Official Thread The Division v. 2

They were in the first game, so I fully expect them to be here. As long as they stay like they were in Division 1--weapon skins, back pack skins, emotes, etc--then I don't care...As long as gear skins are still earn-able in game.
Huh, I never even noticed we could spend real money in Division on that stuff. The more you know.
 
It was added in one of the expansions..think it was Underground....around that time anyway.
That would explain it. I never got an expansion. I played the game for awhile, but I don't know if I just didn't connect? But I like it. So it's weird. I think maybe it was the online presence, not sure. I am getting the second one for sure though.
 
That would explain it. I never got an expansion. I played the game for awhile, but I don't know if I just didn't connect? But I like it. So it's weird. I think maybe it was the online presence, not sure. I am getting the second one for sure though.

Second one looks good. Free DLC too. Still curious how they will do this. Will it be like Rainbow Six and For Honour where they sell an expansion pass and everybody else gets it free a week or so later, or will it just be straight up free for all and released at the same time for all.

I just hope this free DLC has enough content to last 3 months and still has the End-Game first mentality. Hope it doesn't do a Destiny and spend too much time on the added story and be way too lite on other content.
 
Second one looks good. Free DLC too. Still curious how they will do this. Will it be like Rainbow Six and For Honour where they sell an expansion pass and everybody else gets it free a week or so later, or will it just be straight up free for all and released at the same time for all.

I just hope this free DLC has enough content to last 3 months and still has the End-Game first mentality. Hope it doesn't do a Destiny and spend too much time on the added story and be way too lite on other content.
Well, we know there is no such thing as a free lunch. Maybe they are taking notes from how Halo 5 was done with regards to the free DLC, which was free to everyone, and they made their money on other microtransactions. Or how Gears rotated the maps for ALL gamers, but those who paid were able to keep the maps permamently on their system? I think I got that right.

You KNOW they will want to make more money some how. Hopefully it is just cosmetics. I feel like developers, at least the good ones, want to keep everyone together and have the content so that the gamers are not separated. Sadly, Call of Duty hasn't learned from this.
 
Well, we know there is no such thing as a free lunch. Maybe they are taking notes from how Halo 5 was done with regards to the free DLC, which was free to everyone, and they made their money on other microtransactions. Or how Gears rotated the maps for ALL gamers, but those who paid were able to keep the maps permamently on their system? I think I got that right.

You KNOW they will want to make more money some how. Hopefully it is just cosmetics. I feel like developers, at least the good ones, want to keep everyone together and have the content so that the gamers are not separated. Sadly, Call of Duty hasn't learned from this.

I think publishers, especially the big ones, are starting to realise that paid DLC and m'transactions is too much. EA, Ubisoft, Microsoft are all moving on to free DLC for all. Obviously they need to make money, but here is another area which should improve thanks to the whole lootbox blow up.
 
Might jump back in for this,looks pretty good...I enjoyed the first for a few months but the Season Pass was expensive so I stopped after I finished the main campaign...free content after launch is great and it looks bigger and more open then the first.
 
Might jump back in for this,looks pretty good...I enjoyed the first for a few months but the Season Pass was expensive so I stopped after I finished the main campaign...free content after launch is great and it looks bigger and more open then the first.

Not sure it is actually bigger. It is definitely more open in places and this does give a sense of it being bigger....but they did say it was 1:1 representation of DC and given that DC isn't all that big, who knows.
 
I think publishers, especially the big ones, are starting to realise that paid DLC and m'transactions is too much. EA, Ubisoft, Microsoft are all moving on to free DLC for all. Obviously they need to make money, but here is another area which should improve thanks to the whole lootbox blow up.

I think they specifically mentioned (might have been another game) how it separates the community. There's nothing more annoying to buy DLC and find out half the community doesn't have it and see fewer players.

My worry is cosmetics won't be enough, and pay to win is going to come in. I just bought the Origins season pass as it was cheap off an Xbox sale and it gave me these powerful weapons I would not have had access to otherwise. For an SP game it isn't a big deal, but still it is pay to win and that's worrisome.
 
I think they specifically mentioned (might have been another game) how it separates the community. There's nothing more annoying to buy DLC and find out half the community doesn't have it and see fewer players.

My worry is cosmetics won't be enough, and pay to win is going to come in. I just bought the Origins season pass as it was cheap off an Xbox sale and it gave me these powerful weapons I would not have had access to otherwise. For an SP game it isn't a big deal, but still it is pay to win and that's worrisome.
did say it, they all say it. But I don't buy it. I mean it has always separated the community so why is it only happening now? Could have done this 10 years a go. I'll tell why, because M'transactions are a bigger money maker than paid DLC. Keep the community engaged in your game and the potential for greater profits grows.

