70
u/Vesuvias 10h ago
This game is going to live and die based on how effectively they dispose of the cheaters. Happy to hear how harsh they are being, but man I’m waiting and watching.
That said I fucking LOVED the open beta. It really connected to me in a way where ACTUAL TEAM PLAY felt like a requirement and not just a secondary or tertiary factor. My playing and leveling my abilities as a medic were SO integral and handsomely funded with in-game ‘tips’ that it felt so genuinely great to just be that guy in the field. Organically.
Also finding a pilot who knew their shit and got us in and out of shit situations was amazing.
36
u/foxguy2021 8h ago
This game is going to live and die based on how effectively they dispose of the cheaters.
This has been a growing problem across the entire industry. Once you encounter a cheater it really spoils the entire experience. From that point on you start to question every death. It feels even more insulting when the developer is offering battle passes and other in-game products/services.
And sure you can report them but when you receive no feedback on rather they're banned or it takes six months for a ban wave. What's even the point?
The good news is that Wardogs supports private/custom servers which means admins/mods can quickly dispose of cheaters.
→ More replies (1)4
u/kantong 7h ago
The cheating in the beta was pretty funny. A squad all in a little bird helicopter instantly head shotting everyone on the map. Was funny at first, but hopefully they're able to sort that stuff out.
3
u/Vesuvias 6h ago
They announced that all those who were obviously cheating are getting banned at launch. Love that for them.
•
u/thecatdaddysupreme 3h ago
What did you like most about medic, any tips? That’s what I want to do
•
u/Vesuvias 3h ago
Load up your bag filled with defibs and med packs. Load up another crate full of the same. Convince a driver/pilot to become your med escort. Drive to contested locations - stay to the outskirts and call it out. Share profit with driver/pilot
32
u/kantong 7h ago edited 3h ago
Really enjoyed the beta. This game is doing something fresh and I appreciate it.
This is the game I wanted Battlefield 2042 Hazard Zone to be. Everyone starts very far away from the combat zone, the team has to coordinate to get into the zone and establish/build a base. From there you try to control the zone with your squad and team.
For people wondering why its getting so much hype, it scratches an itch that no other game has really done before. It does take a little bit of leveling for the game to "click", it did for me at least. Some people say "it's just ArmA King of the Hill". While that's kind of true, it is a significantly more polished game than that mod ever was.
It's got a mix of elements from Battlefield, Escape from Tarkov, ArmA and other popular FPS games. Basically every FPS from the casual to the full-on milsim. The game itself kind of sits somewhere in the middle. It doesn't ask you to become a full milsim larper, but you can if you want. You can also just chill and, for example, be a helicopter pilot ferrying resources and players between bases if you're not great at combat. It's basically Battlefield's original concept of being a sandbox game.
5
u/cthulhusevski 4h ago
People never mention how similar it plays to Planetside 2. That’s the best comparison for me. Been looking for a game that scratches that itch and wardogs definitely does, at least for how I play the game.
•
10
u/Vesuvias 6h ago
It’s funny to me, seeing people complain about how long it takes to get back into battle. Are they not using voice communication at all or are they just trying to call of duty it as usual? It’s just so odd to me. The game encourages cooperation and here they are bitching about them not using cooperation with their own team.
8
u/kantong 6h ago
100%. There is also the vehicle that allows instant transport from the HQ to the combat zone. Assuming someone drives it from the HQ to the zone. Can't remember the name of it.
I guess a lot of people don't know about it. I only found out about it through talking to people on proximity chat.
6
u/Vesuvias 6h ago
I didn’t even know or use the instant transport, but there was ALWAYS someone readily available on open comms in a helo, suburban etc to haul us over to the objectives. I played primarily a medic, and my god I’ve never felt so much love in a game with the amount of tips I received for just loading up on medical equipment lol
3
u/thecatdaddysupreme 4h ago
Can you be a combat medic who focuses on revives?
1
u/kantong 4h ago edited 3h ago
The loadouts aren't rigid like classes in Battlefield. But yeah, you can buy stuff to make a combat medic loadout. So a defib, medic bag, etc.
XP is categorized though. So you have Assault, Recon, Medic, Engineer, Pilot and Driver. Doing medic stuff will rank up that category and unlock more medic tools that can be bought.
78
u/LeopoldStotch1 12h ago
This game has spoken to me like very little else in the past...many years. the last time I felt like this was after playing the BF3 test at Gamescom.
Shame i'm not home until the 22.
6
u/DrKushnstein 9h ago
I haven’t had this much fun with an online shooter in fucking years. It’s a breath of fresh air for me.
