🛈 Announcement
Greetings! The Division forums are now archived and accessible in read-only mode, please go to the new platform to discuss the game
  1. #11
    LepantoESP's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    2,894
    You'd be crazy if you let yourself be so influenced by others you can't decide which you like better.
     1 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  2. #12
    MIDJULIP's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,306
    Division has better attention to detail and it's a totally different game. I do love the RPG and loot parts of Division. Hate the PVP. Ghost Recons open world is kinda meh but the missions are super fun and challenging. I like them both. Division has much more potential being wasted though.
    Share this post

  3. #13
    I prefer Division, too.

    I am not even sure why:

    The stats on gear are all over the place, each patch with changes fixing some thing while breaking others makes me feel the developers are not sure what to do, and the CLUMPSY cover system (one of the things GRWL does so much better).

    But I think after 1.6 I have a game that has a number of different playstyles to offer. While everyone else *hates* the DLCs not doing something with the story, I actually appreciate the added activities that differ from the normal game.
    I like being able to do a underground mission with the first 3 directives, because it forces me to think where to go without scanner present all the time, and no minimap. This could be enhanced by a lot by just adding more rooms to Underground.
    I like HvTs, because they offer a quite OK random fight, yes the waves could be even more random.
    I like survival because there are still places I didnt go, I dont run *always the same route* like many seem to.
    Now we get Last stand an easy to access PvP arena where you can try new builds on the fly because you dont need top rolled gear, just gear with the correct stats, be them low or high.

    Think if the developers change the way our gear is saved so that they can finally always get us *new* gear and we dont need to regrind the stuff we have, we can go to a good future. This last point is important I think because they STILL need to break everything again, to get us 13 valiable gear sets compared to the HE parts. And maybe the same goes for guns, but it is less of a problem there.

    GRWL: What do I do after everything is done? Uninstall? Because I dont think I would just start another character. No different gear sets to try, or anything else that I can customize...yeah skills but thats not too different. And I remember the TD beta, there I could replay the missions, cannot do so in wildlands, and...what would be the point to play them again in WL. Besides ofc the effect to actually have something to do. I stay with games long times so I fear I would not be able to do something in wildlands after some time.

    Edit:
    After reading the guy that posted after me:

    I like games that have stuff that can be done again. I like DayZ (Mod, not Standalone), I like Arma3 King of the hill, I liked Global agenda. Why? Because the stuff in the game was actually fun to play. And you leveled up, got new stuff and such, specially true for Dayz. Wildlands offers a more tactical gameplay then the Division, yes, but it doesnt feel...good somehow. Be alone the vehicle handling drives me off. For an open world I would like to drive from a to b, but I wouldnt do that in WL, because the vehicles are SO BAD.
    And when it comes to *tactical*...I shot a guy on the tower...1minute later another got up there, I shot him...another minute, another guy. The bodies OFC disappeared so no alarm. Then the occations where bad guys spawn out of thin air. I had 2 Unidad helos on me, before I could destroy the 2nd, there was already a replacement for the first, it maybe took me 30 seconds to down one btw (sweet sweet lmg). Or defence missions where you cleared the whole area and suddenly enemies pop out of every building. Open world is just a name. If you want to live up to it, use it and make bad guys travel to objectives.

    When it comes to tactical I would rather play Payday 2 in stealth than GR WL. And GR would have so much more potential if it had proper, difficult, punishing stealthplay.
    Share this post

  4. #14
    I'll play both for sure. But they are totally different games so anyone who thought any different is kidding themselves.

    GRW is far more tactical and way more punishing. To me, GRW is the thinking man's game and TD is a beefed up arcade game. In GRW you need to plan your assault, pick entry points etc. The story missions in TD are simply linear. You have to go up stair X in Lexington or through door Y in Amherst's Apartment. In GRW you can't stand and tank a hail of bullets. I like that; it suits my play style.

    As for a game having an end, is that really a bad thing? Every game doesn't have to be an MMORPG with 15 years of content. It's OK to buy a game that has a beginning and an end; it's the bit in the middle that's most important, both in terms of quality and quantity. Is doing Queen's Tunnel Camp on Challenging for the 500th time really end game content? At what run number (400, 500, 1000) does a particular activity cease to be content?

    A general criticism of TD is that there is no end game and the paid updates just reuse what we've already got or introduce more of the same stuff that did so poorly in previous DLCs. Take Last Stand as an example. Sure, the gameplay is different in so much as it's an 8 man DZ with some turrets and a points target etc. But it uses the DZ map. Then take a look at Last Stand levelling. Max level of 40 with award caches every time you level and some perks at certain points. Where have we seen that before?

    Sure as eggs is eggs, some people will prefer GRW and some will prefer TD. You don't have to pick one. You can play both you know. In fact, with TD as it is, following a rather rough first year, GRW may be a bit of a Godsend for some. It will allow people to take a break from TD while they wait to see what Year 2 plans are revealed. I certainly won't be putting as many hours into TD. There's some new games coming and ones that I need to catch up on.

    Division really does have potential. The big question is whether that potential can be realised. But, if it is, even TD will have to have an end. It's the nature of the story. This virus can't go on forever. Either everyone will die or the virus will.
     2 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  5. #15
    joelsantos24's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    2,917
    You people insist on comparing two games from completely antagonistic genres. One is a full fledged RPG and the other is a Tactical Shooter. They couldn't be more different.
     2 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  6. #16
    Originally Posted by joelsantos24 Go to original post
    You people insist on comparing two games from completely antagonistic genres. One is a full fledged RPG and the other is a Tactical Shooter. They couldn't be more different.
    I totally agree that GRW and TD are different game genres.

    But, if you're trying to tell me that The Division is comparable to WoW or even Lineage II (which is approaching 15years old and was a far better RPG back in 2003 than TD is now) then I'd have to disagree. In my opinion, TD simply lacks enough content and player to player interaction in a majority of it's largely instanced game world to be classified as an RPG. I'm not sure what I'd classify TD as or whether it even matters that you can't pigeon-hole a game. In fact, I think that because TD is different is part of the reason why it polarises opinion.
    Share this post

  7. #17
    joelsantos24's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    2,917
    I didn't say anything, beyond the fact that this game and Ghost Recon are completely and utterly different. The degree to which The Division and other games might be classified as RPG's, that I leave to others.
    Share this post

  8. #18
    Duplicate. Stupid forums
     1 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  9. #19
    hyper---sniper's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    SCOTLAND
    Posts
    2,984
    Tried the beta grwl , and not for me, this game tops the list of time played.. Must be honest and say it was the best money i have ever spent on the main game, they just lost it with the DLC and the loot.
    They seem to have lost track of what they want the game to be , a shooter or looter ...
     1 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  10. #20
    Force58's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,295
    I love games with NO MP, so Wildlands for me is just fine. I've logged in maybe 3 hours into the beta and so far loving it. I'll get it on launch, or once I finish Sniper Elite 4. I still love playing The Division though, even with all its problems. For me, its still the best gameplay of any shooter I've played. And being 57, I've played A LOT!!!!!
    Share this post