Top
610°
8.0

Star Wars Battlefront Review - IGN

Star Wars Battlefront captures the essence of Star Wars beautifully, harnessing the most exciting and memorable pieces of the universe for a unique and spectacular combat sandbox. Aside from awkward performances and a poor original score, Battlefront is a master class in aesthetic authenticity. Beyond a few essential modes built for casual competition, however, Battlefront is unfocused, relying on excess game types to compensate for an absent single-player campaign.

The story is too old to be commented.
Paytaa1065d ago

Too many game modes 8/10

Bimkoblerutso1065d ago (Edited 1065d ago )

IGN being IGN...

I think in this case, though, he was trying to say "too many game modes for the sake of having game modes." There's only two modes anyone is ever going to be playing, honestly...

In general, most reviews are simply reiterating that the core game feels empty after a few hours of play.

nix1065d ago (Edited 1065d ago )

Such a sham this game is. It's like the full game is priced 2 times the normal cost. Learned ones will be staying away from it. Sadly the hardcore fans and the uneducated ones will gobble it up.

I was quite close to buying this game on PSN then i saw the Deluxe version where they added the DLC also. I got pissed just looking at that. Anyways I bought the Bloodborne DLC so I'm settled.

This Star Wars is a 7/10 game.

Paytaa1065d ago

Yeah I played it on EA Access and I got bored after about 2 hours. Fighter Squadron was probably the most fun I got out of it. The combat feels like it plays for you and I'm not a fan of that and the lack of depth really hurt this game.

I'd much rather play any Battlefield over Battlefront.

Such a shame too since BF1 and BF2 were and still are legendary.

Farsendor11065d ago

I have played every game mode more than once and I don't plan on stopping. This game is fun

Skate-AK1065d ago

Reminds me of Hardline. A bunch of game modes but some are never played.

OB1Biker1065d ago (Edited 1065d ago )

'There's only two modes anyone is ever going to be playing, honestly... '

Right that's about the tale going around the Internet pretending only the content for those 2 modes 'counts'
Whatever

@nix
You complain about the price but you were going to buy from PSN? It's a lot cheaper on retail in case you don't know. Digital is a rip off for most games.

Bennibop1065d ago

I am sure DICE will address some of the game modes once they start receiving good data. Plus other modes etc are on there way.

Jubez1871065d ago

Honestly people only ever play 1-2 game modes and maybe 3-4 maps. When I played the shit out of BF3, I only did conquest and I only remember about 4 maps maybe.

I'd rather have balanced game modes and good maps than just content galore that sucks. The only thing that truly felt lacking in the beta was the character customization. They should have done a class sytem.

1065d ago
_-EDMIX-_1064d ago

@Jubez187- lol agreed. When I play BF, I actually only play rush and conquest. The other modes are not bad, just that I always sorta just focus on those 2 modes and I would put like 400, 500 hours in just those 2 modes lol.

Not saying more modes are not fun, merely that I'll be fine with supremacy and their version of CTF as now that I think about it, I've always sorta just played 1 or 2 modes in FPS MP titles anyway.

In COD4, I rarely played Search and Destroy, but when I did it was pretty damn fun. But I spent most of my time on domination and ground war (or really just Ground war since its actually both modes). I spent over 700 hours in COD4, just playing those modes, I don't think I spent much time in free for all or its other modes.

phallusitator1064d ago

@nix
How can you review (score) a game you didn't buy?

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 1064d ago
1065d ago Replies(1)
ginsunuva1065d ago

This is bullshit - you're oversimplifying a complex situation to the point of no longer adding anything to the discussion.

3-4-51064d ago

I could tell this via the first gameplay footage.

Even after watching 2-3 matches I was bored.

The game will sell because it's Star Wars, but it will also be heavily traded in which will lead to a reduced price sooner than later.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1064d ago
-Foxtrot1065d ago (Edited 1065d ago )

Knock off a point or two because of the Star Wars name and you'll get nearer to the actual score.

If this was a brand new IP it would be getting torn apart...although saying that Evolve was new and they ignored that games missing content, DLC plans and how shallow the game actually was.

Anyway seems like a safe 8 review...oh look it rhymes aswell...are "safe 8" reviews a thing...maybe I should TM it <draws a little TM in mid air>

http://24.media.tumblr.com/...

I mean the review doesn't scream an 8...it basically reads "It's pretty and has a lot of eye candy but it lacks content".

