I dont hate it, TTK seems a bit low for me and I really hate the time you sit waiting for a revive doesnt count towards the 10 second respawn timer after you die. BF1 they were tied together, why ditch it?
Building stuff isnt as stupid as I thought it was going to be so thats nice.
Visuals are good, even on low (the game crashes if I go any higher).
I've only used them once, but tanks seemed cool. Slow turret movement was nice.
Grenades and rifle grenades are pretty useless.
Squad revive is nice, although I dont think I've experienced it very often.
I'm a little torn on the revive animation though. I think you should have to hold the button to do it, it really sucks to start to revive someone and get stuck doing it while someone shoots you. I'd rather try and shoot back and die that way then while watching an animation happen.
I saw a kid get handed a JB poster by who I presume was his parents outside my store today....he tore it in half infront of his horrified parents.....There's hope for our youth yet!
I mean, it's a month out. There's not THAT much that can change at this point.
They delayed it for a reason.
I just realized I can take the scope off of my rifle and go for ironsights or an aperture sight (which I'm not entirely sure what that is). Either way, it's combat recon time baby.
I mean, it's a month out. There's not THAT much that can change at this point.
They delayed it for a reason.
I just realized I can take the scope off of my rifle and go for ironsights or an aperture sight (which I'm not entirely sure what that is). Either way, it's combat recon time baby.
Imo the iron sights are a better option for combat recon, since you won't need to unscope to chamber the next round
Well, played the open beta on and off for a few days now. I'm done. I'm trying like Hell to like it, but it's giving me nothing.
It frustrates me a little how frustrated I am about a silly videogame, but after latching onto BF1942 as a kid (and still playing it at LANs), it's depressing to see a franchise I loved move away from me. There are some nice new features here, but it really feels like the gameplay as a whole has regressed, and the setting itself is honestly baffling as shit.
The low TTK is something I think I could maybe get used to over time. Not my preference, but it can work. I dislike the idea as a BF game inherently has so many angles of attack that the "respawn, run, shot by someone you couldn't see" effect is unavoidable.
I think the biggest issue is that there's no feeling of a greater battle, just small shootouts in a larger map. There's little sense of a frontline, nor a flow to battle, just people plinking at each other in small groups. I'll occasionally press tab just to make sure that, yes, there are indeed still 64 players in the server.
I tend to main medic and occasionally support in BF games, as I tend to enjoy supporting from midline more than assaulting positions. The lowerd amm and health regen is a good change, I think. While I thought health and ammo crates needing interaction to work was a good idea when I heard of it though, in reality it means positions will get overrun as people fail to utilise them (either not knowing they have to ineract with them now, or more likely, simply not noticing the box in the chaos and detailed environments). Building is a nice idea, but feels far too scripted and artificial, and doesn't have much of an effect. I do hope that building does get into the next BF game though as a more thought-out feature, as it's a good idea for the franchise.
Like the building, the explosives are generally better and should work well for the next franchise entry. Ammo not regenerating grenades keeps down spamming, which is a big improvement over BF1's constant explosives fest. Tanks also feel alright. Not especially good or bad, but fine. Planes feel completely pointless right now, but that could vary depending on map.
The gun upgrade system feels pointless and clunky - it's hidden behind submenus, can't be reverted (I believe?), and has no visual effect beyond changing invisible gun stats. It's rubbish design. The gun customisation keeps pulling me out of the setting, with things like ridiculous sights on rifles and such pulling me out of the setting. The UI in general is pretty bad, as despite liking the clean look obviously ported from BF1, the amount of menu switching and lack of ingame functions is a huge oversight given the obvious focus on customisation and specialisation. Willing to give that they might fix this in a patch, though.
Adding to this, the wider customisation grates. Requiring a UI marker to tell apart enemies and allies is poor design, and doesn't really work at extreme close ranges like house to house fighting. An example of this done well is Red Orchestra 2, with not just obvious colour and uniform differences between Soviets and Germans, but also different animations in how they run with their rifles making target identification extremely easy. The immersion is shot to shit, as none of this feels anything like WW2 any more. Allies and Axis using each other's weapons, wearing weird outfits, and having regalia, labels, and logos all carefully sterilised removes any sense of the conflict this is supposedly set in. When CoD:WW2 did this I shrugged and moved on, as I preferred BF, but now it seems to be copying the very things I avoid CoD for.
Overall, the game feels like a confused mess. A Battlefield entry pulled in so many directions that it's lost any sense of identity and become a faceless shooter. There are a lot of ways I think this could have won me over, but it manages to just avoid every one of them in favour of a more clumsy way of doing things. If it had struck out as a scifi, alt-history, or post-apoc game, DICE would've been free to get the most use out of the new ideas (soldier customisation, building, gadgets, upgrade trees, soldier subclasses), fresh and inventive maps, and develop an aesthetic style with more easily differentiated teams, without awkwardly shoehorning them into a setting where nothing quite sticks together as a cohesive whole.
I'll sit this one out, which I never thought I'd say about a BF game. Hell, even Bad Company 2 managed to win me over despite extreme scepticism. I do have hope that the next Battlefield game can take what works and fix what doesn't, and improve on what are some genuinely solid ideas stuck in an otherwise mediocre game.
