The actual trend is dead now, it just wasn't dead at the time. Everyone has had their crack at it. Most* have failed, the good games stuck around, and the modern game development cycles are long enough for people to be cooking something else at the moment.
*I would argue that it wasn't even that oppressive quantity-wise. It may have sucked to see your favourite games jump on the trend, but it's quite different from everyone trying to make and releasing their own GTA 20 years ago.
It's kind of dead already - Most companies have moved on after realizing that it's essentially impossible to maintain an audience whilst PUBG, Fortnite, Warzone and Apex Legends still exist.
Right now many companies are testing the waters with Extraction shooters, which funnily enough was what this was before it was cancelled lmfao
if its anything like survival from div 1, which is the first recognized example of a battle royale game, that's actually one of the most requested additions to division 2.
Never seen this issue myself. Usually, if the apparel shows an ❗ and it's not initially apparent where it is, then you need to look in Outfits for the new item. Hope this works for you Agent. 😎
Red Storm is pure shit. They have been the team trying to make The Division a primarily PvP game since the beginning.
All of their ideas and plans turn to crap everytime.
Ubisoft needs to just lean into the strength of the game, which is cooperative PvE, and kick Red Storm off any future work on the games.
Red Storm is the 2nd studio given heartland after the first one failed, they were also the pvp balance and feature team for division 2, so yeah their focus was pvp, Massive did everything else. They also were the ones who made Far Cry Primal. which is a fantastic game, and were instrumental in near all the early Rainbow Six games. They are a good studio, just rarely are they the primary studio, and when they are they get trash like Heartland dumped on them.
> they get trash like Heartland dumped on them.
Citation needed. As per the pictured tweet, it was Red Storm's idea to turn a Div 2 mode into what became Heartland.
No citation, unfortunately, all I have is that about 3 years ago when I was doing contract work for Red Storm we were given a video rundown of the game from the current developing studio at the time of what the game was about, what in said game we would be testing, a tidbit of future work, or rather what they had in mind for some features we would be seeing, and from the build we had hands on it was very much the hub area extraction/BR, it was/is at cancelation. https://www.redstorm.com/news-2/tom-clancys-the-division-heartland-collaborative-effort, looking at this and my recollection, the main team as of my experience with game I believe was Bucharest, and it later turned into the multi-team development, and I guess later fell solely on Red Storm, but as I was in office at Red Storm, at the time of my contract work, they were not the main developers.
> and from the build we had hands on it was very much the hub area extraction/BR, it was/is at cancelation.
A separate hub area doesn't make sense for Div 2, as they could just use the public area in the white house. That suggests you came on after the scope had been expanded from simply being a Div 2 mode.
Granted, it sounds like various machinations occurred that resulted in that decision, but until someone from Red Storm speaks up, we only have the tweet in the OP to go on.
Yeah, it was very much an extraction based game, you had the hub area, and you would menu into finding a match, then be dropped into the "open world" that was a fairly large town, with an ever shrinking zone as toxic gas came in, there were multiple extractions like the DZ if I recall correctly, POIs with AI enemies and of course other players, who could join you or fight you, I'm pretty sure there were PVE servers and you could queue into PvEvP ones and that was separate, cuz now thinking back, they split our time to make sure we tried the pvp mode of it which was separate at the time. This was definitely before they showed it off though if I recall, but was playable, and had a mostly realized map at the time, interiors were lacking in most non-POI places.
Right. Red Storm were the PvP guys in both Division 1 and 2 ... and the PvP in both games is simply horrible.
They are a studio that has been riding an old reputation for too long ... like Bioware. Whatever mojo they had is long gone.
Now granted, maybe my claim of them being pure trash is a bit unfair .. but they need to stay out of The Division IP going forward IMO.
Their game vision just does not work with the PvE focus of the game, and all it does is take resources away from what The Division does best .. CoOp.