RalphBlutawn1065d ago

My god Fox you hate this game with a passion.

-Foxtrot1065d ago

I hate shitty practices what this game does a lot of...plus ruining Battlefront in the process

Stop supporting games like this, publisher looses money, they'll finally learn their lesson...it's the only way and it stops them doing it to other franchises old and new

DarkOcelet1065d ago

He is right mate. This game has the exact same issues as Evolve and it doesnt have enough to deserve an 8/10. Just like Evolve and how IGN gave that game a 9/10 still blows my mind.

shadowknight2031065d ago

Totally spot on. They ruined the name of battlefront.

Gority1065d ago

@foxtrot You can hate the game all you want, but they didn't "ruin battlefront." The originals are still there, you can still play them. You're just whining like every battlefront thread because the game isn't how you would want it.

Rhezin1065d ago

It deserves to be hated. EA are money grubbing SOB's, it's pretty clear to everyone it's a rushed game, charging full price, $50 season pass, and they're ALREADY talking sequels. It's disgusting...

garrettbobbyferguson1065d ago

I can understand why. If he's anything like me, it means the only titles in a franchise he has held dearly will be nothing like what he enjoyed so much. Then you have clowns telling you to go back and play the older games because the title fits their flavor of the month.

Gority1064d ago

@Garrett

I didn't say "Go back and play the old ones." I said the new ones don't ruin the old ones, they are still there. I don't see how you guys are taking this as some huge gaming sin. Battlefront was DEAD. It has been resurrected, albeit in a different form. You were getting nothing before, but getting something now. You aren't LOSING anything.

Aeery1064d ago

@DarkOcelet:

No, sorry, your comparison is very, very wrong.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1064d ago
mkis0071065d ago

You are asking people not to buy the next iphone.

-Foxtrot1065d ago

We're not talking about Apple or mobiles we're talking about games

1065d ago
mkis0071064d ago (Edited 1064d ago )

Really confused...1. I have never once bought an apple product. 2. I am enjoying battlefront.3. I thought my analogy was pretty good...

The point was people will buy what they want to buy.

JonnyBigBoss1065d ago

The truth hurts. This game would be considered a tragedy if it didn't have the Star Wars IP to give it easy allure.

1065d ago
Dario_DC1065d ago

Most of Multiplayer only games have these issues, like TitanFall, Evolve and now Battlefront.
MP only games aren't worth full price at all.
In this case the Star Wars name is helping it a lot, that's why I'm buying it, the Star Wars fan in me is winning lol, and because it has split screen (mandatory for me!) so I can play with the GF

WellyUK1065d ago

"Ruining Battlefront" it's as if people think the old games were the best games ever... They weren't, it's nostalgia talking.

The problem with these games is that they are good but don't have enough content, Titanfall for example is a brilliant fps yet it lacks content same with Evolve great concept but lack of content.

From what I've seen Battlefront does seem to have more content than both but it's still not enough especially compared to Battlefield.

People will buy this and like it, you just have to deal with that.

SharnOfTheDEAD1065d ago (Edited 1065d ago )

Some people have got bigger rose tinted spectacles than Elton John!

SharnOfTheDEAD1065d ago

If you took out the Star Wars bits out the movies theyd be shit too

Gamble201065d ago (Edited 1065d ago )

I'm not saying this game is perfect because it's definitely not. However to say "if this wasn't Star Wars the score would be lower" is just ridiculous. You could use that logic for almost any game that isn't a brand new IP. This is a Star Wars game, so it gets graded as a Star Wars game. In fact the Star Wars aspect of the game is the only part most would agree they did perfectly right. If they completely butchered and betrayed the Star Wars license people would be grading them lower and you'd have complaints like "if this wasn't a Star Wars game the number would be higher". Yes, we grade this in relation to the subject of the game, not just the general genre. And we should do that. Would a new IP get the same score? Probably not. But a new unrelated IP also wouldn't help me or other consumers relieve childhood memories of battling in the Star Wars universe, that's why it gets more credit.

SegaGamer1065d ago (Edited 1065d ago )

Typical IGN, they wouldn't dare give an overhyped game from a rich game company a lower score, they are ass kissers.

antz11041064d ago

Eh, if this game received a 10/10 you would still be dumping on it.

This game is still averaging out to be a good game but haters talk about it like it's abysmal failure receiving all 4s and 5s.