I hope others can enjoy this, though. BFV just Isn't For Me. If you like it. more power to you. As I said before, ain't gonna shit on anyone for liking something I don't.
I watched a bit of this today and it's probably the first main BF game I'm not even going to bother trying. Suriko's post more eloquently explains it than I could, I just agree the series has continually devolved into something bland. They've gone away from defined armies with an actual battle for the map in place of another arcadey shooter that forgets its roots. Each iteration has a few fun things, I'm sure this one does too, but the iconic battlefield experience from bf1942 isn't any where to be seen in these games any more.
Yeah lower ammo is better. Squad revive is good. I like the checkpoints in conquest have depots, but none of these play like a battlefield.
What's really baffling to me though is how fucking awful the UI and customization system is. I can understand how they arrived where they have in terms of gameplay goals even if I don't like it, but jesus christ some of the UI decisions are just dumb. It just keeps getting worse every Battlefield.
I think I'm skipping this. Or at least waiting for a deep sale.
And man, that feels bad.
I was hoping the beta would sell me but honestly I got bored. Super quick deaths in between few and far between one or two man engagements with lots of running around while... nothing happens. I had nothing close to a Battlefield moment during this beta. It felt too spaced out and boring. No real sense of a frontline and no areas that attracted a lot of heat. Rotterdam mostly saw flags changing hands by the minute. That tells me nobody was actually fighting, but instead running circles capping flags and getting in passing shootouts.
Building felt completely useless as a mechanic. Destruction seemed to be toned way down (though, this may just be the maps in play, one being snowy and having largely predestroyed environments, the other being a city) The limited ammo wasn't really a big deal. I don't feel like it really changed my gameplay except that I found out the ammo depots were more reliable than my teammates. Gun play was good but I dunno. It's not enough.
Honestly feels like they took several big steps back coming off of BF1 and they don't really know what they're trying to be.
I have to confess that I haven't played the beta (just been watching Jackfrags and LevelCap play it), but something that I can't stop seeing in Rotterdam as soon as I noticed it are the recycled building interiors from BF1 Amiens.
| Origin/R*SC: Ein7919 | Battle.net: Erlkonig#1448 | XBL: Lexicanum | Steam: Der Erlkönig (the umlaut is important) |
I honestly dont understand some of the points you guys make, but that's fine. The style of this game is clearly very different from bf4 and that's perfect for me but not for others.
I guess you guys play a lot of conquest when you say there isn't a focused frontline? On grand operations you have huge mashes of people, like over 50% of the server will continuously fight the same piece of land. But I've always preferred the more focused game modes like rush.
For me I have more or less constant action, because youre so fast and nimble I can always be fighting something, and the shooting is tight, easy even. Which is why it's so easy to just get killed over and over, but at the same time I keep dodging out of situations a lot.
Having a medic pal to play with makes a huge difference, but even solo while I cant take objectives I can still play it like a shooter.
I had much more of your guys experience with bf3 and bf4, just tons of instasnipes from any gun category, and I hate the stagnant explosive spams of earlier games. The weak explosive weapons and the new revive/ammo mechanics of bfv are really attractive for me. I wasnt even interested in this game before the beta.
I guess in the end it comes down to what a battlefield moment is for you. For me it was always a crazy clutch objective you take with your squad in BC2 against all odds. And we took objectives and shot a ludicrous amount of germans in the beta when the squad system didn't screw us so it seems right in my ballpark.
I mean, it's a month out. There's not THAT much that can change at this point.
They delayed it for a reason.
I just realized I can take the scope off of my rifle and go for ironsights or an aperture sight (which I'm not entirely sure what that is). Either way, it's combat recon time baby.
Didn't catch that it got delayed.
Well now I'm pretty worried. I really, really didn't like how restrictive BF1 was, so with the sudden removal of archetypes into combat roles and the fact they're absent from this beta, I wonder if they're making it go back to that very rigid, limited playstyle.
If you want a defined frontline and have it feel like something epic, do the grand conquest. Having one attacker and one defender really changes the flow. Also one side air dropping in at night while the other fires AA guns is pretty fun.
I'd like to give a "special" mention to whoever thought "leave with squad" was a good idea for random squads. I really enjoy being randomly pulled from a game because the squad leader I was automatically assigned to decided to quit.
I tend to main medic and occasionally support in BF games, as I tend to enjoy supporting from midline more than assaulting positions. The lowerd amm and health regen is a good change, I think. While I thought health and ammo crates needing interaction to work was a good idea when I heard of it though, in reality it means positions will get overrun as people fail to utilise them (either not knowing they have to ineract with them now, or more likely, simply not noticing the box in the chaos and detailed environments). Building is a nice idea, but feels far too scripted and artificial, and doesn't have much of an effect. I do hope that building does get into the next BF game though as a more thought-out feature, as it's a good idea for the franchise.