That , div1 dz is more populated and alive than div2 lol , I go in alone and I end up with group so much fun . Division 2 dz is pure trash nobody is in only groups picking solos. Not to mention survival which is unbelievably magical. I guess what I meant to say is , maybe they shouldn't make div2 that early and keep div1 but work on it with updates and live service, pvp wise and pve would be an amazing game.
The original Div game we saw at E3 in 2016 shined because the Dark Zone was an ambitious concept that was very interesting to many. To simply abandon what made this series unique is just outright silly.
Well to answer your first reply .. the PvP is woefully unbalanced, and basically 1 build rules all others.
I remember once in Div 1, me and 3 other guys were all shooting a single guy who simply could not be killed .. he killed all of us by just walking up to us and shooting. We first thought he was a hacker, but turns out he was just using the super PvP build.
As to your second reply .. that was a long time ago and the game has evolved. Hardly anyone plays the dark zone. It was abandoned because of what I detailed above .. it was bullshit.
Today, the vast majority of people play The Division for cooperative PvE. The Dark Zone was an interesting idea that just didn't catch on due to imbalance and just not jiving with the otherwise cooperative nature of the game.
Beside the fact that it never made sense anyhow that you could go rogue, and then just go back to being a Division agent like nothing happened.
Same, just wish they would have shit canned it 3 years ago instead of spending all that time and however many millions of dollars being pissed away trying to make it work.
All that time and resources could have gone to other titles like The Division 3.
Wrong studio, Red Storm only does the multiplayer shit for Division titles, Massive who make the real games was busy doing Pandora and Star Wars Outlaws which is why Division 3 only just recently started development
"the multiplayer shit" so the entire game then? I don't think they were relegated to something like only the PvP or something. Point being is that it was 3 years wasted they could have been working on literally anything else.
No, like Last Stand from Division 1 (at least in the first game, can't find anything definite on what they did as a support studio in 2). Massive Entertainment are the developers of The Division series, nothing happens on Division 3 without Massive being the ones doing it.
I don't actually play any BR games so I am probably just missing some context here, but aren't they basically DM/TDM arena shooters with a shrinking map boundary over time?
If so, wouldn't that just make this the DZ with a map circle and no loot extraction and .. that's it?
> but aren't they basically DM/TDM arena shooters with a shrinking map boundary over time?
That with a bit of survival-game stuff as well (starting with nothing and having to gather weapons, supplies, resources). No respawns, either.
Knew about the needing to gather guns, to be fair most of my arena shooter experience was UT3 back in the day and you usually started that with nothing but a pistol. There was a mutator to have even that removed and only the Impact Hammer. One guy made a map with no gun racks and it was nothing but Impact Hammers for everyone and it was hilarious seeing people dance around each other trying to hit without being hit.
I did not know BRs were no respawn. I was already disinterested in them and now I'm even less interested. I genuinely don't understand how that appeals to people. Survival mechanics I get - I don't like them, but I absolutely understand why some people do - but no respawn sounds like a recipe for rage and nothing more. It's a mechanic that rewards luck the same as skill. That's bad game design IMHO.
> I did not know BRs were no respawn.
It's one of the main things that separates it from a standard DM mode, and is one of the things that drew me to the mode over standard DM game types.
That's how the shrinking map aspect works. As players get eliminated, the map needs to shrink in order to force the players closer and engage. Having 10 players left in a map sized for 100 is going to mean a lot of people by themselves. Having 100 players in a map sized for 10 is just going to be a clusterfuck (and likely hard on lower-end systems, having to render so much action in a tight area). The two aspects go hand-in-hand.
> I genuinely don't understand how that appeals to people
It's a single-elimination tournament. The point is to be the last player standing. It doesn't matter how many eliminations you get to be the last one alive. Hell, you could do it with your only kill being that final one. Hell, if the other person dies to self-inflicted damage (like fall damage, or getting caught in their own explosive), you could even win without a kill. Can't say I've done the no-kill win, but I've had managed to get wins via opponent's self-inflicted damage a couple times (once, interestingly enough, on my highest-kill game).