That isn't pay to win. Is it pay to win when MS offers the Forza Car Pass? There are some very good, best in class cars that come in those. No. Pay to win isn;t just getting stuff when you pay. Pay to win is making all those who don't pay spend far too long grinding to get something of equal power/quality. The gaming market knows Pay to Win is a no no, so I'm not worried about it right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frozpot
did say it, they all say it. But I don't buy it. I mean it has always separated the community so why is it only happening now? Could have done this 10 years a go. I'll tell why, because M'transactions are a bigger money maker than paid DLC. Keep the community engaged in your game and the potential for greater profits grows.

That isn't pay to win. Is it pay to win when MS offers the Forza Car Pass? There are some very good, best in class cars that come in those. No. Pay to win isn;t just getting stuff when you pay. Pay to win is making all those who don't pay spend far too long grinding to get something of equal power/quality. The gaming market knows Pay to Win is a no no, so I'm not worried about it right now.

The problem with DLC is it ends up angering the people who buy it as much as those that don't. I buy some maps only to see them hardly ever come up because half the community doesn't have them, or even worse they go BF1 and just give them away anyway.

I don't know if pay to win is a no no. Certainly when EA tried it with a very high profile Star Wars game, people freaked, but other games have it and it gets ignored. EA Sports games are flat out pay to make your team better with their ultimate team. In NHL you can't even build a proper team without spending money on cards. You simply don't have enough players and contracts, and the more you grind, the more it costs you.

AC Origins is pretty bad too. Now because it is SP people don't care. I'm just getting into it, but crafting materials are super rare so being able to buy a few weapons is a big boost. I'm already thinking that if I don't buy the pass for Odyssey that I'll be gimped at the start.

The big issue is that the gaming community picks their battles and ignores others. We've accepted pay to win for select games but just not others like multiplayer fps.
 
The problem with DLC is it ends up angering the people who buy it as much as those that don't. I buy some maps only to see them hardly ever come up because half the community doesn't have them, or even worse they go BF1 and just give them away anyway.

I don't know if pay to win is a no no. Certainly when EA tried it with a very high profile Star Wars game, people freaked, but other games have it and it gets ignored. EA Sports games are flat out pay to make your team better with their ultimate team. In NHL you can't even build a proper team without spending money on cards. You simply don't have enough players and contracts, and the more you grind, the more it costs you.

AC Origins is pretty bad too. Now because it is SP people don't care. I'm just getting into it, but crafting materials are super rare so being able to buy a few weapons is a big boost. I'm already thinking that if I don't buy the pass for Odyssey that I'll be gimped at the start.

The big issue is that the gaming community picks their battles and ignores others. We've accepted pay to win for select games but just not others like multiplayer fps.

There is a and has been for a while a lot of unrest surround FIFA Ultimate team and UT packs. It isn't ignored, but as long as EA are making a billion dollars every 4 months or so they are not going to drastically change it. I do think adding the SBCs has helped them lesson the outrage though. Pay or not you can get a lot more packs today than you could 3 years a go.

I didn't buy the AC pass and didn't feel gimped at all. Didn't take long to start finding some nice weapons. Also don;t need those paid for weapons to finish the game. It is far from pay to win.

Gamer's do pick their battles and that isn't a bad thing. We saw with Battlefront that once that battle is picked and fought the entire industry takes notice. We saw a similar thing with the Xbox One reveal too.
 
The problem with DLC is it ends up angering the people who buy it as much as those that don't. I buy some maps only to see them hardly ever come up because half the community doesn't have them, or even worse they go BF1 and just give them away anyway.

I don't know if pay to win is a no no. Certainly when EA tried it with a very high profile Star Wars game, people freaked, but other games have it and it gets ignored. EA Sports games are flat out pay to make your team better with their ultimate team. In NHL you can't even build a proper team without spending money on cards. You simply don't have enough players and contracts, and the more you grind, the more it costs you.

AC Origins is pretty bad too. Now because it is SP people don't care. I'm just getting into it, but crafting materials are super rare so being able to buy a few weapons is a big boost. I'm already thinking that if I don't buy the pass for Odyssey that I'll be gimped at the start.

The big issue is that the gaming community picks their battles and ignores others. We've accepted pay to win for select games but just not others like multiplayer fps.