_-EDMIX-_1064d ago (Edited 1064d ago )

"Evolve was new and they ignored that games missing content"

? Missing? How can something be "missing" of content that was never promised in the game in the first place? You know what is "missing"? Something that was marketed to be in the final product, only to play it to find out its not there, that is false advertising and against the law.

Is that what happened or are you now merely assuming what you "think" should be in the game and counting it as "missing"?

Lets get this straight, its wrong to advertise or market a title to have something in it, that for a fact it doesn't.

Do either of these titles lack content that was promised, yet not featured upon release? As it sounds like your whole argument is based on what you "think" it should release with vs what it actually is.

That is like me getting mad at Mario Kart and Nintendo because its not a FPS game.

@Antz- because they can't stand that others like the game, that millions will buy the game and that DICE will now be the developer in charge of the MOST successful Battlefront series.

They can't take that DICE will be known for Battlefront by MILLIONS MORE then Pandemic and they live with rose tinted glasses. Your talking about folk that are mad at a game for being something it was never even marketed to be.

The level of intelligence that might get mad at Call Of Duty for not being an RPG, something it was never stated to be lol

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 1064d ago
gantarat1065d ago

+ Huge sandbox
+ Great co-op missions
+ Spectacular multiplayer

- Weak game modes
- Weird music and VO

8.0/10

ABizzel11065d ago

What it really should have said was

+Huge sandbox "for Star Wars fans"
+Great co-op missions "for a couple of hours"
+Spectacular multiplayer "VISUALS"

-Some games modes are pointless
-Needs more maps, not behind a $50 paywall

Also it's VERY casual friendly, which makes sense and allows all kinds of fans of Star Wars to come in and not feel like they completely suck at shooters, but it does make it a bit too easy IMO.

aconnellan1065d ago

"Spectacular multiplayer VISUALS"

Does that mean you don't like the gameplay? Just curious to know - I only had limited time in the beta so I don't know for sure how good/bad it was

In regards to being very casual friendly, the old Battlefronts were also well known for being very casual friendly, so I don't feel that's the best point to make

DarkOcelet1065d ago (Edited 1065d ago )

Called it. I knew IGN would give it either 8/10 or 9/10.

This game is basically like Evolve. Low Content, Overpriced Dlc, no campaign, gets boring after 10 hours but IGN gives it an 8/10.

-Foxtrot1065d ago (Edited 1065d ago )

Look at the positives man, they make no sense or are clutching for straws

"Huge sandbox" - Like it's an open world game or something

"Great co-op missions" - No many though...won't be great after the 30th time in under a week.

"Spectacular multiplayer" - Can't even find anything else to say so they just sum up the entire multiplayer, the main thing about the game as it's a multiplayer title...basically "the game is good"

Rachel_Alucard1065d ago

Don't forget to add other buzzwords like "Visceral", "World Building", and "solid." None of these words have any real conclusive description yet they get tossed around reviews and game descriptions day in and day out.

TwoForce1065d ago (Edited 1065d ago )

I'm glad i bought BO 3 over this. My wallet will go to BloodBorne The Old Hunter and Just Cause 3. A game with full content will make me happy, but this one is not.

1065d ago
ABizzel11065d ago

8/10 is the lowest score their overseers allow them to give it after their checks clear.

Just image the check they had to get after the Evolve fiasco.

HaydenJameSmith1065d ago (Edited 1065d ago )

It's got more content than Black Ops 3 MP side of things and it to has a $50 Season Pass, short derivative campaign but nobody is complaining about that game... why is Battlefront suddenly put on this pedestal above every other shooter. It's launching with more content than BF4, another game nobody complained about lack of content for.

Whether you like the gameplay or not is completely subjective. It's designed to be arcady like the previous games... if your not into that in a shooter then that's your prerogative but it's trying to be Battlefront not a cutting edge shooter like Battlefield. And as a result some people will get bored after a few hours and that's like a lot of shooters nowadays anyway.

If this game had a 5 hour story (which would result in less content on MP) and a Galactic Conquest mode the reviews would be more favorable. Even though everybody just plays the MP and that's where all the value is.

ArchangelMike1065d ago (Edited 1065d ago )

"if this game had a 5 hour story and Galactic Conquest mode..." it would be getting 10/10 scores all round. Those two factors would have substantially increased the value proposition of the game, and are the two biggest things that people wanted in the game.

