I hope you feel better soon dude 😌 gotta be ready for the new season on Tuesday!!

I just hope the Shield bearer and Gunner will be more tanky. So everyone doesnt have to be technician because that was stupid

Agreed. That’s essential for the Division 3s success.

Fr a great tester is the community we can catch exploits,bugs,and items that need tuning faster then they can 😂😂😂😂😂

Not a month that's too late , a year out at minimum

Agreed, I've been on some amazing AAA closed beta testing and the progress these guys are making while being 100% transparent is so perfect and any serious game should be doing.

Definitely a good point, new ideas and features are always exciting. Though I would imagine that data is specifically useful for more core systems that will likely see iteration rather than complete evolution, so as to not repeat mistakes made in the past or things like that.

Would be awesome!

I miss my build with the Big Alejandro + Tactical Link + Lone Star Gear Set. With all those Firerate buffs and the possibility to refill the mag a few times, this was mental :D Sounded like an A-10. Thats just one thing I miss though. There was way more.

As someone who’s only played the 2nd I can’t believe someone missed out on such a amazing game I understand it’s different but come on

Its different for every person I guess. Can only speak for myself. I played both and I liked the PVP in Div 1 more then in Div 2, whereas in Div 2 I liked the PVE more.

Your friends right. Div 2 tried to reinvent the wheel and as usual, failed, and in the process alienated a lot of existing fans. Successive titles that do well have continuity and familiarity, using the same foundation with good additions to supplement each title.

🫡

That's incredibly kind of you to say! Thanks for the positivity 👊👊

🙏 Thanks so much!

No one has a clue what will come out.

Forced pvp in any format will fragment and ultimately destroy the community. Looking at the numbers, most players play pve only. Nice ideas, but it wouldn't work.

If the extra time is given with no set objective then yes I agree there are many examples of bugs persisting as scope continually increases. I should have elaborated, but more what I had in mind was what it was reported Starfield's delay from Nov 2022 to September 2023 entailed, which was a time period exclusively for polishing and bug fixing the existing content, not adding anything extra.

Glad to hear it! 👊

Thanks my friend!

👊 Thanks for watching!

If you're referring to the ETF, that's still an active program they regularly utilize for Division 2 at the moment. They just haven't done in-person summits in a while due to world conditions.

It likely won't be there since they're essentially developing it into its own spin-off with Heartland

It's a valid concern, although I don't think we're too likely to see a "regression" in hardware capability, if that makes sense. The current tech allows for some pretty great experiences, and so I'd imagine it'll suffice for most of what they'd want to do with TD3, even if it releases 3-4 years from now

It would depended heavily on the change in the engine. If the engine changes are massive, they would basically need to recreate those assest. The time is not as long as it would be for new assests but still time is needed. Then you need to test and test and test again to ensure the assests function the way you expect them to as they were built for a different system.

@aaronfilipowich3877 I can't claim to know a ton about that stuff either, so I can't fully answer that. But it's very possible that it takes less than 3 years! I just think that as much as we all want the game ASAP, allowing the team to create a wholly new and evolved experience without it just feeling like Division 2.5 and have a lot of bugs at launch, will be very beneficial.

Any live service Division games are very unlikely to ever get offline modes, as lots of their real-time computing it done via cloud and game servers rather than on actual hardware.

@@RogueGold Oh ok, do you think a Division built for offline singleplayer campaign would do well, would be cool if they made one but it probably wonte make them as much money as the online ones

I think more of those elements will be found in The Division Heartland, and they likely don't want to make the games too similar so as not to compete with themselves

bro tf this is not the sims

Optimal system there IMO is to do crossplay for consoles by default, and then if a console player wants to join a friend on PC they can but they would always go to PC lobbies, not vice versa

It's kind of just a side effect of the genre. It would be really hard to make a Looter with RPG elements and have no bullet sponginess, and make builds + progression feel like they have any payoff and power to them.

@@RogueGold I wouldn’t call it a great example but take a look at destiny, in a sense the game allows from some build crafting and diversity while still not having the sense of bullet spongy enemies, division 3 just needs to hit that fine balance where it keeps its core gameplay but allows for more people to be invested

Hope you enjoy your time with TD2!

It's coming!

100%

😄 Appreciate it!

I can guarantee it won't be on Xbox One/PS4 👍 Massive is already doing that with Avatar this December.

Nope, Heartland is a standalone spin-off title and Division 3 has been announced 👉 kzfaq.info/get/bejne/iJidYN2busXWeYk.htmlsi=UeIKiOWafmRnKhH8

That would be neat! Many want all gear/progression to carry over and I think that's unrealistic, but allowing the characters and storyline to transition would be dope.

@@RogueGold super dope something about creating a character that follows you makes me feel like I am actually part of the world.

The issue is that the Dark Zone was never meant to be a PVP zone. Reclaiming the "glory" of 1.7, as you put it, would be fantastic- but that sounds like what most people want out of a dedicated PVP mode. From conception, the Dark Zone was meant to be the most lucrative endgame farming zone, and for that extra reward the threat of PVP is present. Having a PVE and PVP DZ means that no one who wants to farm would ever go into the PVP version... because why take on the extra risk? At that point there's no reason to have any NPC's or objectives in the PVP version, it would just be a brawl zone and lose all of the DZ's identity. Personally my preferred route would be for them to make a great PVE experience across the game, as that's 95% of the content anyway, make some great dedicated PVP modes for launch that satisfy people's thirst for that, and return the DZ back to its intended form- which is a prime farming spot with a lawless nature.