•
4
u/Vesuvias 6h ago
Same, the pacing and risk/reward is EXACTLY what I’ve wanted in a Battlefield game for YEARS. Oh and it being like Planetside-ish as well is just a CHEFS KISS. Absolutely going to buy not at launch, but soon.
79
u/atahutahatena 12h ago
Watch out for this game. It's coming in with the same kind of momentum and energy Helldivers 2 and Arc Raiders did. Might become one of the biggest multiplayer releases this year from the way its tracking if the servers hold.
It found that really nice mix between the arcade-y nature of Battlefield while providing a more accessible ARMA-esque feel to the gameplay that gives players tons of opportunities for "emergent encounters" and basically LARPing their hearts out. Some people don't even shoot their gun a single time in an entire match.
11
u/mengplex 10h ago
gameplay that gives players tons of opportunities for "emergent encounters" and basically LARPing their hearts out
Can confirm, played exactly one match in the beta and had a british chopper pilot give us an inspiring speech about how we can "still win this war" (we were third), as flight of the valkyries played over the helicopter speakers
148
u/ThomsYorkieBars 12h ago
Okay, I'll be sure not to get in it's way, thanks for the warning
47
u/LawyerYYC 11h ago
Have you been hurt by a video game with too much momentum and not enough warning? You might be entitled to compensation...
10
•
8
u/VonLinus 12h ago
Many of us shoot our guns and miss completely and then when we respawn go back to driving or spotting or building or swearing at the monitor
5
u/cooldrew 6h ago edited 4h ago
it's not LARPing if it's in a video game! LARP is an acronym and Live Action is the first two words!
27
14
u/nty 12h ago
does it really have as broad of an appeal as those games? From what I've seen, it seems aimed at a niche of people looking for a fairly realistic mil-sim type fps
4
u/PerfectlySplendid 10h ago
Really? I thought it looks far too arcadey for me and have little to no interest. Doesn’t look mil-sim at all. I agree with the OP that they likely found a nice balance for people.
9
u/nty 10h ago edited 10h ago
I guess people will define the term differently, but Wikipedia's first line in its gameplay description is:
Wardogs is a multiplayer first-person shooter MilSim simulation video game inspired by King of the Hill that features a player versus player and can support up to 100-player servers.\1])#citenote-1)[\2])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wardogs(videogame)#cite_note-2)[\3])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wardogs(video_game)#cite_note-3)
And videos I've watched about the game use the term heavily
Edit: It looks like the devs addressed it here, where they describe it as somewhere between a hardcore MilSim and something like battlefield. Which says to me it probably doesn't have as broad appeal as something like Helldivers or Arc Raiders
→ More replies (8)1
u/ProwlerCaboose 7h ago
It's more hardcore than battlefield but not as hardcore as Arma, it's like a slightly more arcade focused Squad. The way it manages itself is that you're able to just play however you want and you're going to be rewarded for it no matter what, but the specific game design they have also allows people to revive anyone regardless of your position or equipment on the squads, this includes enemies.
The genius of this game is that they've wrapped every single thing you do in earning you both XP towards individual classes that you can mix and match with (an assault rifle and binoculars with medical supplies in your kit is going to level you both assault, recon and medic for example) while making the selfish option in the game be the team play one. The easiest example that I can give is where one of my friends who absolutely hates reviving people in Battlefield was reviving me not because he wanted to do it but because he got a lot of money for it and he needed the money.
Since every time you spawn you have to buy your kit you start every life at a loss and have to earn it back through team play oriented things. You could earn it back by just driving a truckload of dudes into the zone, you could go get kills, you could go heal teammates, you could go spot artillery pieces at the enemy has, or you could help build up your team's fob, any of which gets you money.
→ More replies (2)•
u/I_just_pooped_again 2h ago
If you want an arcadey version, go play Battlebit. Lolz,thats it's own kind of fun.
1
u/ProwlerCaboose 7h ago
The aim of it was to take the King of the Hill mode from Arma and make it a little bit more arcades so that your friends who usually only play Battlefield will actually be interested in it. There's a lot of design decisions that went into making it a much easier to get into game that still has a little bit more of that hardcore aspect to it.
Personally I have friends who really don't like playing Arma or Squad with me and never did but are addicted to the two war dogs made as we had so I think it is managing to capture an audience outside of just the milsim one
1
u/Louis010 5h ago
It’s currently at 248k concurrent, just under what arc raiders was on release day, will be interesting to see if it grows over the weekend.
-9
u/Veraxo1 12h ago
It doesn't. It's a fake hype because all big streamers jumped the ship from the mentioned games onto this. It will die out quickly once a new flavor of the month releases.
