The Division, considering it is always online and focused heavily on that, especially in the intervening time since its release (no solo, story-focused DLC for instance), it should have been a game that put me off, but the setting, the third-person gameplay, and soundtrack, even the way it develops its backstory through collectibles was great to me. I'm in no way a person that plays online, and when I do, it's rare, and yet the game was my favorite game in 2016. The Dark Zone was an important aspect of the game from what I understand, and yet in the near (what I believe was) eighty hours of play time, I didn't once step in the DZ, but loved the majority of the rest.

What I want out of a sequel is for it not to be always online, as a choice anyway. I never felt it was necessary when you just roam the streets on your own. Just because it makes it faster to transition from solo play to multi-play, it isn't a good enough justification to disallow others to turn that option off. It'd be nice if they fleshed out the world more, putting more focus on story and characters. Lastly, I would like them to spend time creating a better variety of side content instead of it being there mainly for upgrading purposes. You go from district to district doing the same thing over and over, most of the time with the same bits of dialogue from NPC's; the only thing that differs is setting and the task givers having their own personalities. I think they could bring the best of both worlds for people that love playing on their own, and for people that love playing with others online.

I kind of want to go back to the game to just run around the world for a bit, maybe do some of the story missions. Oh, and about that, if they make the structure of the world similar, I would hope they number the stages because I found it quite hard to determine the order of the stages after I had finished them. I wouldn't mind going back through them again, but I didn't memorize the order, and I'd like to go in order of story beats.

I didn't like it enough to wanna buy it. I want them to cut out some of the RPG bullshit from the sequel and improve the controls.

I wrote a blog about my experience with the free weekend, using some of what I said in my Division thread here.

The Division was free on Uplay this weekend. I played it for eleven hours and finished 38 percent of the story. The quarantined, lawless Manhattan looks amazing. It has a strong atmosphere.

I wish the player character talked. My first one also had a permanent expression of disgust. Why was she in such a bad mood all the time? She looked constipated.

You can’t edit your face! I was only an hour in, so I decided to start over with a new character, who was more relaxed in the game.

The gunplay feels rather good. Recoil isn’t too bad. The mechanics are mostly solid, but leave some things to be desired.

You can only swap shoulders when aiming. This forces you to use the over the shoulder view every time you make a cautious right turn. I don’t like having a massive blind spot. Since swapping shoulders is mapped to the sprint button, you can’t accelerate while aiming from the OTS view. The OTS view always resets to the right shoulder.

There is no crouch button. This forces you to use the cover system against high level enemies. They probably could have done both cover and crouch. When you’re crouched, the character could automatically attach to cover, and when you look at another piece of cover from cover and hold sprint without moving the stick, the character could transition over there. It wouldn’t be like in MGSV, where it activates even when you’re standing, and it wouldn’t be like in Tomb Raider, where you’re crouched almost all the time. It would only attach you to cover when you’re crouched. Obviously, it also wouldn’t have an inefficient animation of the character attaching, like in MGSV. They would just lower their self slightly more when you go right up against the cover and stay attached until you pull away or transition to the next piece of cover.

I was having fun going from mission to mission with two to three other players, who were also trying out the weekend trial. Someone in my squad complimented my skills, because I was the only one playing aggressively and seldom using the cover mechanic.

But, The Division is ultimately disappointing. Role-playing game mechanics have a habit of ruining everything. My last main mission was one where you have to restore power to Times Square. I was slightly underpowered. The enemies all took bullets like terminators and dealt pretty high damage. I got through it with another player after several attempts, but I was still bothered afterwards. We had to play it like a whack-a-mole cover shooter and rely excessively on the health regeneration and each other’s healing.

Also, I love how the game has stealth, but never lets you use it. I sneaked through a long train yard, only to then read the objective and realize that I have to kill them all before proceeding. It’s always like this.

The reason I found out this is free is because a few people on a forum I frequent were saying Watch Dogs has good controls. So I started up Uplay to reinstall it and give it another try. (That’s when I saw the Division trial.) But after playing it again, I quickly remembered that Watch Dogs isn’t a good shooter.