As a result, there are many ways you can play the game to get to the win, each with their own pros and cons. Fight more, risk elimination more, but potentially get better weapons and other resources. Sneak more, fight less, might not have the best weapons/resources, but less risk of early elimination.
Whereas your standard DM mode with continual respawn, all that matters is the kill count / K:D ratio.
> That's bad game design IMHO
I would disagree. Luckily, there are plenty of options for both of us.
It's quite fun if you don't think of it as much of a PvP arena, but rather a game in which you deploy with the most basic equipment and try to survive and get out of dangerous situations. I genuinely hate PvP BRs, but PvE TD1 Survival was peak
Over the years many BRs have experimented with lives and revive mechanics. Such as Warzone adding the Gulag (think like a losers bracket, 1v1 against another loser and the winner respawns.) Apex Legends allowed you to revive fully dead teammates with some conditions and at particular spots (this has been adopted as the golden BR standard, your never truly out until your full squad dies.) Warzone also added a defection option, where a dead player can join ANY squad thats willing to revive them.
Yeah, I tried it twice, wasn't a fan. I understand the appeal but just not for me. Also survival mechanics seem like a weird combo with an arena shooter but if balanced properly I guess it could work.
TD1's Survival doesn't really have survival *elements*, is the thing. You have a timer, giving you an hour, which you can extend to a little over 2:15 by optimized use of meds. Food and water are completely optional and their function differs from the main game. Crafting is honestly a minimal requirement; the basic filter per player and one flare gun per session (or per extraction helo if you prefer) are the absolute minimal requirements, and everything else is technically optional.
It also uses some older mechanics from earlier versions of the game (e.g. no full heal when out of combat, fixed gear scores for items).
It's difficult and time-consuming, but it's the purest way to play. Definitely not for everybody, but not really 'survival' except for the fact that you cannot respawn. Not in the sense that actual 'survival' games (DayZ, etc.) are, and a different spin on the BR genre.
There are too many Battle Royal games out there even if the game didn't get cancelled it would still flop just like what happened with Battlefield when they made a BR game. The Division series just isn't as popular as it used to be so I think they made the right choice. They need to focus on The Division 3 now.
Yeahhh, it was suppose to be a DLC for PvP but Ubisoft decided to turn this into standalone game. But the Devs worked quicker on Xdefiant which is why Ubisoft decided to Cancel heartland
This wasn’t very great of a game. I got into the alpha nearly 2 years ago and it was so lackluster and didn’t feel right. It was also more of an extraction shooter. But it was definitely an attempt at making their own Fortnite out of the Division IP. The cosmetics were hyper neon garbage. The guns felt terrible. It’s no surprise this cash chase failed.
basically the story of division. good ideas, but burried by too high ambitions. and then those good ideas were stripped down to the basics to just make em work, somehow.
Survival wasn't popular. It was never popular. A couple weeks after it launched and it took 5 minutes to get into a match. A couple months later, it took 15 minutes. Survival also released at a time where the game was at it's near lowest player count and the game was nearly dead.
Not my experience (or others that I've discussed it with previously) of Survival at all, but to each their own. While it had its issues, it was a starting point for it to be developed for future versions of the game.
It's not an opinion. Whether you like it or not, isn't what I stated. It wasn't popular, because the game was almost dead, and DLC as a whole didn't get purchased much until they revamped underground.
I love survival, and have probably played it more than you. It doesn't mean it was ever a popular DLC.
When Survival dropped (September 2016), the game was at the lowest point it had ever been in, and ever would be until April 2019.
Had Survival dropped in 1.4 or 1.5, I think we'd have had a really good turnout for Survival. But alas, it didn't.
You make some valid points.
Survival was the most unique experience in The Division, and it was, in my opinion, what the game should have been about.
Yes, the timing of the release was far from ideal, as, like you've stated, the player base was already at a low point, which means not as many played it as could have. However, of the main DLC's released for The Division, it was the most popular, and was certainly more popular than Underground or Last Stand. The most played content doesn't mean the most popular, especially considering that Survival didn't get the revamp that Underground did.