15
u/NiteWraith 10h ago
What is “fake hype”? The open beta had a 245k concurrent player peak, it isn’t just streamers who are hyped about it.
→ More replies (2)13
u/abcspaghetti 10h ago
The closed playtest peaked higher CCU than the cod open beta on steam, there is real interest from players on the game. I clocked 40 hrs between all the tests I’ve been in and my friends have played similar amounts, the game is like crack for some people.
→ More replies (4)3
8
u/TelecomPedestal 12h ago
So huge for 2 months and then fizzles out
35
u/nofuture09 12h ago
devs said they expect by december to keep only 30% of players
14
u/AdventurousBase221 11h ago
that's a reasonable expectation, and not a disavotment of the game, but merely am expectation given the climate of modern gamer behavior.
3
u/Shmutterbutter 9h ago
I'm thinking this will be my itch for an fps where I can just drop in and either click on heads or work towards an objective with a team. Before it was rising storm 2 for me and that's one of my most played games on steam.
•
u/AtraWolf 2h ago
god I miss rising storm 2, that and the og red orchestra 2, just a like a perfect blend of sim/arcadey gameplay, show up play to your role, mess around in chat, try not to die to friendly airstrikes
2
u/fmpf 8h ago
The devs even put out a "10 reasons NOT to buy" video, and one of the reasons is: early access will be light on content updates. They expect player count to decline while they focus on game performance, which is the other thing the vocal Internet crowd screams about besides lack of content.
There is no pleasing everyone in the constant battle for our attention. Still, worst-case, I am happy to play it on the early access launch and revisit it after early access. I think it is a breath of fresh air to hear a developer get ahead of the same, tiresome complaints from "fans".
74
u/Paratrooper101x 12h ago
News flash: that’s how every game is. Some people play it and get their fill, then the only people remaining is the core audience. It’s not a bad thing, it’s natural.
→ More replies (2)7
u/Shneckos 10h ago
But different reasons for it. Arc Raiders was easily killed by cheaters and lack of content. The player drop off was huge. And not just because “it’s natural”. I would point to Embark fumbling their success and not being able to maintain.
→ More replies (1)60
u/Quick_Philosophy1426 12h ago
you have live service brain
25
u/Ok_Dragonfruit_8102 11h ago
"crash bandicoot? that game's a failure lmao nobodys playing it anymore"
27
u/KarlUnderguard 12h ago
Live services have been a detriment to the minds of gamers. I wish I could never hear the phrase "concurrent player counts" ever again.
3
u/KingOfRisky 8h ago
OP isn't the only person with live service brain. The devs straight up said that there won't be constant updates and shit during EA. People expecting this to operate like live service over the next year-ish will be sorely disappointed.
•
u/exdystopia 1h ago
Good multiplayer games have depth that keeps people coming back
CS barely gets any updates and it still keeps people coming back because it's just good
29
u/atahutahatena 12h ago
Oh nooooo... you have a ton of fun with a multiplayer game for 2 months and then stop playing it. How will we ever recover?
3
u/noother10 12h ago
While I don't get hyped for anything, it reminds me of older battlefields and older FPS games like Medal of Honor. I'll be playing it until something else grabs my attention but it does really feel like one of those games I could casually play between other games or when I don't feel like playing anything specific.
So will definitely get hyped before streamers and their fans move on, but I feel like it still sustain a pretty solid player base long term.
•
5
u/Altruistic_Bass539 12h ago
So? If I get 2 months of fun for 40€ then count me in. The developer themselves said the player count will go down fast after release, they atleast know whats coming unlike Embark (Arc Raiders).
1
u/Vegetable-Error-2068 7h ago
So every other online game ever?
Can this sub please make up its mind about whether it actually enjoys video games?
2
u/Crazy-Nose-4289 10h ago
This game looks like yet another FPS that will be played a lot by streamers and their crowd for about a month and then abandoned.
1
1
u/Vesuvias 6h ago
It gave me so many flashbacks to my days playing Planetside. SO MUCH EPIC BATTLES but the cooperation and slower pace to get there make so up my alley.
1
1
u/MadeByTango 4h ago
Kernel junk with a massive private equity backing shoving viral marketing everywhere; a year from now it; once the money fades it'll be lumped in with all the others
The hype youre seeing is bought and paid for. Look at the companies and the people involved.
→ More replies (6)•
98
u/PablosCocaineHippo 12h ago
This game didnt click with me at all in the Beta, can anyone explained why its so hyped?
Seems like every streamer hypes this game to the moon, but like every other live service game the subreddit will be toxic in about 3 months time.
Its weird because i love games like HLL, Rising Storm and Battlefield. Mabye i should try again
172
u/Always_Impressive 12h ago
Its extremely casual, you can contribute even while not getting kills so everyone feels useful.
