The Division 2...what do we want? | Forums

[Jaime_Ward]

Well:

If they did do a sequel, which I definitly would not buy on start, first see how it works out:

More research on other games

This game is nothing special in types of what it does, it is a loot shooter/rpg. There are so many things out there that do things better.

What they could use:

Meaningful gearset bonuses

Less clunky controls (been doing the nimble holster and jeez how often I end up not being/doing what I want due to just 3 buttons to control it all...)

Proper Chat windows with dmg messages, you know things where you can see what hit you how hard, who did it and such, to be able to tell what you can do to improve, what works, and to report the hackers more easily (to not have to clunk around to get their names).

Encounters that are more random, be it enemy numbers, types and spawnpoints, so we dont feel bored after playing a mission 4 times.

Proper balanced guns, not having the best dps weapons being nearly best controllable at a time.

A team that knows how to calculate a proper DPS value, because if you do have this, we might get better balance, too. No idea on DPS = no balance.

Less useless things. Be it exotic / named weapons with no real use, talents/skills no one uses and so on. I want to think about hard what I use in a certain situation, and maybe even get mad I dont have the one more slot. Being forced to make choices.

Having a wider view on changes affecting other things. I.e. making First Aid far worse and suddenly realizing they might need to change Health on Kill, too. Or nerfing tacticians set in 3 aspects in one go, while maybe even one would have done it.

Faster reaction on exploits. I mean, if they just deactivate a thing after some of the serious exploits were found, maybe we would not end up with so many imbalances between exploiters and normal people.

Different rogue mechanics. Seriously the DZ was THE ONLY THING why I got this game, because everything else was boring normal. Was fun for some time, but not having any way to properly defend your extraction from teams running up without going rogue yourself is plain bad design.

And this is maybe just the tip of the iceberg. One thing. Keep survival, just with random landmarks and boxlocations. That was really good.

[komplikCZ]

I would like si Desiny in Division visuals.

[UMUSTBBORNAGAIN]

Division 1 fixed first then I might think about Division 2. How well did this work out for Homefront the Revolution? Putting out a broken game shouldn't lead to higher sales in the future.

[eskimosound]

Vehicles, motorbikes will do, running around takes too long. I thought yeah they have no petrol but there's helicopters so why not have to find fuel to hotwire vehicles. And drones like in Ghost recon and Watchdogs 2.

[RhinoCharging]

There is no Division 2, Massive do not have the manpower to work on Avatar and that at the same time and Ubi won't be putting money into a failed project.

The Division was not a failed project as far as Ubisoft are concerned...you know why?

Because it made huge amounts of cash.

To us, or some of us, it was a failure, but to the people who will green light a sequel, namely Ubisoft, it was a very lucrative new I.P that they absolutely will want to revisit.

[RhinoCharging]

Well:

If they did do a sequel, which I definitly would not buy on start, first see how it works out:

More research on other games

This game is nothing special in types of what it does, it is a loot shooter/rpg. There are so many things out there that do things better.

What they could use:

Meaningful gearset bonuses

Less clunky controls (been doing the nimble holster and jeez how often I end up not being/doing what I want due to just 3 buttons to control it all...)

Proper Chat windows with dmg messages, you know things where you can see what hit you how hard, who did it and such, to be able to tell what you can do to improve, what works, and to report the hackers more easily (to not have to clunk around to get their names).

Encounters that are more random, be it enemy numbers, types and spawnpoints, so we dont feel bored after playing a mission 4 times.

Proper balanced guns, not having the best dps weapons being nearly best controllable at a time.

A team that knows how to calculate a proper DPS value, because if you do have this, we might get better balance, too. No idea on DPS = no balance.

Less useless things. Be it exotic / named weapons with no real use, talents/skills no one uses and so on. I want to think about hard what I use in a certain situation, and maybe even get mad I dont have the one more slot. Being forced to make choices.

Having a wider view on changes affecting other things. I.e. making First Aid far worse and suddenly realizing they might need to change Health on Kill, too. Or nerfing tacticians set in 3 aspects in one go, while maybe even one would have done it.

Faster reaction on exploits. I mean, if they just deactivate a thing after some of the serious exploits were found, maybe we would not end up with so many imbalances between exploiters and normal people.

Different rogue mechanics. Seriously the DZ was THE ONLY THING why I got this game, because everything else was boring normal. Was fun for some time, but not having any way to properly defend your extraction from teams running up without going rogue yourself is plain bad design.

And this is maybe just the tip of the iceberg. One thing. Keep survival, just with random landmarks and boxlocations. That was really good.

Lots of good ideas.

[RhinoCharging]

Division 1 fixed first then I might think about Division 2. How well did this work out for Homefront the Revolution? Putting out a broken game shouldn't lead to higher sales in the future.

Well maybe it'll take The Division 2 to make the game that we all want.

[aldramelech]

The Division was not a failed project as far as Ubisoft are concerned...you know why?

Because it made huge amounts of cash.

To us, or some of us, it was a failure, but to the people who will green light a sequel, namely Ubisoft, it was a very lucrative new I.P that they absolutely will want to revisit.

That is an assumption on your part.

The initial sales were impressive but we have no idea what the development costs were. Its possible that the initial sales covered that cost and little else, so the real money was in season passes, DLC etc. Those sales are likely to have been disappointing at best as 90% of the players walked after the first month.

So it's a good chance that yes, financially this is indeed a failed project. But there's more, this game has a VERY negative image outside of us players that stuck with it and Ubi must be fully aware that their reputation (such as it was) has taken a Massive (pun intended) hit.

It is actually far more likely that they'd want to put as much distance between themselves and this game, then double down on number 2.

[RhinoCharging]

That is an assumption on your part.

The initial sales were impressive but we have no idea what the development costs were. Its possible that the initial sales covered that cost and little else, so the real money was in season passes, DLC etc. Those sales are likely to have been disappointing at best as 90% of the players walked after the first month.

So it's a good chance that yes, financially this is indeed a failed project. But there's more, this game has a VERY negative image outside of us players that stuck with it and Ubi must be fully aware that their reputation (such as it was) has taken a Massive (pun intended) hit.

It is actually far more likely that they'd want to put as much distance between themselves and this game, then double down on number 2.

No assumptions necessary.

It is on record that Ubisoft made huge profit's from the game.

The Division is the most successful new I.P in years, and it gave them a handsome return on their investment.

You said it was a failure and I said that it wasn't in the one way that matters to Ubisoft and that would ensure a sequel...financially.

We can agree or debate the merits of the game as a piece of art, as entertainment, and whether it failed as either.

But that doesn't relate to the likelihood of a sequel.

Many terrible games get a follow up, often to put stuff right or because, as with The Division, they still made money.

[Jpebrz]

If removed watch dogs got a sequel, TD will get one too