode, all of which sound like a complete waste of money
This is a beautiful reaction gif.
I am not playing the Division so I can't comment on its quality, but it seems fitting that the more time spent with the game the more thoughtful the review seems to be.
I just looked at his Twitter and man...
I wish I'd had the time to shitpost a game I actually don't want to play as much as he does.
Seems like kind of an illness tbh.
Dude is a real crusader.
TheNamelessOne
Member
This is the best gif I ever did see.
That actually sounds a lot more intriguing.
I honestly just hope that the "expansions" as they call them adds also something little more substantial than just maybe 1 or 2 gameplay tweaks like this. While turning the entire city into a Dark Zone sounds great, I do hope they also will add more enemy types and classes, weapons, abilities etc. Things that add more verticality to the gameplay than just more content horizontally (like more maps).
Anton Sugar
Member
I think that review made the mistake of comparing TPS to FPS gunplay. They feel inherently different, and it's stupid to compare them.
Compare playing Battlefront in third person and first person. Even though third person offers a great FOV, I feel like accuracy, and shooting in general, feels "better" in first person.
Having said that, I think The Division has some of the best TPS gunplay out there.
Xaero Gravity
NEXT LEVEL lame™
I don't know if I should find it pathetic, or sad.
Lan Dong Mik
And why would I want them?
lmao at this gif
lol no kidding. The most amusing part of this was the his veiled attempt at concern trolling. I've never quite understood how folks can get so emotional about something THEY ARENT GOING TO PLAY.
Honestly if I don't like it I just don't play it.
oh god :lol
Yeah, I'm the opposite. There aren't many standouts as far as TP shooting mechanics, but I don't find myself impressed by what I experienced with the Division. I actually find that the shooting itself takes a backseat to the environments and rpg system. Where I find Destiny amidst other FPS is a clear standout. I agree the comparison will always be dumb though.
I really liked the shooting at first, but in the later levels I've started to enjoy it less, I think due to the factors you mentioned. It starts to feel much more like an RPG and less like a shooter. I kept wondering why people were complaining about bullet sponge enemies as 1-20 didn't feel that way at all to me. It really kicks in once you get to the areas that have wandering elites, and 90% of the time they just charge at you constantly with a machine gun, flame thrower, or shotgun. Pretty much the only thing you can do solo is keep running away constantly. If you pop out to shoot or try to run between cover the LMG will drop you to less than a single bar within half a second burst, and they seem to have perfect aim across long distances with weapons that should have very heavy recoil and poor stability/accuracy. It starts to feel much more like an RPG grind combat and less like shooter combat; I'd argue that even Fallout 4 feels better as a shooter, and it's literally labeled as an RPG. I'm still enjoying the game, but the combat really started to dip for me late in the level progression.
Edit: Why hasn't any FPS ever had enemies that carry multiple weapons and switch between them? Rather than make the LMG have better accuracy for NPCs to avoid players simply sniper-camping it, it should switch to a longer distance weapon if it knows you're too far out. Or when it runs out of ammo it pulls out its sidearm if you're in close combat. Having just considered this, I'm really at a loss as to why it hasn't been happening in shooters already for a long time now.
cleveridea
Member
Yeah I was explaining why people gave the bad scores not that I agreed with it
Even though I only play the game single player (I'd rate it 6), if I had to post a review I would gave given the game a higher score to account for those features (8/10) that the game includes but are what I personally dont value
The game looks and plays amazing on PC, and I am very optimistic for the franchise because the biggest issue I have (few enemy types) should be easily fixible with DLC
Comrade Crunch
Member
Depends on how staunch you are, are you willing to give any of the MP or coop stuff a try? If not, I probably wouldn't recommend it. The game is still fun alone, but you'd be missing out on a lot if you only played that way.
I don't have a lot of time to play (30-40 minutes every other day or so) so I can't really coordinate with other people in such a small window (unless you can join random people quickly). For that reason, I'll be mostly playing alone. Thanks for your input.
Comrade Crunch
Member
Matchmaking is pretty quick with randoms, and they're usually pretty decent at the game, especially at the higher difficulties.
bestfieldscup
Neo Member
as someone whose gaming time is going to be cut to around same as yours, what type of games do you usually play if you don't mind me asking
I'll back this up. I've had nothing but pleasant experiences with randoms
Hell, I had an enjoyable couple of hours in the Dark Zone with three match-made randoms, without any of us using a mic
It reminded me of Dark Souls in a way