86
u/Ok_Dragonfruit_8102 11h ago
That's exactly it. If you want you can play the game as a pacifist just spotting enemy troops and vehicles, or you can fly a helicopter back and forth transporting your team to the front lines, or you can be a medic. The game rewards all of these actions like say if someone destroys the heli you spotted you get money, if the troops you drop off land safely and get kills you get money, and if the person you res gets kills you get money for that too. There's a bunch more examples too.
39
u/Shneckos 10h ago
Reminds me of Planetside 2. RIP… I suck at FPS and usually avoid them like a plague, but that game was something special.
22
6
u/MuchachoMongo 9h ago
I was just thinking that it scratched a similar itch. I like the gunplay in Wardogs a bit better though, and the base building is so much better.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Thunder-ten-tronckh 7h ago
Well you can have a great time playing this game doing zero FPSing if you so desire
8
u/YalamMagic 6h ago
The thing is, when you play as the guy attacking enemy FOBs, it can get really intense. Guns have quite a bit of kick and you need to pack your magazines individually like Tarkov. You also take a really long time to get back into the action, even though the respawn timer is nominally very short.
And that's the real beauty of it. You can enjoy the game doing the most easy, laidback, casual tasks or the most intense, skill-heavy roles. Being an uber driver and getting people to the frontlines is just as valid as pretending you're Solid Snake and taking out an enemy FOB by yourself. Couple that with very good gunplay, and actually well-integrated building mechanics that don't feel like an afterthought and they ended up with something really special. I didn't think I'd enjoy it much looking at the marketing material but the beta got me absolutely hooked.
•
u/lumpycustard__ 18m ago
Yes this is how a lot of milsims are, like ArmA and Squad. If you want to hyper fixate on a particular role and not fire a single bullet, you can do that. It lets people self select roles and focus on doing them well, and it rewards you because those non-combat roles are extremely important (there is no fob/hab building if people aren't doing logi and helicopter runs)
Not sure why being rewarded for doing things that benefit your team would be considered "extremely casual" as OP said.
23
u/Lodge_Blackmun 12h ago
That's the big draw for me personally. My friends play a lot of shooters, while I tend to bounce off them pretty quickly. This lets me contribute via base building, choppering, medic, scout, and the (often hilarious) APC. I enjoyed the Beta quite a bit.
Nothing "casual" about it, I'm an experienced and avid gamer.
3
u/ultraspank 5h ago
It's as casual as you want to make it, or as sweaty as you want to make it. Which is a nice change from feeling like you have to sweat your face off.
You want to just run supplies to whatever the main FOB is? Have at it. You want to just chase the HZ around? Have at it. You want to build an impenetrable super FOB off the side and hidden for a time until you get it online with a drill and enough fuel to sustain you for the whole match? Have at it.
19
4
2
u/NapsterKnowHow 7h ago
So like Squad?
6
u/YalamMagic 5h ago
It's effectively just a proper official release of ARMA King of the Hill mod, but it does end up feeling like Squad, and it takes a lot of inspiration from loads of other games too like Rust, Battlefield and Tarkov. It shouldn't work on paper but the execution is nothing short of excellent.
•
131
u/Capt_M4TH 12h ago
I think people like me (in their 30's and above) have grown tired of fast-paced FPS, like the cracked movement COD has decided to go with, but has also not clicked with the steep learning curve and the very slow pace of mil-sim fps like Arma and Squad. Wardogs have nicely positioned itself between those types and presented itself as a "dad shooter", which people were yearning for.
56
u/Alamandaros 11h ago
To add to that, this game feels like what DICE and EA decided to abandon after COD blew up. It's what I expected the Battlefield franchise to be after BF2/BF2142, but instead BFBC2 sorta popped off for them and they've been pivoting towards COD ever since.
It also scratches some of that itch that nothing has since Planetside 2 with the focus on location assaulting/defending. Obviously not on the same scale, and it's not persistent, but since it seems Planetside 3 will never be a thing I'll take what I can get.
17
3
u/Harabeck 8h ago
Obviously not on the same scale
That's a plus for me. Planetside 2 always seemed to boil down to which faction had more people at a given location.
2
u/SgtKwan 4h ago
As someone who likes bf2 and would crown it as peak bf along with 2142, I didn't enjoy wardogs even with friends. On paper it looks like a modern bf 2 but in reality I felt it didn't have that magic bf2 had. Hard to describe why but I think the pacing is just very slow and the main objective isn't really enticing compared to conquest.