Soldierone1064d ago

You see content as what? Maps? Or? I fail to see how this game has more content than BO3 and Battlefield.... Both of those games have lots of weapons, lots of load-outs, classes, a strong tier of progression, tons of community features, and so on. Battlefront has none of that. (BO3 is missing a few things and people ARE picking at it)

BO3 also has a full fledged Zombie mode AND single player. People keep saying "if Battlefront had SP it'd hurt the multiplayer" yet the multiplayer is clearly lacking anyways, so what did they add that would otherwise be cut? The season pass? Plus Battlefield has had SP for a couple games now and still has a massive multiplayer....

Facing facts here Battlefront has always had a somewhat lackluster content package, and yet DICE couldn't even get to all of that let alone make a complete experience.

captainexplosion1064d ago

LOL at SW Battlefront having more MP content than Blops 3. Blops 3 has more (and MUCH deeper) MP content, plus 1000x more Co-op, plus two campaigns.

Nodoze1065d ago

Look at the ad space EA bought on IGN....follow the money.

antz11041064d ago

So did you play this for 10 hours? Let's face it Evolve failed because the 4 on 1 chase mechanic was very boring. This game is literally nothing like that.

Aeery1064d ago

No it's not like evolve. This is false and inaccurate.

Get boring after 10 hours ?
Did you play this game ?

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1064d ago
trywizardo1065d ago

for me , i won't buy this game right now , a lot o sites says that its broke and lack content , maybe next year with the ultimate edition or game of the year edition with all the content and more stability

CorndogBurglar1065d ago

The game isn't "broke" at all. It runs perfectly. Does it lack content? Sure. Does it have some game modes that are less that spectacular? Yes.

Does the game deserve to be panned for anything other than that? No. Its a great game. It just slightly missed the mark with some of its modes and it needs more content.

Just think what a Galactic Conquest mode by itself would have done for this game. Again, its not a bad game. It just needs a bit more.

Petebloodyonion1065d ago

I'm sorry but let me ask you this as a consumer I have a choice to make. Now I don't like Bops3 but the game have a Single player, a zombie mode and a great multiplayer and it score around 8 to 9 as average

Now someone please explain how just a robust multiplayer with no single and 10$ more pricey = same rating meaning same value?

Sorry but unless the Mutliplayer would have been miles ahead of Halo or Bops 3 then I don't see how this game can score as high!

HaydenJameSmith1065d ago (Edited 1065d ago )

@Pete

All the value is in the MP. Most people spend about 50-100 hours plus in the MP and a campaign can only offer you a short experience. Please tell me how a short 5 hour derivative campaign, which would result in less content in the MP likely, would give you much more value to the game. If anything it'd be taking value from the game.

And this game does have a single player with the offline mode which are training, survival and Battles (against A.I.)

I want a campaign as well but DICE are just not that good at Single Player Story so is it a huge loss ? I don't think so... as a result there is more MP content there than BF4 or Hardline (the last 2 EA shooters) and yet everyone is complaining about lack of content.

ChuckTheIceMan1065d ago

@Petebloodyonion this is why game rating sites are complete rubbish! I don't even play COD multiplayer and I think BO3 is 3 times the game that BFront is. I don't know how anyone could have actually played both and given them a similar score. I mean BO3 even has a second campaign after you beat the regular one that's polluted with zombies. Plus the zombies multiplayer and the regular campaign. And if it's your thing it also has multiplayer. Battlefront has ONLY multiplayer! That's it! It's like a skinned bastardized version of Battlefield 4!

trywizardo1065d ago

didn't you see any review ?! they say the gameplay become repetitive very quickly and the unlocks are just a few so after a while there is nothing encourage you to collect coins and XP ...
so maybe they can fix some of those , IDK how , but those are a game fundamentals so they must be fixed

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1065d ago
ABizzel11065d ago

I say wait until more potential free content drops (specifically maps), and more than likely a price drop.

The game isn't broken, and it's not bad, it just gets old fast due to the utter lack of content and casual play, and it's just no really worth $60.

If they release a lot more content (we're talking at least 4 more planets), and it drops to $40 then consider it.

Ark_1065d ago

They are still selling BF4 (+ Premium) for 50 bucks two years after release. I don't exspect a reasonable price for Battlefront anytime soon.

DEAD-DEVIL-DISCO1064d ago

I bought this for my sons 9th bday this friday. He isnt allowed Mrated online shooters. But loves a tablet mp shooter named pixel guns. Anyone think he will dig this with it being easy casual and racking up killstreaks easily ?