🛈 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. #41
    YodaMan 3D's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    8,108
    Originally Posted by UMUSTBBORNAGAIN Go to original post
    I don't want any gear locked behind activities, should be able to get what you want grinding where you want. DIvision 2 does a decent job of it but also locks certain things behind modes (Dark Zone and Raids)

    I have heard Division 3 is going to be a total open world game with 2 separate servers PVE and PVEP(DZ) and am very happy to hear that. Also heard it's going to be more of an MMO and would love to have a Division game with ongoing content that doesn't run dry.
    1st, I wouldn't be buying into rumors too much at this point. 2nd, Ubi and Massive are going to have to do something different then what they have been doing. Locking loot is ignorant. Creating a game for a large playerbase and then only focusing on small group when making content is ignorant. They need to think big picture and they don't.
     1 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  2. #42
    if there is a division 3...
    1. I want the annoying slow jog you are forced into every time you go into the whitehouse or safehouse
    2. I want mobility improved... it is the worst part of this game
    3. base mission designs needs to improve... division 1 was better
    4. if they are going to continue forcing the tank/support/dps roles, give the tanks a way to generate threat(this did exist in division 1)
    5. sometimes less is more, ive lost count of how many skills are in the game... and they really are not good, they either are too difficult to use, to unreliable to use or to ineffective to use
    6. get rid of the horrible aiming system that the grenade launcher/chem launcher/mortar turret/bomb drone all seem to use and its bad

    keep...
    control points, although if you are going to continue the black tusk(or other top military like faction) let them take the control points
    Share this post

  3. #43
    Originally Posted by UnR34L. Go to original post
    Well it is true that the state of PVP is in a lake at the bottom somewhere but PVE was never " borked " to satisfy PVP complaints (when is the last time we got an update)
    As it pertains to "this game is not iconic for the dz but for open world action and visuals" there are wayyy better games that do those 2 things (GTA, Read Dead Redemption, Witcher....
    You might think that the DZ is not the beacon of Division but name a few other games that do that.
    I (and about 80% of the PVP-ers i know) bought the game for the sole reason of the DZ and for the PVEVP and if that was not the case than the marketing should have changed.
    I understand it is hard to go in the dz and have a full on battle with PVP-ers when you just play PVE but some of the top PVE Division gamers that i know have said that they would never mind the DZ's PVP if it was in a good state "close to Div1 without the cheaters ofc".
    Now opinions differ and thanks for sharing yours.
    I dunno what game you're playing, but in this game, for almost every change they've made to "balance" crap in PvP, they have consistently failed to keep those changes from screwing PvE. There are numerous complaints about this throughout this forum and elsewhere.
     1 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  4. #44
    somehow incorporate foliage of Ghost Recon Breakpoint. That looks awesome.
    Major improvements in balance
    no tracking nades
    no bullet sponging
    no spamming of nades
    introduce stagger when enemy gets hit
    intelligent AI; go into cover when being shot.
    etc
    etc
    etc
    Share this post

  5. #45
    Armor/Health.

    Screw waiting for D3, it should have value here. They just need to tone down AI damage....absolutely fk off with the one **** BS, fk off with the AI chewing through 2 million armor in a single burst. Fk that noise......
     1 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  6. #46
    Originally Posted by Marriorqq Go to original post
    Not every game is like 2077 (The Witcher 3) or Red Dead Redemption 2.
    100% agree. In fact I have just recently completed RE3 and enjoyed it enormously. That game had a short development cycle and was released 100% completed on day 1, was major bug free, and I was only too happy to part with my money.

    Ubisoft has both the people resources and the finances to be a Rockstar and choose quality over quantity, and to reap all of the acclaim and monetary reward that this would bring. Instead they have chosen the EA route, churn out reskin after reskin (Farcry and Assassins Creed as blindingly obvious examples) with little to no concern over the quality or content of these games. They would rather cut corners on development time and resources, and instead spend absolutely millions on PR, whether that's on incredible looking CGI trailers (just look at FC5 trailer, unbelievable standard), or "encouraging" shill content creators and gaming journalists to push their narratives (gotta get that channel promotion yo). Good people such as yourself are the key target in that PR spending spree. They want (and quite possibly have succeeded) to convince you and millions of others, that paying up front and in full for a 50% complete, bug riddled product, with little more then a promise that they will finish it "at some point" (providing you buy enough microtransactions of course) is actually a good thing. They can point at a pre Alpha version of a game and call it a live service until they're blue in the face, it doesn't change the fact that it's a product at the pre Alpha stage of development, and should be treated as such (i.e. free until completed and thoroughly tested).

    I actually read an article last week where someone had written a list of the best Switch games with a list of pros and cons next to them all. Do you know what was listed as a pro against one of the games? And I quote - "excellent monetisation"..... It beggars belief. "Excellent monetisation" as a positive... for gamers. Outstanding.

    I was shamefully fooled on more then 1 occasion to buy games that fit this mould by Ubisoft, and to which no doubt TD3 will fall into as well, but I refuse to allow myself to be conned again.
     2 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  7. #47
    They need new developers, Massive have failed with too much boring content and neglectful piddly PVP content. KISS. Keep it simple stupid, should have been their model instead of Summit, Kenly college ? Blah ! They needed big engaging DZ with competitve pop up activities, Warlords DZ. Double more Conflict Maps. and a Survival.
     5 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  8. #48
    JHemp12's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    507
    I just want a single player Division game with more realism and a much longer well written story.
     3 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  9. #49
    If there is a Div 3, just give the development to any other studio than Massive and the game will be better.
     1 people found this helpful
    Share this post

Page 5 of 5 ◄◄  First ... 345