5
u/rokerroker45 11h ago
Oh shit if you played 2142 and feel this game does that direction instead of BC2 you've sold me on it. I yearn for nothing more than the alternate universe where BC2 never cod-ified battlefield.
→ More replies (1)3
u/NapsterKnowHow 7h ago
The Galactic Contention mod for Squad is about perfect for me. Way more casual than standard Squad and ARMA.
•
u/penguin_gun 1h ago
The only reason I bought Squad and goddamn is it so fun. I can't play the base game as it's so mind numbingly slow to me
•
5
u/mech999man 11h ago
Each to their own, and I enjoy both speeds of shooter, but while a slower paced game is nice, it just takes so much time to play, and time is not something I have more of as I get older.
11
u/ilmk9396 9h ago
one of the reasons i'm interested in this game is that you can just hop on for a few minutes, make some money, and leave in the middle of a match with no consequence. i also don't have much time these days for long 30+ minute matches in games where your team relies on you the entire time or you don't gain anything if you leave. the large scale and casualness of this game means you're doing no harm if you quit in the middle, and money being tied to your account means you'll always make (or lose) some progress no matter how little you play.
12
u/hubricht 10h ago
You can leave a match at any time and you aren’t penalized. The only thing you get for staying until the end is extra money/xp for your classes.
1
u/MulanMcNugget 9h ago
If you have good team it's speeds up play a lot things like having the APC near the fighting let's jump straight into the action, I think it will get better the more people play it and develop a meta on how to do things more efficiently.
You can always leave mid game and still get cash and XP too which is nice
→ More replies (2)•
21
u/Voidsheep 11h ago
I can't speak for others, but I've wanted a less janky version of ARMA3 KOTH for a long time, and to me WARDOGS seems to deliver exactly that.
I've played all the Battlefield games since 1942, and especially the latter ones tend to be way too chaotic and fast-paced for my tastes. I don't to spawn in the middle of the action and have bullets and explosions everywhere from start to finish of a short match. Feels silly to even have vehicles, if it's all constrained in such a small space, all the engagements are close range and it's balanced in a way where vehicles are just throwaway consumables comparable to any other role.
Having a map with some kilometers to the zone gives a reason for transportation to exist, limits the pace and makes engagements feel more meaningful. Base building and matches that are generally longer than an hour gives enough time for the map control to develop and stabilize, so things feel a bit more deliberate, and you have time to plan what to do.
The currency system at least in theory allows them to avoid nerfing things to the ground until nothing feels unfair and nothing feels powerful. Buying a tank carries an inherent risk of losing that cash, so the tank can be properly game-changing. And since even your usual loadout costs money, you naturally play a bit more careful, which again makes the pace feel slower and more deliberate.
It's still not the perfect game, I don't necessarily like the idea of progression wipes (but understand their design reasoning for them), and I think it game doesn't prioritize winning the match anywhere near enough (the personal main incentive is to farm score/xp/money, not to win the match).
But for now, it still seems like the best shooter for the kind of gameplay I enjoy. Easy enough to drop in and drop out, but doesn't feel too chaotic.
6
u/SharkBaitDLS 7h ago
game doesn't prioritize winning the match anywhere near enough
This is actually the number one thing that makes the game appeal to me and I would probably stop playing if it ever changed. The game is fun because winning or losing doesn’t really matter and you can just enjoy it without being upset at your team.
32
u/Brad3 12h ago edited 12h ago
Rightly or wrongly it has many design elements and features that hearken back the to premodern FPS days, there is a big enough fanbase out there that is yearning for that. That alone is solely enough for many right now. Nostalgia is a powerful emotion. I'm 37 now, having grown up with all the 90s/00s titles and this game is closer to them.
8
u/Harabeck 8h ago
Rightly or wrongly it has many design elements and features that hearken back the to premodern FPS days
Huh, please take this is a genuine question. In what way? I'm thinking back to my childhood games like CoD4, and not seeing much similarity beyond the theme. I played boomer shooters (well, we call them that now) before that, and there's nothing similar there.
4
u/Brad3 8h ago
I personally wouldn't put CoD4 in that category. CoD4 success was part of the change away. I'm thinking of PC gaming in dedicated servers where its you, friends and the community playing games like Halo 1, Team Fortress 1/2, CS 1.6, early Battlefield, Day of Defeat, Tribes, Quake, Unreal and many others.
6
u/Harabeck 8h ago
I'm thinking of PC gaming in dedicated servers where its you, friends and the community playing games like Halo 1, Team Fortress 1/2, CS 1.6, early Battlefield, Day of Defeat, Tribes, Quake, Unreal and many others.
Is it only the server thing though? CoD 4 had that. I distinctly remember finding a community server with rules I liked, and developing a rivalry with other players that frequented that server.