There is no chance of them putting a pay to win element in this.
 
So having watched a fair few videos of this game over E3 and I am actually left a little worried now.

They seem to have completely toned down character builds. Stamina, Firearms, Electronics are now gone and haven't been replaced by anything. Minor attributes are now gone. Gear Sets and gear sets talents appear to be gone and no confirmation on them returning. All the stats boosts I have seen have been pretty minimal. Plus, all the characters in E3 videos all seem to have roughly the same weapon damage and health/armour.

Gears sets seem to have been replaced by a similar but far less exciting and powerful system called brands. Wearing up to 3 items of a brand will give you 1 attribute perk per item, but these are small things, things like +20 health, etc. There are no actual set bonuses.

I am very worried that they have massively dumbed down the character builds part of the game in order to get greater balance in PvP and make it more casual/new player friendly.

Obviously, this is just our first glimpse of the game and they could show of stuff leading up to release that totally squashes my issues. Another interesting thing, we haven't seen a single healing skill yet. Everything has been offensive skills--except for a quick ''self repairing nanos'' on the chem gun, which could easily be for tech skills and not the player.
 
I've always wondered about this. It never matters on pc for any game, why does everyone have to be level on console?

Fairness is more fun in competitive games? Its why there's a cap in most professional sports leagues. . Ihate thinking I lost because someone had an advantage over me outside of my control.

PC gamers are forced into bizarre competitive discrepancies because the platform is too hard to police. That's not and shouldn't be the case on consoles.

IMO
 
Fairness is more fun in competitive games? Its why there's a cap in most professional sports leagues. . Ihate thinking I lost because someone had an advantage over me outside of my control.

PC gamers are forced into bizarre competitive discrepancies because the platform is too hard to police. That's not and shouldn't be the case on consoles.

IMO
I totally get it but then all online games will be hamstrung by the lesser hardware (standard X1) and that annoys me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Sunset Limited
I remember a time back in the 90s when some PC players were still on dial-up modems vs dsl or other higher speed connections. One player would ping 400 while another 40. There was no level playing field, but people got by.

While consoles should try to maintain some sort of even playing field, I don't think framerates have to be gimped on higher end systems due to competition.
 
I totally get it but then all online games will be hamstrung by the lesser hardware (standard X1) and that annoys me.

Shouldn't have bought an X1X then. You were told and now you want complain that it won't do the thing you were told it wouldn't? :laugh:
 
Shouldn't have bought an X1X then. You were told and now you want complain that it won't do the thing you were told it wouldn't? :laugh:
Not complaining, I will get it on PC. Just dont like seeing progress being held back by lesser hardware on the basis of "competitive equality"
 
What are your thoughts on people with Elite Controllers?

Couldn't give a crap. It is still a controller with sticks and buttons...it isn't an advantage, no matter how much people like to think it is to justify the silly price of those things. Me pressing A or you pressing a paddle is the same thing.

What are your thoughts on lag switchers, wall glitchers? An unfair advantage is what you want after all.
 
Couldn't give a crap. It is still a controller with sticks and buttons...it isn't an advantage, no matter how much people like to think it is to justify the silly price of those things. Me pressing A or you pressing a paddle is the same thing.

What are your thoughts on lag switchers, wall glitchers? An unfair advantage is what you want after all.
Would you be ok with limiting just the Dark Zone to 30fps if they could?

Because that would be fine with me. I'll hardly touch the pvp in this anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spiritech
Would you be ok with limiting just the Dark Zone to 30fps if they could?

Because that would be fine with me. I'll hardly touch the pvp in this anyway.

Yes...why wouldn't I? I am not looking to begrudge people a 60FPS experience. I just don't think people should have an unfair advantage in online competitive modes. I just don't think they can. If the Dark Zone is like Division 1 then it is embeded within the single player experience.
 
Devs answering questions.




Seems Gear Sets are coming back.

Control points ( the air force one battle in the E3 demo) are dynamic and can be re-taken by NPCs which create a kind of meta game within the open world.

Raids sound like they will be proper raids and not just tweaked incursions.

Survival mode seems extremely likely to come back.

Signature weapons are not a singular choice. You can fully spec/upgrade all of them on a single character (great news).
 
  • Like
Reactions: D-V-ANT
No thanks. Call me crazy but I prefer the old school pricing model. Buy the game, then buy the expansions for those still playing.

I'd rather just know the cost of a game up front rather than getting bled dry over time.