1) Yes, on both consoles.
2) Certainly with any game, especially MP shooters, that question is subjective. Being a Star Wars nerd and a fan of good shooters (even though I'm a below average player) I have fun w/both BF and BFII.
3) For BF I love Walker Assault. For BFII I split time between Blast and Galactic Assault.
4) The campaign's story is canon and bridges RotJ and the new sequels. While a bit predictable it's still cool and I have fun playing it.
5) Eh, I guess? You need to play to power up your star cards and get weapon upgrades, and unlock new weapons. It's not like you start out with crap though. I think it progresses pretty nicely. Both Battlefront games are like that.
There's a lot of opinions out there about BFII...so here's another one!

I think it's a lot of fun and technically it's gorgeous (great on a Pro, and more amazing still on the X1X). It has a solid story and is fun to play MP w/randoms.
If I have any gripe about BFII, I wish the maps on Starfighter Assault weren't so cluttered with **** to fly in to LOL. I know it's supposed to be a bit more about skill this time around compared to the more open skies of BF, but as such I don't play that mode as much as I do in BF.
The only other thing I miss is Drop Zone from BF, my second fave MP mode of the series. Luckily I can just fire up BF still to enjoy that and Walker Assault. Still lots of great maps on the old game too.
I am very much looking forward to some more maps for BFII, and if they want to sub-divide Strike into the games in BF that won't break my heart.
Comment