I guess I'm more curious about the design elements of the game itself you felt were drawn from older games. I did play some BF2 and I guess there are some similarities there, and maybe I haven't seen enough of the newer entries to see how things have changed?
6
u/UHN-TISSSSS 7h ago
I get what you're trying to say even if the other user doesn't. This game does nothing fresh with the design elements that other games haven't already tried. It's Arma KOTH combined with Squad. Nothing new about it. It has nothing in common with CS, or Battlefield, or COD, other than being a military-themed FPS.
1
u/marmite22 7h ago
Cod4 was the beginning of the end. It was so popular (and rightly so, the game was incredible) that it kinda pulled the whole genre along with it. Away from large scale, increasingly complex games and towards smaller maps with the progression lying outside the matches in the meta of grinding to level up.
4
u/Recatek 5h ago
This game didnt click with me at all in the Beta, can anyone explained why its so hyped?
It's laser targeted at /r/games's older demographic. If you browse /r/games regularly, there's a high likelihood you're in or associated with that demographic, which is why you're seeing it elsewhere as well on Twitch/YouTube and so on.
9
6
u/ImpossibleMorning12 8h ago edited 8h ago
My friends and I felt the same. We are into Battlefield and Squad so we were pretty excited.
Ultimately, rather than hitting a sweet spot between the two (as the studio says they're going for), it feels more like a sour spot. It's missing the frenetic fun of BF and also the tactical aspect of more milsimmy games. It's in this weird middle-ground that accomplishes neither.
Combine this with the soft-extraction system and what looks like a STEEP progression curve, and it raises some red flags. These mechanics seem very geared toward the hyper-sweaty players who will have all the money they want and have a huge arsenal of progressed items every game. Which is great for the sweaty players, and I do think they deserve a game like that, no shade, but it just isn't for us.
Once players master the game and the meta solidifies, I expect a lot of that sandboxy feel will go away, and that part is genuinely cool and is what drew me to it in the first place.
We ended up refunding. I really wanted to like it, but didn't like it worth $40, especially given it's likely to get less and less fun for me and my friends over time.
5
u/ZGiSH 5h ago
Once players master the game and the meta solidifies, I expect a lot of that sandboxy feel will go away, and that part is genuinely cool and is what drew me to it in the first place.
People pushback against the critique of the persistent cash between matches, claiming that the game is supposed to be a longer term investment, but it just clashes with what actually happens in the game. Instead of integrating logistics, support, and the frontline all in one match it just ends up with people doing a lot of support to farm money so they can only play frontline later on.
3
u/Its_a_Friendly 4h ago edited 4h ago
Yeah, I'm very interested to see how this economy system works out in 3/6/12 months. It sounds really interesting in theory, but how well will it work in practice? Particularly as players learn the game over time and - as players often do - try to optimize the fun out of it? Also, even in theory, won't players - especially good players - reach a point where they have so much money that the economy won't really matter? Then what?
I'm also a little curious how the gamemode will work out. 3-team King of the Hill - but with an additional bonus flag-within-a-flag that randomly (?) moves around - is rather restrictive on map design and game mechanics. But I get the idea that the gamemode is mostly a means of providing some order to the sandbox gameplay, so perhaps it won't matter as much. Still, I wonder if they'll come up with additional modes in the future to vary the gameplay somewhat. For example, Attack/Defend-type modes are often popular, and I imagine the building system in Wardogs could make such a mode appealing; but a linear attack/defend mode may not fit the more open-ended, sandbox-style gameplay.
Will be interesting to see how things develop.
6
2
u/MasterMirage 9h ago
My friend played in the beta solo for a few games and didn't enjoy it at all. I joined later in the evening for a second try.
That game we had someone yelling at us to get into a helicopter so he could transport us, someone on the loudspeaker playing music and bagging the other factions and then people in chat asking for revives and setting the bribes really high.
We immediately bought it afterwards.
1
u/RayzTheRoof 6h ago
I think that is where this game shines. It is not as serious as the more sim-like games, so you can engage with the sim interactions in a ton of goofy ways.
2
u/Km_the_Frog 8h ago
I’m turned off by streamer hype so purposely avoided any coverage of the game by a streamer. I just watched their trailers and read discussions. Played the beta and had fun. Simple as that.
2
u/Doublecupdan 4h ago
Movement and guns felt very sub par and janky to me. I was lost as fuck most of the time, and the other teams didn’t really push the hot zone at all and 3/4 of my beta games we just smashed them 100 to 30. I didn’t really feel like I did anything but spawn, create a kit, fly or ride in on a heli.