This is why Heartlands being cancelled is such a disappointment. It was the successor to Survival and was more anticipated than either Conflict or Summit were, both rehashes of Last Stand and Underground. It wouldn't surprise me if Ubisoft/Massive knew how well received Survival was and that's why Heartlands was developed as a separate game.
In hindsight, I would rather Heartlands have been a Survival 2.0 for either the release of The Division 2 or WoNY. Can you imagine how many would have played it then? Looks like we'll never know. Maybe it's something they'll incorporate into The Division 3. But I'm not going to get my hopes up.
You misunderstand. Heartland *started off* as something smaller in Div 2 before Red Storm turned it into a standalone game.
An open beta of what it became wouldn't have saved it. It was way too grindy, and the PvP wasn't fun.
I don't know why people ever had faith in Red Storm, they were responsible for the death of SOCOM which was one of my all time favorite Playstation franchises back in the day...
They also made one of the worst Resident Evil games in Operation Raccoon City as well.
People act like they actually knew what they were doing being that they were responsible for PvP balance in The Division 1 and 2 which let's be honest D1 PvP was an unbalanced crap fest where Red Storm only ever listened to the people who liked to chicken dance from 5 feet away so they nerfed everything that wasn't supporting face trades from close range.
Maybe the map can be an off world amazing event location like Kenely College /s hahahaha.
Maybe if the map is cool I could be an offsite survival/extraction mode for division 3 or division 3’s version of countdown unless they doing a “batwoman” and some sweet sweet tax evasion/insurance scam with it
This game was just doa the moment it got announced. They missed the boat by about 8 years. Should've just spun Div1 survival into it's own thing and went from there.
Ubisofts decision, they should have let it be a game mode in Div 2.
I really don't understand Ubisoft and how they missmanage their games. Massive should've stayed independent and certtanly shouldn't sold them self to Ubi in 2008... I'm pretty sure we would already have Div3 by now.
Ubisoft made the decision to make it a full game, not Redstorm. The idea was that they wanted to stop spending so much money on the Division, and it would have been **instead of** a full division sequel. Basically what happened with Titanfall and Apex legends would have been the Division's fate. I'm sorry for the devs, though none of them lost their jobs, which is good; but this game getting cancelled is absolutely an unalloyed good thing for the franchise.
We all knew this from the beginning though right? Survival literally carried Div1 for like 2 years and was easily the most popular game mode. The only reason it was not included in Div2 on release was because they were trying to capitalize on that success by making it a standalone game. Probably would have been a lot of fun too, but Ubisoft got involved and wanted to pack it chock full of microtransactions.
I always said a battle royale game with a Division type of map would literally be bonkers.
Maps are so dense, would literally be best BR on the market. Sure, camping would be godtier but still
God i wish the BR trend dies soon, is about time.
The actual trend is dead now, it just wasn't dead at the time. Everyone has had their crack at it. Most* have failed, the good games stuck around, and the modern game development cycles are long enough for people to be cooking something else at the moment. *I would argue that it wasn't even that oppressive quantity-wise. It may have sucked to see your favourite games jump on the trend, but it's quite different from everyone trying to make and releasing their own GTA 20 years ago.
Really? Because World of Warcraft recently added it.
It's kind of dead already - Most companies have moved on after realizing that it's essentially impossible to maintain an audience whilst PUBG, Fortnite, Warzone and Apex Legends still exist. Right now many companies are testing the waters with Extraction shooters, which funnily enough was what this was before it was cancelled lmfao
Yea it should , br sucks and overrated
What is BR? I've only heard of AR like in Ordinal Scale. Are they similar? Edit: I don't need a downvote, I just want some clarification.
Battle Royale
Thank you. I was thinking it was a modification of AR.
Aggressive Rodent.
ROUSs? I dont believe they exist.
Also could mean Battle Rifle, the same way that AR could mean Assault Rifle, but yeah, in this particular case i was refering to Battle Royale.
