E3 2018: EA Play

[kamikazekeeg]

I've been doing the E3 threads for us for abit now, so I'll be doing that again this year also.  I'll be putting up the threads the day before, so we can have casual conversation for the upcoming event, and then as stuff is released and talked about, I'll update the main post with all the relevant information so people who aren't watching the live events can stay in the know.

Kicking off the E3 festivities Saturday is the EA Play event at 2PM Eastern.  We'll be getting multiplayer gameplay and likely more details for Battlefield V, something I'm very excited for.  We'll also get more details on Anthem and what it will overall be as a game. Those are the two known big things, with other surprises expected to happen.

EA has a lot to make up for after their disastrous last year.  As things are at the moment, they are looking up, but this is EA, it's always been EA, so it's always good to feel worried that they'll screw up something.

----------------------------------------------------------

-Battlefield V gets a Battle Royale mode.  More details later, but will have the full Battlefield experience of team play, vehicles, and destruction within it.

-Star Wars: The Fallen Order, set between Episode 3 and 4 coming from Respawn Entertainment next year.

-Solo movie content with some new modes next week.  Clone wars era content with a new Genosis map, and hero/villains will be Dooku, Grievous, Anakin, and Obi Wan.

-Unravel 2 with co-op. Game is out today.

-Sea of Solitude.  New indie platformer?  Didn't get a lot of specific details. Early 2019.

-Command & Conquer: Rivals.  Mobile Game.  I'm sad.

-Anthem out February 22nd.

[jalien]

It starts in a few hours here now, and I'm being optimistic that they might have learned from A Way Out and have another game in that vain or not given up on single-player games entirely. Most people will call me naive, and they are probably right.

[kamikazekeeg]

Battlefield gets a Battle Royale mode, though they aren't talking about it right now and it apparently will still be the Battlefield experience within the mode.  BR with destruction? I'm into that.

New Star Wars game from Respawn for next year.

Solo content next week for Battlefront 2 with some new modes.  Clone Wars content, Genosis map, Grievous, Dooku, Anakin Skywalker, and Obi Wan Kenobi, as Hero/Villain characters.  Out later this year.

New Unravel game with co-op.  Unravel 2 is out today?  Think that is what I heard.

Sea of Solitude announced.  Indie game.  Think it's a puzzle platformer.  I like the art style.

I'm worried that this mobile game is Command & Conquer...Ah fuck, it's Command & Conquer.  I had hoped they'd bring the series back, try to rebuild it, but not like this...not like this...

[seether]

Well better get the worst confer nice out of the way first.

[kamikazekeeg]

Well better get the worst confer nice out of the way first.

It's not even a particularly bad show, but yeah, this was real underwhelming.  It was all pretty expected, though it would've been nice to see what the new Star Wars game would've been.  I see why they wanted to get their show out first compared to anyone else.

[bikingjahuty]

EA's E3 2018 Press Conference: D-

I never go into EA's press conference with high expectations, but it makes me laugh when they actually fall below even those already low expectations. We all knew they were going to show off their sports games, which at this point is their bread and butter keeping them alive. It was the total lack of interesting or new content outside their perfunctory sports franchises that makes me rank them so low. Their big reveal, "surprise" was a stupid, ultra generic platformer with yarn characters and a bastardized mobile version of Command and Conquer.


And then there was Anthem, their next killer app from Bioware which looks wildly underwhelming as well. I'm also not a fan of the more or less forced multiplayer as well. Sadly, my expectations of Bioware are also super low these days and as a studio they about met my expectations as well.


The only thing preventing me from giving EA a huge F is the announcements of a few new games, albeit ones that look very unappealing, which seems to be the consensus if the conference's crowd was any indication. Also you gotta love the fake, bubbly "gamer" girl host, DICE and EA spending a good chunk trying to convince us they're so, so sorry for the Battlefront 2 cluster %$#&, and trying to pander to the Fortnight and PUBG growd in Battfield 5 which actually got a lot of boos. Congrats EA on escaping a complete fail of a conference by a hair. *applause*

[kevininja]

The only things of interest to me were Unravel 2 and Sea of Solitude. Anthem did absolutely nothing for me, even after they showed some gameplay.

Also, who thought it was a good idea to have 10 minutes of C&C Rivals? It was absolutely embarrassing.

[kamikazekeeg]

The only things of interest to me were Unravel 2 and Sea of Solitude. Anthem did absolutely nothing for me, even after they showed some gameplay.

Also, who thought it was a good idea to have 10 minutes of C&C Rivals? It was absolutely embarrassing.

This was a game guaranteed to annoy people too as there hasn't been a legit proper Command & Conquer game in a decade now.  The people most likely to play the game, a somewhat younger crowd needing a new mobile game, don't give a shit that it's Command & Conquer, because it hasn't been relevant in their gaming lifetime.  The older crowd, who actually knows what C&C is, aren't going to be happy with it because it's not even slightly like the old games and are pissed with how EA has treated the series.  Just feels like a lose-lose situation. 

And it was 10 minutes on a throwaway mobile game.  I'm sure glad we got that, rather than learning something about a brand new Star Wars game.

[marvelvscapcom2]

I don't know if Battlefield is the focus of this thread or if this is EA's E3 as a whole.  But I really wanted to blow off some steam about Battlefiled V  lol. 


Battlefield V's trailer might be the most offensive thing i've seen from a game in quite some time.  It borders on disrespect.  I got a good laugh out of it don't get me wrong, I cried laughing at it's expense but it's gone too far.   

I don't like being a fuddy duddy, but why EA!!  You did it again.  The one of few franchises they had in tact still.