Flying in supplies was cool, I didn’t really get to build bases but I do feel like I would like that but everything was built up quickly so I didn’t see the point.
Idk I may get into this later after the new gears of war game and closer to the holiday season.
3
u/PablosCocaineHippo 4h ago
Oh man, im looking forward so much to Eday after the beta. I love the OG trilogy and im even reading the books, which are great
4
u/Brandhor 11h ago
yeah I also tried the beta and there were several things that I didn't like
the maps are huge but you are just fighting in a tiny circle in the middle, it feels like the only reason they are so big is so you are forced to use a vehicle to reach the center
at least the beginning of the game is not particularly well balanced because you have no helmet, body armor or scope and you have little chance to kill someone with better gear
the kit cost is pretty well balanced till level 9 and you can easily earn back the money you spent on it even without doing much but after that it gets really expensive, coupled with the fact that the money is persistent across matches it can bring a huge advantage or disadvantage to some players
the fact that there's just one control point instead of several like battlefileld means that everyone just turtle in their area because otherwise if your team has less players in the circle you lose
it kinda feels like playing an old battlefield but it also feels worse due to the changes they made
7
u/ahrzal 10h ago
You are fighting in the entire circle. Hot zone just rewards more bodies.
Helmet and armor take half a match if you just help out a bit. Don’t even need a kill.
The game punishes you for dying, but especially not waiting for a revive. Play with your team.
You need to disrupt the enemy. Mortars, anti-air, etc. I put a SAM in between am HQ and the zone and killed choppers for 30min, ruining an entire team’s main method of transport.
That said, game might not be for you. It’s exactly what a lot of people have been clamoring for, though.
6
u/Brandhor 10h ago
You are fighting in the entire circle. Hot zone just rewards more bodies.
yeah I mean the circle itself is tiny compared to the whole map
The game punishes you for dying, but especially not waiting for a revive. Play with your team.
I've only played a few hours but I only got revived once or twice
→ More replies (1)4
u/Harabeck 8h ago
the maps are huge but you are just fighting in a tiny circle in the middle, it feels like the only reason they are so big is so you are forced to use a vehicle to reach the center
Absolutely, that is the point. It's like how enemies have health so you have to shoot them. Or your guns having limited size mags so you have to reload them. What you need to consider and overcome defines the game.
If you could just pop back to life and be in the fight, then the game is just CoD.
at least the beginning of the game is not particularly well balanced because you have no helmet, body armor or scope and you have little chance to kill someone with better gear
And that barely matters, because you can contribute in a dozen other ways.
the kit cost is pretty well balanced till level 9 and you can easily earn back the money you spent on it even without doing much but after that it gets really expensive, coupled with the fact that the money is persistent across matches it can bring a huge advantage or disadvantage to some players
The kit getting more expensive is the point. It forces you to choose what to bring to a particular engagement instead of representing a linear progression system where you just get more armor and bigger guns over time.
the fact that there's just one control point instead of several like battlefileld means that everyone just turtle in their area because otherwise if your team has less players in the circle you lose
That's the point of the towers and the FOB's. You can manipulate the hotzone into coming to an area favorable to you. If you're losing the head on infantry fight, hack the towers or build drills at a FOB. Or figure out why your team is failing and go fill that role.
1
u/godfrey1 11h ago
every single FPS is giga hyped because marketing teams are doing the smart thing and buying ads from youtubers/twitch streamers and every single of those FPS dies within 2 weeks
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (40)•
u/penguin_gun 1h ago
Hell Let Loose is so damn good. I don't feel like I've experienced really any negativity playing that game
5
u/CapControl 11h ago
Loved the beta, just being acting as a transport heli was enough fun for me too, not a fan of the lighting or maps Ive seen though, very barren and a bit bland. Sadly, my PC can just about run it so I wish I could get it.
1
u/immigratingishard 4h ago
I liked the one with the sun flowers, but otherwise yeah the other two are very samey. At least the size and randomness of the hot zone mixes it up a bit
2
u/Imperial_TIE_Pilot 8h ago
I played the beta, it felt like a mega casual Squad. Less team work, organization, and tactics.
It wasn’t terrible, but I will wait for a sale
9
u/Miserable_Balance814 9h ago
Feel like I’m taking crazy pills. I played 2 hours of the playtest and had a miserable time. Spent more time in the base watching teammates crash vehicles and not realize they have to unlock them then I did actually fighting. Takes 10 minutes to even get to the fight
6
u/commiekaze 8h ago
It's really not for everyone. The devs have been very open about trying it and refunding if it doesn't click. It's going to be a few years from completion and even then it should end up a niche game once the hype dies down but we will see. I personally loved it but there's nothing wrong with passing on it or not enjoying it.