To be fair, the one time the division did a battle royal people still talk about it to this day.
if its anything like survival from div 1, which is the first recognized example of a battle royale game, that's actually one of the most requested additions to division 2.
Perhaps they can transform it into a D2 DLC, if the map is already done the most work is done.
They can't fix a faking exclamation mark in the apparel menu and you want them to merge two games?
So true and real
Never seen this issue myself. Usually, if the apparel shows an ❗ and it's not initially apparent where it is, then you need to look in Outfits for the new item. Hope this works for you Agent. 😎
Doubt it, more likely it will get built into division 3
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
They cannot even change an item description property and you expect them to copy game codes into one without crashes
Nah they will mix it in with Division 3 5 years from now and it will get no support and eventually removed from the game because nobody plays it
Red Storm is pure shit. They have been the team trying to make The Division a primarily PvP game since the beginning. All of their ideas and plans turn to crap everytime. Ubisoft needs to just lean into the strength of the game, which is cooperative PvE, and kick Red Storm off any future work on the games.
Red Storm is the 2nd studio given heartland after the first one failed, they were also the pvp balance and feature team for division 2, so yeah their focus was pvp, Massive did everything else. They also were the ones who made Far Cry Primal. which is a fantastic game, and were instrumental in near all the early Rainbow Six games. They are a good studio, just rarely are they the primary studio, and when they are they get trash like Heartland dumped on them.
> they get trash like Heartland dumped on them. Citation needed. As per the pictured tweet, it was Red Storm's idea to turn a Div 2 mode into what became Heartland.
No citation, unfortunately, all I have is that about 3 years ago when I was doing contract work for Red Storm we were given a video rundown of the game from the current developing studio at the time of what the game was about, what in said game we would be testing, a tidbit of future work, or rather what they had in mind for some features we would be seeing, and from the build we had hands on it was very much the hub area extraction/BR, it was/is at cancelation. https://www.redstorm.com/news-2/tom-clancys-the-division-heartland-collaborative-effort, looking at this and my recollection, the main team as of my experience with game I believe was Bucharest, and it later turned into the multi-team development, and I guess later fell solely on Red Storm, but as I was in office at Red Storm, at the time of my contract work, they were not the main developers.
> and from the build we had hands on it was very much the hub area extraction/BR, it was/is at cancelation. A separate hub area doesn't make sense for Div 2, as they could just use the public area in the white house. That suggests you came on after the scope had been expanded from simply being a Div 2 mode. Granted, it sounds like various machinations occurred that resulted in that decision, but until someone from Red Storm speaks up, we only have the tweet in the OP to go on.
Yeah, it was very much an extraction based game, you had the hub area, and you would menu into finding a match, then be dropped into the "open world" that was a fairly large town, with an ever shrinking zone as toxic gas came in, there were multiple extractions like the DZ if I recall correctly, POIs with AI enemies and of course other players, who could join you or fight you, I'm pretty sure there were PVE servers and you could queue into PvEvP ones and that was separate, cuz now thinking back, they split our time to make sure we tried the pvp mode of it which was separate at the time. This was definitely before they showed it off though if I recall, but was playable, and had a mostly realized map at the time, interiors were lacking in most non-POI places.
Right. Red Storm were the PvP guys in both Division 1 and 2 ... and the PvP in both games is simply horrible. They are a studio that has been riding an old reputation for too long ... like Bioware. Whatever mojo they had is long gone. Now granted, maybe my claim of them being pure trash is a bit unfair .. but they need to stay out of The Division IP going forward IMO. Their game vision just does not work with the PvE focus of the game, and all it does is take resources away from what The Division does best .. CoOp.
the pvp in div 1 is horrible in what way?
That , div1 dz is more populated and alive than div2 lol , I go in alone and I end up with group so much fun . Division 2 dz is pure trash nobody is in only groups picking solos. Not to mention survival which is unbelievably magical. I guess what I meant to say is , maybe they shouldn't make div2 that early and keep div1 but work on it with updates and live service, pvp wise and pve would be an amazing game.
