1. #31
    Originally Posted by Bone_Frog Go to original post
    Can you define dead? You go 300m in any direction and you are running into either enemies or faction people. More often enemies. There is an abundance of wild life. So what is dead about it?
    You go 300m in any direction and find small groups of enemies or faction people that are just standing around. Whereas in Wildlands, NPCs were actively moving around the environment, walking, driving, and flyinng, and you could still find enemies and civilians and rebels all over the place.
     1 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  2. #32
    kritta83's Avatar Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Australia - PS4
    Posts
    115
    Originally Posted by OppositeCoast94 Go to original post
    Wildlands has Bolivian culture throughout. Variety of civilians, radio stations, language, colour scheme, music, ranging architecture like ancient ruins, farms, villages, towns, cities, industry. Breakpoint does technology intitusions well but has no Pacific Islander culture? A couple of ruins but no bustling culture going about their daily rutine? One of the most immersive parts of Wildlands completely absent. Unfortunately leaves the world of breakpoint feeling unnecessarily empty.
    Well put, and agreed, the island feels 'flat' life wise, there's minimal immersion in culture or fauna even.
     1 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  3. #33

    Maybe a fix for the dead gameplay?

    A possible fix for this dead gameplay, among others, would be for the game to increase civilian activity as you clear the island of threats.
     1 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  4. #34
    LaMOi's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,339
    I know what the OP means. I thought that initially.

    But then I considered that isn’t the island under a kind of occupation? So most homesteaders have probably fled or gone into hiding? I mean that’s the narrative...


    But the world does feel less alive / populated in respect to what you had in Wildlands...
     2 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  5. #35
    LaMOi's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,339
    Originally Posted by A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n Go to original post
    You go 300m in any direction and find small groups of enemies or faction people that are just standing around. Whereas in Wildlands, NPCs were actively moving around the environment, walking, driving, and flyinng, and you could still find enemies and civilians and rebels all over the place.
    True.
     1 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  6. #36
    As a previous poster said the beta is just a small part of auroa, with regards to civilian life I have only seen images showing adults and children, there are other images showing a large city with what looks like an American football field and a baseball pitch there. The images can be seen in the video link below. Of course, I don't know if all this is in the final cut? in the beta there were plenty wildlife, although I don't want an animal simulator, lol, so to me there is just the right amount in the beta in the small part of it anyway. I seen armadillo, goats, pelicans, swarm of mosquito's, although I can't recall seeing flies I sure heard them. Is it mainly the lack of civilian life?

    https://youtu.be/68TG_xq8BWU
    Share this post

  7. #37
    Well.. My opinion is Wildlands is way too much populated. But yeah, I agree, Breakpoint needs improvements, more types of enemies, more interactions from them, adding dangerous wildlife (but in the wild, not near objectives, I don't want alarms caused by 3rd parties). BTW I did enjoy the beta, the gameplay felt fun, a little bit frustrating was the driving part D: but for the most i liked it and hope they will release a bad*** game!
    Share this post

  8. #38
    I understand what he means. It was said they are under martial law which is understandable. However it seemed to me the developers copy and pasted broken vehicles every 300 meters with people saying the same lines over and over. Sure it's a beta, and restricted but that doesn't feel very lively. I mentioned in the survey there should be moving patrols in the woods. That'd seem more realistic than people broken down all over the place. That's just my opinion of course 😁
     1 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  9. #39
    Originally Posted by GRwemissyou Go to original post
    I understand what he means. It was said they are under martial law which is understandable. However it seemed to me the developers copy and pasted broken vehicles every 300 meters with people saying the same lines over and over. Sure it's a beta, and restricted but that doesn't feel very lively. I mentioned in the survey there should be moving patrols in the woods. That'd seem more realistic than people broken down all over the place. That's just my opinion of course 😁

    Teams searching the wooded or non-populated areas would be good. Especially if it increases the more objectives you complete in that area. Kind of a "they know something's up over there as they are losing men or being hacked a lot so let's deploy more troops in that region and send out search teams/drones" kinda feel.
    Share this post

  10. #40
    Originally Posted by Nayabinghi93 Go to original post
    Well.. My opinion is Wildlands is way too much populated. But yeah, I agree, Breakpoint needs improvements, more types of enemies, more interactions from them, adding dangerous wildlife (but in the wild, not near objectives, I don't want alarms caused by 3rd parties). BTW I did enjoy the beta, the gameplay felt fun, a little bit frustrating was the driving part D: but for the most i liked it and hope they will release a bad*** game!
    Wildlands is set in an actual country. How is that too populated? Do you play Watch Dogs and think it's too populated? Do you play Assassin's Creed and think it's too populated? Like, where do you get that? I can understand if you simply don't like games with civilians in them, but how is it too populated?

    Not trying to be disrespectful or dismissive of your opinion. I just really don't understand how Wildlands had too many people. I don't think it'd make much sense for there to be a small population in Wildlands. In Breakpoint, it makes sense that there aren't a lot of people based on how the devs designed it, but an island doesn't have to be sparsely populated. It could make sense for Auroa to be populated if they'd simply add more habitable villages. One thing I liked about Wildlands was the culture. It was immersive to me. I wanted that with Auroa, where there's an indigenous population that is rich in culture. It would give the island some character instead of just being largely empty with Skell buildings and bad guys and a few homesteaders who could also show up in Far Cry or The Division.
     1 people found this helpful
    Share this post