@@RogueGold yes the issue of a PVE only darkzone inThe Division 1 had multiple threads on the official forums, i use to post on there alot AND i was against a PVE Darkzone. But the issue is that PVE players arent going to PvP. And Who cares if they have a slightly differrent PVE Darkzone than PVP players. There are many ways they could seperate the PVP and PVE darkzones so the PVE is not desirable for PVP players and the PVP DZ is not desiravle for PVE players. This is a issue with Many games that have PVE and PVP in them. The PVE players ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS want their cake anf to eat it to... and PVP players could give a rats ass what PVE players want. If it is set up correctly there would be Numerous reasons why you would want to go into the PVP darkzone and there would also be Alternate reasons to go into the PVE DZ. The issue is no that people would Never go into PVP DZ if there was a PVE darkzone. The Issue is creating Differrnt reasons and alternate rewards for going into one or the other. If they stick to the same model of PVP vs PVE = nothing will change. Lets take Survival mode as a prime example did that kill PVP? Or how about the fact there is 2 seperate games = Div 1 and Div 2 and Both Games still have players in the DZ.. so nothing is going to Kill the PVP Darkzone in The Division. The best bet is to make the best of Both Worlds and then the developers can make the PvP darkzone Like the Division 1 Darkzone was at Release = a Grab you by the balls,edge of your seat,sweaty palmed adrenaline pumping roller coaster of a fantastic time. Instead of the them trying to cater to PVE players that want to play in the Darkzone and players that Cry for their mommy when they get annihalted in the Darkzone.

@dylanlivingston2065 I didn't say that having the two options would kill off one or the other, I just believe that the presence of a PVE Dark Zone would reduce/alter the DNA of a PVP Dark Zone to something that is the antithesis of what the Dark Zone was originally intended to be back in Division 1. Just wouldn't be my preference 👍 I appreciate you laying out all of your thoughts!

@@RogueGold First i want to Thank you for reading and replying to my comments, Thank You! I understand exactly where you are coming from, I am just trying to relate why the Div 1 Darkzone caused a Huge issue for PVE only players (IMO it was the #1 issue) back then I argued against a PVE only DZ. I felt the Same way, that a PVE DZ would take away or ruin aspects of the DZ as it was Designed. (This is also thought to be a reason they split the DZ into 3 smaller zones in Div 2 (No PVP player in DIV 1 asked for seperate smaller Darkzones. The DZ was the Meat and Potatoes of the Div 1 Experiance, why would you ruin that?...) to not make it as obvious that 1/3 of the game is barred from PVE only players(Yes the excuse that nobody is stopping them from entering is a beaten dead horse, just because you can do something, does not mean you want to do something, you are forced to enter a PVP enabled zone to play the Content) Let me explain it this way: Imagine if you Hate First Person Shooters. You buy The Division 1 because it is a 3rd person shooter. But then you find out that the Endgame content (That huge Red area Directly in the center of the Map that takes up 1/3 of the map) is strictly First Person View Only. You would be confused,fustrated and probably angry that you are denied(argueably)the best Content and best Designed Map in the entire game. It woukd 100% make No sense. Now Imagine you are a PVE only player. You paid $59 same as a PVE/PVP player. You open the Map and there in the center taking up 1/3 of the map is a Huge zone in Red. You think"Thats Awesome" and then you find put that if you(as a PVE only player)step foot in there you will be mercilessly Ganked to death ad infinitum. And you find out that this is meant to be the Endgame content to farm the best stuffzzzz. So i the Div 3 instead of making 5 tiny darkzones (For the PVP only crowd that demands Every 1st person shooter game must ne a COD clone = Super fast TTK, small box maps, run and gun shoot,die,respawn yawn fest) All of these things pull the game design in multiple directions: PVE Only, Generic PVP maps,The Darkzone but only with the added risk of PVP(we know PVP in the DZ was the Norm and not a Rare thing) A PVE DZ Or the alternative,and I am completly against this idea = toggleable On/Off for PVP in the DZ

Exactly...this guy is just blowing smoke up the devs ass...they only care about money and div3 will be another half-baked cash grab...

I'll take one

Casuals; A term used to describe people who go outside and engage with other humans, whom also sometimes play video games.

👊👊

Unless they change the genre/fundamentals of the game, games like TD1/2 can't have an offline mode. Many of the systems/sequences are handled offsite and not on your console/PC. Also the latest version of Snowdrop is equally powerful to UE5, and it's Ubi's proprietary engine so they're never going to switch away from it.

@RogueGold I'll have to disagree about the snowdrop engine based on Star Wars Outlaws and Avater. It's nowhere as good as UE5. If no offline mode then they'll need dedicated servers . Still for PVE that's all I really play now on the division as I'm done with the PVP. Would be be what I prefer. But I understand it's probably not happening.

If they "failed" we wouldn't be getting a third one and several spin-offs ;)