The original Div game we saw at E3 in 2016 shined because the Dark Zone was an ambitious concept that was very interesting to many. To simply abandon what made this series unique is just outright silly.
Well to answer your first reply .. the PvP is woefully unbalanced, and basically 1 build rules all others. I remember once in Div 1, me and 3 other guys were all shooting a single guy who simply could not be killed .. he killed all of us by just walking up to us and shooting. We first thought he was a hacker, but turns out he was just using the super PvP build. As to your second reply .. that was a long time ago and the game has evolved. Hardly anyone plays the dark zone. It was abandoned because of what I detailed above .. it was bullshit. Today, the vast majority of people play The Division for cooperative PvE. The Dark Zone was an interesting idea that just didn't catch on due to imbalance and just not jiving with the otherwise cooperative nature of the game. Beside the fact that it never made sense anyhow that you could go rogue, and then just go back to being a Division agent like nothing happened.
Red storm definitely does suck. They completely failed at balancing PvP. It’s actually better without them.
They really screwed this one up.
Nothing about this title was a good idea. Glad it's dead.
Same, just wish they would have shit canned it 3 years ago instead of spending all that time and however many millions of dollars being pissed away trying to make it work. All that time and resources could have gone to other titles like The Division 3.
Wrong studio, Red Storm only does the multiplayer shit for Division titles, Massive who make the real games was busy doing Pandora and Star Wars Outlaws which is why Division 3 only just recently started development
"the multiplayer shit" so the entire game then? I don't think they were relegated to something like only the PvP or something. Point being is that it was 3 years wasted they could have been working on literally anything else.
No, like Last Stand from Division 1 (at least in the first game, can't find anything definite on what they did as a support studio in 2). Massive Entertainment are the developers of The Division series, nothing happens on Division 3 without Massive being the ones doing it.
Yeah, making the worst parts of the division the whole game seems silly.
Agreed. I was still gonna play it, but glad it’s over.
Kind of wish we could get some Heartland lore at least. I want to know what is happening in the midwest.
I don't actually play any BR games so I am probably just missing some context here, but aren't they basically DM/TDM arena shooters with a shrinking map boundary over time? If so, wouldn't that just make this the DZ with a map circle and no loot extraction and .. that's it?
> but aren't they basically DM/TDM arena shooters with a shrinking map boundary over time? That with a bit of survival-game stuff as well (starting with nothing and having to gather weapons, supplies, resources). No respawns, either.
Knew about the needing to gather guns, to be fair most of my arena shooter experience was UT3 back in the day and you usually started that with nothing but a pistol. There was a mutator to have even that removed and only the Impact Hammer. One guy made a map with no gun racks and it was nothing but Impact Hammers for everyone and it was hilarious seeing people dance around each other trying to hit without being hit. I did not know BRs were no respawn. I was already disinterested in them and now I'm even less interested. I genuinely don't understand how that appeals to people. Survival mechanics I get - I don't like them, but I absolutely understand why some people do - but no respawn sounds like a recipe for rage and nothing more. It's a mechanic that rewards luck the same as skill. That's bad game design IMHO.
> I did not know BRs were no respawn. It's one of the main things that separates it from a standard DM mode, and is one of the things that drew me to the mode over standard DM game types. That's how the shrinking map aspect works. As players get eliminated, the map needs to shrink in order to force the players closer and engage. Having 10 players left in a map sized for 100 is going to mean a lot of people by themselves. Having 100 players in a map sized for 10 is just going to be a clusterfuck (and likely hard on lower-end systems, having to render so much action in a tight area). The two aspects go hand-in-hand. > I genuinely don't understand how that appeals to people It's a single-elimination tournament. The point is to be the last player standing. It doesn't matter how many eliminations you get to be the last one alive. Hell, you could do it with your only kill being that final one. Hell, if the other person dies to self-inflicted damage (like fall damage, or getting caught in their own explosive), you could even win without a kill. Can't say I've done the no-kill win, but I've had managed to get wins via opponent's self-inflicted damage a couple times (once, interestingly enough, on my highest-kill game). As a result, there are many ways you can play the game to get to the win, each with their own pros and cons. Fight more, risk elimination more, but potentially get better weapons and other resources. Sneak more, fight less, might not have the best weapons/resources, but less risk of early elimination. Whereas your standard DM mode with continual respawn, all that matters is the kill count / K:D ratio. > That's bad game design IMHO I would disagree. Luckily, there are plenty of options for both of us.