Like The Division, it has no crouch, forcing you to use the cover system. Unlike The Division, it has no shoulder swapping at all. This is a pretty basic feature.

Even after I disabled the mouse acceleration by following a modding guide, the aiming still feels horrible. The game slows down your aim if you move the mouse too fast.

The enemies always hide behind cover, but keep their heads usually just high enough that you can pop them off. I’ve shot them through several layers of wood and even thick steel.

That’s good lumber!

The cars are so useless in a chase that it’s easier to just get out and shoot all your pursuers.

I had a lot of fun with this right up until I hit a patch that brought every enemy up to my power and ability and left me absolutely powerless without popping into the Dark Zone, which I sure as hell wasn't going to do without a few friends to back me up. So better balance for people who want to play solo would be awesome. As with most games with this kind of loot, I'd also like to see them go for more flavor with what I can find. Keep it realistic, but it doesn't all have to be drab color variations.

AI partners so I don't have to interact with actual people.

All PvE areas to have real online players if players opt in to. Public events. Interesting incursions.

Put back that tanky shotgunners that can one shot you. (No please don't do that, or anything similar to that ever again.)

@ezekiel: Yeah, you just wanted a different kind of game out of this. I like those kinds of games, but The Division wasn't and didn't need the kind of things you described in my opinion, like crouching. I also like the cover system which was brought over from Splinter Cell (which pretty much started the type of cover). You could have had the other (what I consider also very good) style of gameplay similar to the G.R.A.W. games, which you may have approved of more, but to me, The Division works fine on its own. Also, if you're playing on anything other than the easiest or second to the easiest, you're going to get more bullet-spongey enemies, and I didn't want to deal with that. Would you prefer The Last of Us cover system? I'd be okay with that. I also liked the over the shoulder swapping and had no issue with not being able to do it without aiming in. The camera didn't really give blind spots to me. Sounds like you would have just wanted something similar to The Last of Us.

Honestly The Division to me felt like they sold a game that never was. Even going back to the bombcasts that lead up to it, it seemed the bombcast crew also thought it was a very different game that it ended up being. So much of their pre release made it sound more mmo-ish. Obviously I would not consider it an MMO even what they were sorta promising, but more in that pseudo-mmo direction. The game just felt too much like here is a watered down open world game but we have some minor multiplayer hooks in it. SO I would want a game more in that direction.

That is not to say that that I don't have a lot of positive to say about the game, but it just feel short in a very strong way for me in some big areas.

Honestly I would mainly want a more interesting world to explore. New York City is represented in an accurate and technically proficient manner, but there is nothing unique or special about it. So much of the game is about exploring the city but there is little to no character building and very little of visual interest, making it very difficult to want to go collect all these things they want me to collect. To give a somewhat odd comparison that I think works fairly well if you think about it, I completed both Prototype games 100%. Those games also involve you going around a quarantined NYC and upgrading a character through mindless collecting and killing. But in Prototype the virus causing the quarantine leads to interesting gameplay and story sequences. Furthermore it allows for an interesting visual element to be added to the city. Now I'm not saying that the next Division game needs super powers. But it does need something to spice things up. The missions in the first game are too simple, the variety in side objectives too lacking for the whole thing to be very compelling. And the shooting, while fine, is not enough to carry the experience by itself. I guess I find The Division to be among the most boring of Ubisoft's open world games. The Assassin's Creed titles put you in visually arresting locations and the whole concept of travelling through genetic memories makes the experiences at least somewhat compelling. The Far Cry games combine excellent gunplay with crazy villains and quasi-supernatural scenarios. Watch Dogs has its hacking component and corporate espionage element going for it. The Division is just downright boring by comparison, and adding co-op to everything isn't in itself enough to make up for that.

