Alright, I've played the "beta" (c'mon EA, it's a demo) for a few hours (well, about 3 hours or so). Mostly on Walker Assault mode (also tried the solo mission until the last wave).
So far, I'll only judge Walker Assault mode since it's the one I've played the most and obviously the one mode that pretty much everyone wanted to try anyway. So for that mode only I'd say:
PROS
º Absolutely superb sounds quality.
They've certainly used the movies and/or official sound databases. It's probably the 'show stealer' for me. But I'm not surprised, because the sounds in both BF3 and BF4 (especially in BF4) were fantastic. I just think that they've surpassed themselves with Battlefront once more. The sounds (variety and quality) in Battlefront is right now about as close as you can get to pure Star Wars authenticity in a video game, lest simply watching the movies for the millionth time.
º Good graphics, and particularly Star Wars-authentic particle effects.
The visual style (and amount) of flash and particles coming from anything and everything interacting and exploding is top notch. The physics, debris, fire and smoke effects coming from TIEs, X-Wings, A-Wings as they explode or just as their engine starts to burn before crashing is spectacle on its own right. The blasters' laser impacts on different surfaces resulting in different particles ejected from said surfaces (metal, snow, rock, enemy soldiers) is as unrealistic and exaggerated as it needed to be for an accurate Star Wars experience (this isn't sarcasm, Star Wars has always been a visual spectacle 'because fuck realism', the game's overall visual and particle effects portray exactly that very well).
The way AT-STs crumble on their own legs after the pilot's 'cabin' explodes is simply beautiful and sends me right back to stop motion animations from the movies' battles (Hoth, Endor). When Y-Wings execute their attack run on AT-ATs to disrupt their shields the blue ionized effect on the surface is not only clear-as-day to help players visually understand that it is exposed and it's time to focus fire on them, but is also simply well-made. Speaking of AT-ATs, walking (or running) right next to one of them is as impressive as it is imposing (and I do believe the scale is pretty much accurate too).
It's just spectacular, overall. Now of course, there's more to see. I mean Hoth is a snow map, the textures won't be at their best there (they ARE good, just saying that there's not that much in terms of texture details to be found in a map like that). The textures, tessellation, polygons count, it's all there, modern and satisfying. It's a beautiful game, there's going to be more to see in the final version, and I'm certain that in the coming months more DLCs will pop up with more maps with (hopefully) varied environmental settings.
º I actually liked the GUI, and the HUD's UI as well. It is indeed 'streamlined', but it's clean, and to-the-point. I consider this as a positive points simply because I normally loathe GUIs and/or heads up displays when they've obviously been dumbed down or streamlined well past the "consolitis" point as to make it frustrating to navigate in. It's fortunately not the case with Battlefront. Yes, again, to repeat myself, it IS a streamlined GUI. But it merely took me five minutes to get 'used to' it and move on to multiplayer without anything to really complain about. I found my way in options, set up my matches fast, so it serves its purpose well.
And as far as the HUD is concerned it's good. It's non-obstrusive during combat and I can see full-screen action without too many 'hints' or icons, or side-screen windows or bottom screen player-related status information, etc. For me in games like that (focused on multiplayer) what's important with the HUD is usually a matter of seeing what's happening, while not being distracted by said HUD (or as little as possible), and it works with Battlefront.
º Performance was very smooth, and experienced absolutely zero lag/latency issues. On that front, the game seems to be already well-optimized. Now obviously I'm speaking for myself here. I'm not sure if there's known issues as of now, but I myself didn't experience a single "lag spike", not a single crash, or a single screen freeze. I also noticed that all other players in the games I joined seemed to have good performance, everyone seemed to have good response times to what was happening around them (which would normally indicate that there's no lag on their part either). I didn't see anyone appearing or suddenly disappearing and reappearing five meters ahead (as it might happen when someone lags in front of you).
I had maxed visual settings. That is, except for Ambient Occlusion and Motion Blur, which are visual effects that I personally never liked, so I always turn them off entirely whenever I can. At 1920x1080 I had pretty much constant 50+ or maybe 60+ FPS by the looks of it. I didn't actually have a third party software to look at my FPS as I was playing. I might try that later today with Geforce Experience on just to make sure. But I can easily and safely say that it was very smooth even when facing the entire Empire side when the game is about to end as a Rebel soldier (that's the moment in that map when you're looking at the most amount of details on-screen, when the AT-ATs are closing in on the Rebel generator).