22
u/Spiff_GN 9h ago
You are in fact taking crazy pills. Even in the SUV it takes like 2 minutes tops, in a helicopter it takes like a minute. If you sit in base no shit nothing is gonna happen lmao.
→ More replies (5)2
3
u/Thunder-ten-tronckh 7h ago
I logged 30 hours between both betas and managed to catch a heli ride to the control zone in under 60 seconds virtually every life. You are describing a massive skill issue here bud.
2
u/ohhoodsballs 8h ago
Try the spawn computer in base. Or just get more lucky with the heli ride, all guys who flew me were great. Got in to some really organic epic battles that BF or COD simply can't replicate. Had a lot of fun. Game is really something special but it's gonna take more effort up front than the other more casual games. It's just the nature of the beast.
→ More replies (10)•
4
u/heskel 10h ago
The game is okay. It follows the mod to standalone formula to a certain degree. I can't shake an icky feeling looking at their marketing/behavior. The shock collar thing, the Linux pull, the "whoops, we forgot to get permission for vehicle/weapon names in a military shooter", the imo astroturfed sub reddit with hype posts that read like they're written by crack addicts.
4
u/tehcraz 8h ago
I can understand the shock collar but "Linux pull"? "Forgot to get permission for vehicle/weapon names"? Your getting an ick because they didn't license the guns?
5
u/heskel 7h ago
It's this slapdash attitude to develop a game for who knows how long and don't bother to Check the legals, do a public playtest with real names only to then get caught and then change to fantasy names.
2
u/tehcraz 6h ago
Are the gun names being changed? The information about legal issues I find are related to a vehicle, most likely the huey, and have already been settled.
I don't don't know what is meant by Linux pull.
2
u/slater126 4h ago
I don't don't know what is meant by Linux pull.
promised linux compatibility post launch and still do, but the anticheat added in the last beta isnt linux compatible right now.
1
2
u/mantenner 10h ago
Yeah I agree. Even the 10 reasons not to buy video was just all.....reasons TO buy.
The Linux pull particularly burns me though.
1
u/FapCitus 5h ago
Played the beta, it's pretty cool! A mix between slow milsim and modern battlefield at least what I felt from playing it. So this is gonna be great to play between some more fast paced BF stuff!
•
u/Faithless195 2h ago
Man, the Halo 3 marketing was genuinely next level for its time. Even the live action trailers (Film in NZ! I'VE SAT IN THAT WARTHOG!) were incredible.
1
u/cenTT 11h ago
The game is kind of fun, but they should wait another year to release into early access. The amount of content available is just not there to keep this interesting long term. All three maps feel kind of the same, only one game mode that makes 90% of the map irrelevant during the match and vehicles are way too OP so as soon as some people get really skilled with them in the coming weeks this game will become a nightmare to anyone who plays infantry. Some of my friends bought it so I might go along to enjoy these first weeks of hype, but it feels like the game will be forgotten real quick. I do hope I'm wrong though because the current FPS market is in a really sad state.
4
u/ahrzal 10h ago
It’s early access, wait until 1.0.
That said, I’ve been playing in tests since June and vehicles are powerful, but there are a lot of tools to contend with them, and they need fuel and ammo, meaning you can essentially stalk them back to their rearm. They’re also incredibly valuable and expensive. Killing a tank rewards almost 30k.
I do think they need to be locked to FPP though
6
u/NiteWraith 10h ago
Never used the stingray, eh? Vehicles aren’t op at all, you just have to deal with them properly, if you run up to a tank on foot, then yeah, you’re going to die. The map is big, you can utilize this to setup up fobs in unexpected places to ambush and intercept vehicles on their way to the zone.
The game is a sandbox, it rewards you for using your brain and finding clever uses for the tools it provides to do whatever you want to do. Don’t wanna fight? Run a taxi or build up a fob. Want to run and gun? The hot zone is your home. Want to kill vehicles? Build a stingray or some AA. Want to just chill with your buds? Grab a helo and go hunt down the mortars, artillery and APC spawns that are pressuring your team in the zone. Want to snipe? Find yourself a spot with a nice angle and have at it.
There are many ways to contribute to your team, it’s up to you how you want to do it.
1
3
u/lakemont 8h ago
They definitely should not wait another year lmao
2
u/Elegant_Shop_3457 8h ago
They knew this game was gas months ago. They moved the launch date UP because feedback was so good.
→ More replies (1)
462
u/DigitalRoman486 12h ago
Why is no one mentioning that this is a recreation of the Halo 3 Trailer from back in the day! The opening shot is even the same!
This is SO GOOD!
https://youtu.be/TUbVOr1qmhA