I really enjoyed the Division, particularly as I went from a 360 being my primary system to a PC and thus losing all chances to continue playing Destiny as friends moved over to PS4s and Xbox Ones and the updates for the 360 version dried up. The Division's environments and gaming loop sat really well with me, my biggest problem was I couldn't get anyone else in my friends group to commit to it or even try it out when there have been free weekends. So I ended up dropping off due to it not grabbing me as much running about on my own all the time.

I think if the game had managed the bumping into random people a bit better that might have kept me going, that random encounter aspect of Destiny created some of my favourite moments, I was just always waiting for those in the Division and they never materialised. If there was a bit more of that in a sequel I'd be much more on board (not sure if this has been fixed in any recent patches - I've been out of the game since PUBG came out as that's all everyone I know seems to want to put their time into now.)

• I loved the snowy New York setting to death, but I'd love to visit different cities in the sequel. An exaggerated version of downtown Tokyo, a more futuristic-looking Paris, etc. Basically I'd love a hub-world with those same amenities you upgraded in the first one -- let's say the Division has now prepared for future 'events' and built a custom X-COM style base to do all that stuff in -- and you do missions in three or four different cities. Or maybe you pick a 'starting city' -- much like Dragon Age: Origins' races -- which effects how events unfold depending on your choice, the order of events, and has a unique intro for each.
• I liked how normal the enemies felt in the original, it created a chilling realism, but some more variety in what you're shooting/doing and how would be cool. Getting attacked by rabid or hungry packs of dogs; giving food to hunger-starved civilians (who may otherwise have become hostiles you fought later); a quest that has something personal with your character involved (based on your starting city maybe). Dynamic fights and events that unfold based on what you do or don't do, in essence.
• The nemesis system could be great in the sequel, as well as a battle royale mode.
• More weapon stats to ogle: armor penetration, stopping power, etc.
• More weapon options like dual-wielding pistols or SMGs. Perhaps at the cost of no sub-weapon.
• I liked the different abilities you could pick and specialize in, but a more 'holy shit' final ability for each path would make leveling more fun in my mind. If it was just something like, "summon mech" and you fired a flare into the air and it dropped from the sky, there'd be very little need to hesitate, and my next playthrough I could pick the other holy shit ability instead. In short: a tangible difference that completely changes your tactics in the field and increases replayability past the level cap.
• Random thunderstorms.

The first thing that comes to mind is a more realistic damage model. I grew to really dislike the bullet sponge enemies. In my opinion it's a lazy, uninteresting way to boost difficulty. And it looks ridiculous to have to put two magazines into a dude in a hoodie before he goes down.

No. I liked what The Division was trying to be, but I think it also had some stupid ideas (like levels, which made enemies above your level tedious to take down) and could have done some things better. I know the cover system is from Blacklist. I still want a crouch and a proper shoulder swap. Never played The Last of Us. The camera DID give you blind spots. If the character is always standing on the left side, you're not gonna be able to see what's on their left unless you make a far turn. The player/enemy on that side will have an advantage over you. Having to use the zoomed view is a poor compromise.

At one point I was slowly strafing at a distance around a debris-ridden street corner so I could get an enemy or two in view (but not all of them) to headshot them. And I realized that scenario is in 90% of the missions in the game. There's other stuff in the game, but you keep coming back to that same street corner encounter. Technically the enemies/corners/weapons are slightly different, but not really. Every street fight feels the same (and there are a ton of street fights) so eventually I just quit.

Two words: battle royale.

Not make the sequel and make a good game instead.

No. I just thought the game was boring, and I played it with friends. We stopped playing after the first chapter. With all of the great coop options available now, it would be real hard for them to figure out something interesting to add.

Expanded skills trees. These loot shooters need more active skills and better differentiation between classes. I felt like Borderlands 2 did the most and still felt slight. The Division didn't really have "classes" but character progression felt very limited.

Sigh, I'll be that guy: Less of a clustercuss of bad political stances and willful ignorance of inherent meanings to their narrative and design decisions. I actually like the shooting, the gameplay loop, and the RPG mechanics of The Division, and the aesthetic is across the board so many things that I like but I get pretty sick of being reminded of just how tonally disgusting this game can be.