So yeah, kudos to DICE for apparently optimizing the game well (at least so far, who knows what might happen when patches or DLCs come out, sometimes patches create more trouble than they're designed to fix).
CONS
º Ok, the actual game-play itself isn't ground-breaking. But it's not really what I'd call "bad" either. It's alright, but it's not... epic, I suppose. I'm not sure if it's the map's design (which is quite linear all things considered) that doesn't help, or if it's perhaps the limited 20 Vs 20 setting (although that number seems to fit the map's size well enough).
It feels to me that combat is either too focused on linear paths (well there's about two or three paths that pretty much everyone takes for 'x' and 'y' objectives, which are pretty much indicated by beaten paths in the snow leading to said objectives) or just isn't scattered enough. Then again that alone probably stems directly from the map's linear design, which "forces" players towards specific locations to a good extent, even though side-tracking is technically possible you'll just end up moving away from the action rather than making yourself useful.
Maybe there's going to be other maps in the final version that will give me the "sandbox" feel I actually like from the Battlefield games (well at least from specific maps in those games). But for now Walker Assault is, to me, a map that is overall too linear, too small and too limited by the 20 Vs 20 setting to truly give such a battle between the Rebels and the Empire going in with AT-ATs (with ships on low orbit) the justice it deserves. In other words, Walker Assault feels and plays exactly like a dumbed down Battle of Hoth.
It's NOT 'bad', however. As I said it's ok, for now. It's sort of fun, but it feels a bit tedious as well after a short time. Well at least it felt like that to me. It IS, however, the best mode available right now in the demo specifically.
º Including heroes (Luke / Vader), in my opinion, specifically in Walker Assault was a mistake. However, I'm not considering the feature in and of itself a bad one. The fact that we can occasionally play as either a Jedi or a Sith is not only fun (from time to time, as long as it's not abused or too frequent) but of course almost mandatory in a Star Wars video game. The problem though, is that specifically for Walker Assault it just feels off. I considered them an annoyance rather than a "fun challenge" to face especially when you're not prepared or aware of their nearby presence.
As far as challenge goes, speaking for myself anyway, it was either 1) you don't hear them and they chop you in a matter of a second or two, respawn and continue, or 2) you see Luke / Vader from a distance, you happen to have a rocket launcher (or whatever the actual name of it is), fire that bad boy to their face, see them "die", move on. In other words, it's either not an actual challenge (they just deal with you in a second) or it's as boring of a "fight" as it gets if you have the proper item to deal with them. It didn't feel "epic" to see them around and my teammates didn't seem to actually want to follow Luke or Vader around (and I didn't feel like doing that either).
Now do I want to play as Jedi or Sith in Battlefront? Sure! Give me an actual mode for that perhaps, or maps with that in mind (as part of their actual design) and I'm in. As it is for now their availability in Walker Assault just isn't fitting for the map and its setting. The battle going on on that map is too linear, situational, focused and objectives-based for me to even start caring about or wanting to look around for a Luke or a Vader. If I do see one and I'm too close I don't even bother firing unless I can shoot them from the back. But there's no "OH SHIT" moment at all, it's not imposing, it's not menacing, it's merely annoying.
º No server browser. That, simply, is inexcusable. If someone wants a "quick game" function without having to browse for a server, then fine, give them that option. But if we actually want to select a server on our own, especially for us PC gamers, then we should have had that ability. I can't fathom why they decided to just go with their current automatic matching system.
º Not being able to control AT-ATs is heresy.
Now here's the thing. That map specifically, Walker Assault (well, Hoth), it's obviously based on the ultimate Imperial objective of destroying the Rebel generator... just like in the movie. Fine we get that. If players had been given the actual ability to fully manually control the AT-ATs then, of course, the map in question would have been completely different... because, obviously, having specific objectives when the inevitable seemingly-retarded player in that AT-AT over there is just doing 360º's on its own axis since the past 10 minutes won't necessarily help the team (not that it'd be possible to actually control AT-ATs for 10 actual minutes... my example was figurative).