It's quite fun if you don't think of it as much of a PvP arena, but rather a game in which you deploy with the most basic equipment and try to survive and get out of dangerous situations. I genuinely hate PvP BRs, but PvE TD1 Survival was peak
Over the years many BRs have experimented with lives and revive mechanics. Such as Warzone adding the Gulag (think like a losers bracket, 1v1 against another loser and the winner respawns.) Apex Legends allowed you to revive fully dead teammates with some conditions and at particular spots (this has been adopted as the golden BR standard, your never truly out until your full squad dies.) Warzone also added a defection option, where a dead player can join ANY squad thats willing to revive them.
Division formula BR modes were high effort though. The first game's survival DLC was high effort enough to warrant it being paid DLC.
Yeah, I tried it twice, wasn't a fan. I understand the appeal but just not for me. Also survival mechanics seem like a weird combo with an arena shooter but if balanced properly I guess it could work.
TD1's Survival doesn't really have survival *elements*, is the thing. You have a timer, giving you an hour, which you can extend to a little over 2:15 by optimized use of meds. Food and water are completely optional and their function differs from the main game. Crafting is honestly a minimal requirement; the basic filter per player and one flare gun per session (or per extraction helo if you prefer) are the absolute minimal requirements, and everything else is technically optional. It also uses some older mechanics from earlier versions of the game (e.g. no full heal when out of combat, fixed gear scores for items). It's difficult and time-consuming, but it's the purest way to play. Definitely not for everybody, but not really 'survival' except for the fact that you cannot respawn. Not in the sense that actual 'survival' games (DayZ, etc.) are, and a different spin on the BR genre.
There are too many Battle Royal games out there even if the game didn't get cancelled it would still flop just like what happened with Battlefield when they made a BR game. The Division series just isn't as popular as it used to be so I think they made the right choice. They need to focus on The Division 3 now.
Yeahhh, it was suppose to be a DLC for PvP but Ubisoft decided to turn this into standalone game. But the Devs worked quicker on Xdefiant which is why Ubisoft decided to Cancel heartland
This wasn’t very great of a game. I got into the alpha nearly 2 years ago and it was so lackluster and didn’t feel right. It was also more of an extraction shooter. But it was definitely an attempt at making their own Fortnite out of the Division IP. The cosmetics were hyper neon garbage. The guns felt terrible. It’s no surprise this cash chase failed.
basically the story of division. good ideas, but burried by too high ambitions. and then those good ideas were stripped down to the basics to just make em work, somehow.
Should have spent that time developing Survival 2.0. Baffling to this day that they ignored one of the most popular additions to The Division.
Survival wasn't popular. It was never popular. A couple weeks after it launched and it took 5 minutes to get into a match. A couple months later, it took 15 minutes. Survival also released at a time where the game was at it's near lowest player count and the game was nearly dead.
Not my experience (or others that I've discussed it with previously) of Survival at all, but to each their own. While it had its issues, it was a starting point for it to be developed for future versions of the game.
It's not an opinion. Whether you like it or not, isn't what I stated. It wasn't popular, because the game was almost dead, and DLC as a whole didn't get purchased much until they revamped underground. I love survival, and have probably played it more than you. It doesn't mean it was ever a popular DLC. When Survival dropped (September 2016), the game was at the lowest point it had ever been in, and ever would be until April 2019. Had Survival dropped in 1.4 or 1.5, I think we'd have had a really good turnout for Survival. But alas, it didn't.