And more personally: Yo, The Division was always two steps of mystery, mysticism, and folklore away from feeling like a good Secret World spinoff. I know they'd lose their Clancy cred by doing it but it'd be great if they took those two steps.

No bullet sponge crap

Also this.

I would like to see a Disgaea level of RPG mechanics added, more diverse side content to support that extra level of RPG mechanics, a complete removal of auto-scaled levelling for enemies (edit: I don't think that there is anything inherently wrong with grinding as a form of difficulty selection), and make the game more balanced for those playing solo.

@ezekiel: Conviction, but yes Blacklist later as well as Ghost Recon Future Soldier. And like I said, I had no issue with the blind spot thing since the camera view was far enough out, and in action, you can switch over the shoulder so it didn't bother me. I never once had an issue where I felt my view was being blocked. I think you might like The Last of Us and/or the G.R.A.W. games.

Yes, but this is mainly due to the RPG aspect, which makes it unrealistic, but if you're the same level or over, guys go down fast. Some guys that are a few levels above can also go down with a headshot.

@younggryan: So... Avatar? Okay.

I'd like more enemy variety and strategy. Similar to Destiny 1, the missions are all "run through a series of rooms and shoot generic enemies" and then there's a bullet sponge to kill at the end. Destiny 2 has found some really creative ways to make mission structure feel dynamic and giving you secondary objectives that keep old content fresh, and I think The Division could learn from their example.

Survival was the most fun I had in the whole game. It wouldn't surprise me if they followed that through to its nature conclusion and stuck a Battle Royale mode in their next game.

The bullet sponge stuff became a big problem for my and friends. The lack of any real enemy variety. Guys with melee weapons, guys with guns, guys with guns and very heavy armor and guys with flamethrowers is not NEARLY as much variety as it sounds. The world was empty and though it was gorgeous, it was a smidge boring, ESPECIALLY at end game with nothing to do. The sewers DLC was awesome and the randomization was well worth the money, I probably played that DLC content more than the actual game.

I would want a sequel that works more like Metal Gear 5. Big open worlds, several of them all over the world. Cities, the deserts of Cairo, the jungle, etc. Way way way more enemy variety again, like Metal Gear. Vehicles, tanks, etc etc. A PvP system that works. Just do an opt in PvP system in the game world where people can fight others wherever whenever, and the stat difference between the two players no matter what their gear and player levels are sort of equal out so the fights are reasonably fair.

Also, can we stop with the charging melee guys, please? Seems like every "authentic" shooter since Tomb Raider has them now, when in reality no one would be audacious enough to run with just a melee weapon into the middle of a gunfight.

A compelling endgame.

Incursions, their stab at group endgame content in the style of a dungeon or raid was shockingly bad. I never played beyond the first one, because it was so terrible myself and my friends all quit playing the game the day that content came out. It's possible future Incursions were marginally better, but the game's systems don't really support the type of mechanics driven group endgame content I'd want out of a persistent online game like this, so I doubt they were great.

They'd really need to retool a lot of how the game works in order to implement truly great group endgame content with meaningful depth to the mechanics. That Incursion boiled down to shooting endless waves of spongy dudes and moving objects from one spot to the other. The game would need to be capable of supporting way more interesting types of cooperative encounters (the setting being relatively realistic is a major barrier to this).

Regardless, I can't say I'm interested in a Division sequel anyway, the setting is just incredibly ill suited to this type of game. Anthem is the game I'm looking towards to hopefully be the next great game in this genre, and the first proper competitor to Destiny.

• Add raids for the endgame
• The powers were nice, I'd like to see more powers
• Enemies being less bullet spongy
• A better story and not a mute protagonist
• Having a clan base that you all expand together instead of it only being solo (Warframe has this)
• Maybe a new setting, they probably shouldn't do NYC again... New Orleans or LA, have urban areas and more natural ones (geography doesn't need to reflect real life)

It to be good.