If EA or DICE didn't want to show the war any respect whatsoever, they shouldn't claim it to be based on WW2.  They didn't have to. I'm sick of historical accuracy being thrown out the door and things being bent by modern day people who weren't there just because they can for the sake of pleasing the SJW warlords.  Just leave WW2 alone if your aren't going to do it right. 


The blue face paint,  the 360 no scopes out the window,  the female british soldier with a robot prostetic limb, the british soldier with a katana blade on his back like some Dynasty Warriors spin off that never made it.   The 1 arm wielding of a MG-42 machine gun,  BY THE ALLIED FORCES!!   It's a nazi german machine gun being used by the Allied forces.   How does one 1 arm wield fire a 40 pound machine gun?     


The inaccuracy of this is more pathetic than anything Call of Duty has ever done and although this is saying quite a bit, more pathetic than anything EA has done in quite some time.  I normally don't hold video games to too high of a standard to be realistic,  but when you are emulating a war where millions died in, that actually happened.  These companies need to do the game justice or don't try at all.   


If they wanted a fortnite clone, they could have made one.  If they wanted customizable blue faces, dumb outfits and female nazis.  they could have done it.   But to sit there with the gaul of saying  "immerse yourself in WW2 like never before" .  No offense, it's played.  We had World at War and Medal of Honor.  A game not scared to show the swastika or to be historically accurate,  a game that did the war justice and didn't lie to young impressionable kids about the brutality of the war.   


We have Fortnite and PUBG already too, Black Ops 4 and Battlefield V changing their identity to try to keep up with the passing trend of royale games will land them flat on their face.  I doubt i'll buy either entry.   


I'm pretty offended by both of them.  I apologize if anyone here enjoyed those two.  But it certainly was the low point of E3 for me.  Typical of EA though.   

[kamikazekeeg]

Battlefield has never been about historical accuracy.  It's always used it as a playground for gameplay.  That trailer was perfectly fine as it was a clear multiplayer trailer, which is an amalgamation of everything from the war.  So a guy wielding a katana isn't out of place, and a woman fighting on the british side is just because it's a custom character fighting for the British on whatever that map is meant to be.  Most people are seriously blowing it out of proportion.

If wanting historical accuracy, or at least more of it, that's what the singleplayer stories before, which dive into specific battles throughout the wars.

[98dgreen]

I don't think many people play video games for historical accuracy.

[kamikazekeeg]

I don't think many people play video games for historical accuracy.

Most don't and they don't play Battlefield for it.  I think most people are blowing the trailer out of proportion and ignoring all the information and big gameplay overhaul the game is actually getting which is making this sound like the series has a lot more depth in it for the first time in quite awhile.  If the trailer was annoying to anyone, just check out Jackfrags videos on Battlefield V, he lays out all the new information and it's really exciting me as a BF fan. 

I'm even interested in the Battlefield Battle Royale mode if they hopefully do some unique stuff with it.  It has potential to stand out.

[burningdoom]

Boring.

[marvelvscapcom2]

I don't think many people play video games for historical accuracy.

Most don't and they don't play Battlefield for it.  I think most people are blowing the trailer out of proportion and ignoring all the information and big gameplay overhaul the game is actually getting which is making this sound like the series has a lot more depth in it for the first time in quite awhile.  If the trailer was annoying to anyone, just check out Jackfrags videos on Battlefield V, he lays out all the new information and it's really exciting me as a BF fan. 

I'm even interested in the Battlefield Battle Royale mode if they hopefully do some unique stuff with it.  It has potential to stand out.

I think the nearing half a million dislikes in a little over 2 weeks say otherwise.  If you scroll through the comments, you'll find that majority of the community plays the game for historical accuracy and realism.  COD:WW2 also had this problem last year but tidied it up by having a somewhat realistic campaign to save face.   

Sledgehammer had to release statements on this, stressing how multiplayer would be inclusive but campaign will preserve historical accuracy in respect to the war to calm the raging player base,  most of which who do play it for historical accuracy and don't wan't actual wars being skewed by game devs for the sake of pushing modern era political agendas of inclusiveness even if you don't. 

Even if you put historical accuracy aside, which is hard to do with WW2 games, when the game is based on history.... what about realism? That is certainly something most gamers today care about.  People make thousands of videos comparing COD with BF explicitly on the aspect of realism and accuracy,  garnering millions of views.   


I'm all for games not being realistic, they are funner that way.  Same way I like non fiction books.  But label them as such.   Don't have the disrespect to say  "WW2,  the darkest time in human history"  in the description  and have blue man group doing no scopes out of 2nd floor windows with Katana blades on their back.   It was a bit insensitive imo. 














   

[marvelvscapcom2]

Battlefield has never been about historical accuracy.  It's always used it as a playground for gameplay.  That trailer was perfectly fine as it was a clear multiplayer trailer, which is an amalgamation of everything from the war.  So a guy wielding a katana isn't out of place, and a woman fighting on the british side is just because it's a custom character fighting for the British on whatever that map is meant to be.  Most people are seriously blowing it out of proportion.

If wanting historical accuracy, or at least more of it, that's what the singleplayer stories before, which dive into specific battles throughout the wars.

I think a lot of the confusion comes from how they titled their trailers,  they put their multiplayer trailer out which has cut scenes from the campaign trailer and their reveal trailer is their actual multiplayer trailer but even that has mostly cut scenes which multiplayer wouldn't.   It's hard to follow.  But I think you are right.  It might save face with it's campaign like COD WW2 did if it's got some great realism.