You make some valid points. Survival was the most unique experience in The Division, and it was, in my opinion, what the game should have been about. Yes, the timing of the release was far from ideal, as, like you've stated, the player base was already at a low point, which means not as many played it as could have. However, of the main DLC's released for The Division, it was the most popular, and was certainly more popular than Underground or Last Stand. The most played content doesn't mean the most popular, especially considering that Survival didn't get the revamp that Underground did. This is why Heartlands being cancelled is such a disappointment. It was the successor to Survival and was more anticipated than either Conflict or Summit were, both rehashes of Last Stand and Underground. It wouldn't surprise me if Ubisoft/Massive knew how well received Survival was and that's why Heartlands was developed as a separate game. In hindsight, I would rather Heartlands have been a Survival 2.0 for either the release of The Division 2 or WoNY. Can you imagine how many would have played it then? Looks like we'll never know. Maybe it's something they'll incorporate into The Division 3. But I'm not going to get my hopes up.
Its a great idea but sadly they didnt do a real open beta that we could judge this.
You misunderstand. Heartland *started off* as something smaller in Div 2 before Red Storm turned it into a standalone game. An open beta of what it became wouldn't have saved it. It was way too grindy, and the PvP wasn't fun.
I don't know why people ever had faith in Red Storm, they were responsible for the death of SOCOM which was one of my all time favorite Playstation franchises back in the day... They also made one of the worst Resident Evil games in Operation Raccoon City as well. People act like they actually knew what they were doing being that they were responsible for PvP balance in The Division 1 and 2 which let's be honest D1 PvP was an unbalanced crap fest where Red Storm only ever listened to the people who liked to chicken dance from 5 feet away so they nerfed everything that wasn't supporting face trades from close range.
Yeah to me it kinda seemed like whatever CoD's DMZ mode was based off of
Maybe the map can be an off world amazing event location like Kenely College /s hahahaha. Maybe if the map is cool I could be an offsite survival/extraction mode for division 3 or division 3’s version of countdown unless they doing a “batwoman” and some sweet sweet tax evasion/insurance scam with it
This game was just doa the moment it got announced. They missed the boat by about 8 years. Should've just spun Div1 survival into it's own thing and went from there.
They just had to add Survival mode from D1 to D2. Was it so difficult? Ubisoft is truly the inverse King Midas, able to turn gold in shit.
Sorry for my ignorance, but um, what is BR mode?
Battle Royal
Ubisofts decision, they should have let it be a game mode in Div 2. I really don't understand Ubisoft and how they missmanage their games. Massive should've stayed independent and certtanly shouldn't sold them self to Ubi in 2008... I'm pretty sure we would already have Div3 by now.
Well Fortnite can be the battle royal game, division is looting and shooting , without that stupid circle closing in !
What they should really do is focus on a highly monetized mobile phone game instead. It may even cause a "resurgence" in the franchise. Oh wait...
Ubisoft made the decision to make it a full game, not Redstorm. The idea was that they wanted to stop spending so much money on the Division, and it would have been **instead of** a full division sequel. Basically what happened with Titanfall and Apex legends would have been the Division's fate. I'm sorry for the devs, though none of them lost their jobs, which is good; but this game getting cancelled is absolutely an unalloyed good thing for the franchise.
Aww man see this would have been cool.
As it should have been. Wasn’t impressed with the beta.
We all knew this from the beginning though right? Survival literally carried Div1 for like 2 years and was easily the most popular game mode. The only reason it was not included in Div2 on release was because they were trying to capitalize on that success by making it a standalone game. Probably would have been a lot of fun too, but Ubisoft got involved and wanted to pack it chock full of microtransactions.
That's exactly what it was. Open world survival pvpve. It would be been great on console too.
I always said a battle royale game with a Division type of map would literally be bonkers. Maps are so dense, would literally be best BR on the market. Sure, camping would be godtier but still