The point is that, I DO agree that on Walker Assault (well, on Hoth anyway, not sure if there's going to be more maps for that specific mode) the AT-ATs HAD to be put on a specific track, and that they'd simply auto-move and follow the path to ensure that the match actually progresses. But, again... all I'm saying here is that WE WANT to control AT-ATs. So DICE will HAVE to design a map with that in mind at some point or another. If there's one or two (or more) such maps in the final version then I'll be a happy panda. But if they just don't ever allow that in a proper map where doing that would fit the setting (in a proper sandbox of pure chaotic action freedom Battlefield-style) then I'll never consider Battlefront a full Star Wars experience, sorry.
I want to hop in or spawn in one of those baddies and control it myself on the battle field. I want to squish enemy positions if I want to. I want to just keep walking towards an enemy base as my screen is red with Rebel scum lasers doing absolutely zero effect on my shields while I manically laugh in my command module. When that is done I'll be happy to pay $60 for it.
º For now, the 'classes' on both sides is pretty much non-existent. I am aware, however, that we seemingly have to unlock everything ourselves to actually create the variety (I mean for on foot soldiers at least) that's currently lacking when you're login-in brand new.
I'm considering the default "variety" as a negative point, however, because the 'stuff' that we should be able to unlock shouldn't essentially be everything from the start. I WOULD have liked to select from a 'support' or an 'assault' class from the start and THEN as I gain more credits being able to unlock a few more skins, or weapons or 'gadgets' for that specific class.
Now, on the other hand, it seems to be easy to unlock stuff after just a few matches. I suppose that DICE thought "well, it's easy anyway so... while you wonder why there's no actual classes we on our side were wondering why bothering to create them in the first place". I sort of feel that they just decided to "let us choose" our class... but... instead of just... you know... actually choosing a class on the screen as the match starts we actually have to play the "I'm the useless common grunt" game for the next week until I can actually play with a style I like because I finally have enough credits to do just that.
So... sure on one hand it's easy... so why complaining? Just play and eventually unlock things you like to play with. Right? Makes sense. Instead of giving us actual play styles from the start, pick one we like best, play that one specifically for a week and unlock more stuff for that style of play we like for even more weeks ahead. Right? Well... ye- no actually, doesn't make sense. Well... okay...
CONCLUSION
The demo indicates that Battlefront has probably been rushed to a noticeable degree to "coincide" with the release of the movie in December (I.E. obvious lack of varied content at release, even judging by the greyed-out content for the final version that's currently shown in the demo). Although I'd bet that we'll later on (in 2016) see more DLCs released for it (we ALL know it's going to happen).
One thing is for sure right now. That Battlefront is certainly a successfully terrific, authentic and pleasing visual and auditory experience, it's a spectacle for the senses for the Star Wars lovers out there (and the new comers alike). However, the actual game-play is rather unvaried, bland and quickly-repetitive. The demo is of course limited as of now, and is there mostly to show some 'muscles' with Walker Assault, but even that mode ultimately feels rather 'lacking' to put it simply (then again, it might just be the map itself, maybe the actual mode will be fun in other maps from the final version).
As of now I think that Battlefront succeeds to show that there is enormous potential to exploit in a modern Star Wars multi-player-focused action game. I can definitely see what they COULD do with this. But that I have... a bad feeling about it... that for all intent and purposes Battlefront II will still be much superior in the end, unless DICE "get their shit together" and give this game justice. Give us more modes, give us space battles, give us bigger maps, give us 64 Vs 64, give us MASSIVE warfare... give us Jedi Vs Jedi, Sith Vs Sith, Sith Vs Jedi maps. Give us vehicles-specific maps (that's where I want MY self-controlled AT-ATs dammit!), give us a mini campaign. Give us THE Star Wars game we ALL wanted. And then, and only then will I be willing to pay full price for it. Heck, actually, give me a Star Wars game like that and I'll pay $100 for it without hesitation. For now, it feels "meh", I'll definitely go with Fallout 4 instead, and might eventually buy Battlefront sometime in 2016 when (and if) there's more to it.