It was the Dark Zone that made Division stand out from other games. If they leave the Dark Zone and PVP and Conflict out of Division 3, it wont be the Division franchise anymore
Printable View
It was the Dark Zone that made Division stand out from other games. If they leave the Dark Zone and PVP and Conflict out of Division 3, it wont be the Division franchise anymore
Where'd you hear that?
Its going around the streamers and youtube community. Supposedly someone over heard a ubisoft employee say if Heartland was a succcess than maybe Division 3 wont need pvp. After reading this my stomach literally flipped. I feel uneasy. Let it not be so. Even if rumors, we have to support and voice our love of Divisions pvp.
The Dark Zone is the BnB of the marketing and it's inherently PVPVE. It allows Division to deviate itself from other PVE looters, so I wouldn't be worried about it.
The ultimate Division game is Division 1's dark zone (size and player count) with Division 2's PVE. Plus, you throw in solo servers and you've got yourself a pretty snazzy dark zone. The general concept or idea of the dark zone isn't an issue, just the implementation and cut backs it has in Division 2.
For you, perhaps. But for those of us interested in, e.g., a rich and complex gear/weapon/loadout-building system, Division 2 already stands out. (I'm not aware of any other game like this that's also reasonably arcade-y, rather than an ARMA-like simulation. It's not just the number of options, it's the design of the interactions between them and player control over that, which is why Borderlands doesn't even begin to compare, despite also being a looter-shooter with a lot of weapons.)
I wouldn't miss PvP at all myself; I'm just not a twitch player and that seems to be a requirement for most PvP combat games. (World of Tanks is a notable exception, though it still requires some degree of fast reflexes.)
This is not to say that PvP should be left out, only that it's not the one thing that distinguishes Division 2 from other games.
With all due respect, given the complete and utter failure of PVP in both Division 1 and Division 2....
If you want your PVP, go play heartland/warzone or whatever garbage BR knock-off crap is popular right now.
PVP has been a plague on the game. A cancer. A vomitus mass of kids and hateful people who have nothing better to do than to hack and cheat in the name of being some of the worst "gamers" the genre has ever seen. All while spewing racist, phobic bile.
And on top of that, Massive/Ubi has shown repeatedly that they are completely clueless and incompetent when it comes to balance, design, flow, or even the basics of what makes a PVP game good.
So no thank you. With complete and utter honesty, and spoken from the bottom of my heart: I would rather that there never be another Division game EVER than see PVP inflicted upon the franchise again.
EeeeZ 8 v 1 is the DZ in a nutshell. That said, I have and you can have fun in there. Just not that often as that side of this community are particularly unpleasant!
Ahh! Now I see why Ubi does not bother with most of the opinion posts on this forum. It's mostly "extremist" horsesht from the far ends of the bell curve...
Case in point, rather NO TD3 if it has PVP, or rather NO TD3 if it doesn't have PVP. What kind of crap is that?!
Is it a perfect game(s)? No, but it works for majority of the players. I am not a PVP player, but I still find stuff to do in DZ. Pretty sure most PVP players found stuff to do in the LZ as well.
My way or no way is just a dumb view of the world. Good luck with that.
I find lots of useful info here, but I will ignore this horsesht.
Don't confuse the two parts of my post.
One part is pure opinion: "No pvp in division".
The other part is factual: "Ubi/Massive being incompetent at PVP. And the type of toxic players that failure engenders"
Neither of which are "horse****" just because you don't like what's being said.