Is the game so bad!?

[Jeanolt]

Hii, I would like to play this on VR since it seems like a good experience. I was just checking the trophies and only a 8% completed the story, which seems really low even for VR. I think only a 18% completed Arkham VR which is really short, but this game is more than a demo. 

 

How's the experience? Is it worth to play the campaign?

[papert0wng1rl]

I can't speak for the VR experience, as I only played without peripherals. The game is not "bad" imo, and the low completion can be explained by several factors.

 

Firstly, this was a PS Plus offering at one point, and a lot of people casually tried it without committing to finishing it. Pretty standard for any free game. Secondly, the campaign is not really the focus of Squadrons. I know plenty of people who jumped straight online and never touched the story mode. If you played Battlefront games, you know that the campaign is just a lengthy tutorial to prepare you for the multiplayer. The story is usually okay, but nothing memorable or important to the overall SW lore. It's just there. Again, the aim here is to bring you online and keep you there.

 

However, where Battlefront offered many opportunities to waste time online through various distinctive modes, Squadrons has only two: Dogfight and Fleet Battle. Dogfight is a quick 5v5 match, where the first team to get 30 kills wins. Fleet is more drawn out strategy match, where you need to take out opposing team's Capital ships and the Flagship. After a while, playing just these two modes the game becomes very repetitive. Because of that a lot of people dropped out soon after starting. Dogfights are still somewhat active, while Fleet is pretty much dead outside of prime times when trophy hunters are boosting. 

 

Besides the repetitive nature, the other reason I saw frequently mentioned online was the steep learning curve. I personally stayed away from Squadrons for three years because I thought it was aiming to be a realistic flight simulator - all thanks to those comments. I couldn't be more wrong. Flying in Squadrons is still very arcade-y and user friendly, with only a few additional manual functions. I didn't find it to be drastically different from the Starfighter mode in Battlefront, but I know plenty of people who think differently. So again, player base dropped quickly.

 

So there you have it. Squadrons is not a bad game. In fact, I find it entertaining enough to go for the platinum. It looks great, it's pretty easy to learn, the trophy list is refreshingly challenging, but the simplistic campaign, dead multiplayer, and repetitive gameplay brings down what could have been a fantastic entry into the SW series. 

[Jeanolt]

1 hour ago, papert0wng1rl said:

I can't speak for the VR experience, as I only played without peripherals. The game is not "bad" imo, and the low completion can be explained by several factors.

 

Firstly, this was a PS Plus offering at one point, and a lot of people casually tried it without committing to finishing it. Pretty standard for any free game. Secondly, the campaign is not really the focus of Squadrons. I know plenty of people who jumped straight online and never touched the story mode. If you played Battlefront games, you know that the campaign is just a lengthy tutorial to prepare you for the multiplayer. The story is usually okay, but nothing memorable or important to the overall SW lore. It's just there. Again, the aim here is to bring you online and keep you there.

 

However, where Battlefront offered many opportunities to waste time online through various distinctive modes, Squadrons has only two: Dogfight and Fleet Battle. Dogfight is a quick 5v5 match, where the first team to get 30 kills wins. Fleet is more drawn out strategy match, where you need to take out opposing team's Capital ships and the Flagship. After a while, playing just these two modes the game becomes very repetitive. Because of that a lot of people dropped out soon after starting. Dogfights are still somewhat active, while Fleet is pretty much dead outside of prime times when trophy hunters are boosting. 

 

Besides the repetitive nature, the other reason I saw frequently mentioned online was the steep learning curve. I personally stayed away from Squadrons for three years because I thought it was aiming to be a realistic flight simulator - all thanks to those comments. I couldn't be more wrong. Flying in Squadrons is still very arcade-y and user friendly, with only a few additional manual functions. I didn't find it to be drastically different from the Starfighter mode in Battlefront, but I know plenty of people who think differently. So again, player base dropped quickly.

 

So there you have it. Squadrons is not a bad game. In fact, I find it entertaining enough to go for the platinum. It looks great, it's pretty easy to learn, the trophy list is refreshingly challenging, but the simplistic campaign, dead multiplayer, and repetitive gameplay brings down what could have been a fantastic entry into the SW series. 

Thanks for the input! Really helpful.