I've been mostly playing medic and for the most part I don't see the point of the crate, outside of when you establish a solid defensive line on grand conquest and are holding a point for a while. Otherwise the packets seem perfectly fine, they are very easy to spam out while on the move, and you can easily keep 10+ people topped off with them. People don't need to notice them, people don't need to interact with anything. You just quietly keep your sector of the battlefield kicking ass. So, for general gameplay I vastly prefer the grenade launcher on my medic for the situations when lobbing something through a window is what the situation calls for.
I'd like to give a "special" mention to whoever thought "leave with squad" was a good idea for random squads. I really enjoy being randomly pulled from a game because the squad leader I was automatically assigned to decided to quit.
The system is broken, I think it's because they're testing the servers so they cant handle the requests. You keep getting "sucked" into requests that happened minutes ago. If you go into a bunch of squads during a session you'll start pinballing around later, including into squads in other matches!
It'll probably fix itself if they give the servers enough juice in the live version. They seriously have to fix the respawn bug though, dont res people you're not sure are critically dead or not.
See to me battlefield is conquest mode. It started getting away from that with Rush in bf3. Those other modes are fun, but those aren't battlefield to me. That's some other game.
And that's part of the reason I've lost interest in the franchise, because it's become another game.
That's not saying anyone who enjoys those other modes doesn't have a valid opinion. They're fun.
I mean, it's a month out. There's not THAT much that can change at this point.
They delayed it for a reason.
I just realized I can take the scope off of my rifle and go for ironsights or an aperture sight (which I'm not entirely sure what that is). Either way, it's combat recon time baby.
Didn't catch that it got delayed.
Well now I'm pretty worried. I really, really didn't like how restrictive BF1 was, so with the sudden removal of archetypes into combat roles and the fact they're absent from this beta, I wonder if they're making it go back to that very rigid, limited playstyle.
From what I understand some of the archetypes have smgs in the recon branch. Sounds like that there will be differences
I saw a kid get handed a JB poster by who I presume was his parents outside my store today....he tore it in half infront of his horrified parents.....There's hope for our youth yet!
The weapon upgrade system is a piece of shit and I told them so in long essay form in my beta survey.
As someone who doesn't really care about weapon upgrade systems, and like, just longs for the old days when you had everything from release... what don't you like about this particular system?
0
Zilla36021st Century. |She/Her|Trans* Woman In Aviators Firing A Bazooka. ⚛️Registered Userregular
I tried the beta, and all I want to know is, are bullet impact decals synced between players?
Because I did this whilst walking around the maps and admiring the handiwork:
Which is like the exact opposite of this game, which is ridiculously good looking and sounding, but nowhere near as fun as the fun I had many years ago playing BF1942.
Or even BF1943, which is on XB1 back-compat and I already own. (Actually it's amazing that EA/DICE are still keeping the servers up for that!)
The weapon upgrade system is a piece of shit and I told them so in long essay form in my beta survey.
As someone who doesn't really care about weapon upgrade systems, and like, just longs for the old days when you had everything from release... what don't you like about this particular system?
I mean, every step that of the process is annoying to accomplish as a process of playing or as an implementation of the UI. I like filling bars like any other person, but what I don’t like is not having a clear path of achievable progression. It’s like endlessly frustrating trying to figure out what loadout I would like to have and then realizing it’s going to be like 350 hours of focused gameplay before I can achieve it.
Finally hit rank 10 as Support, put together a fun point defense loadout for Rotterdam
Shotgun, incendiary grenade, s mines. Cut off as many entrances to the point as you can with fortifications, drop mines at the entrances farthest from you, then camp one side with the shotgun. Take potshots with the slug rounds as you like. Really like that you don't have to choose between slugs or buckshot in this!
Yeah WW2 was not know for it's highly customizable guns.
Eh, this game isn't really interested in historical accuracy at all so I don't see why they'd limit themselves on gun customization.
Personally I have quite enjoyed the beta and will probably be picking up the game. This game just has a lot of cool moments for me.
Our recon spotted an enemy tank at a distance so I ran out as my assault with our support. He threw up some sandbags while I laid down covering fire and then he got some tank traps up on the road. This stalled the tank out and let me put some panzerfausts into it's side, which only served to enrage it. We both sprinted back to the point under heavy fire so I could grab some more ammo from the crate, only for a plane to drop a bomb on the ammo crate as I was using it, knocking me out and destroying the crate. The support rebuilt it while my medic got me back up. Got 3 more panzerfaust rounds, recon got eyes back on the tank, I hid in a building, and slammed panzerfausts into the side while the support threw mines on it from above and it blew up in a glorious fashion.
The weapon upgrade system is a piece of shit and I told them so in long essay form in my beta survey.
As someone who doesn't really care about weapon upgrade systems, and like, just longs for the old days when you had everything from release... what don't you like about this particular system?
Essentially it just has little depth and no graphics in the game, so you don't get sweet muzzle breaks and grips, your gun just gets better. The lack of depth is because you can only make 2** builds with each gun, though to be fair who ever had more than 1 build on their gun in battlefield games. Then there's a bunch of people who say that in previous games attachements had penalties so they weren't overpowered, they were just different choices! Except that isn't really true, a leveled gun was always much better and tons of attachements had flat bonuses.
The system sure is boring, but I will say that in BFV the system seems very fast to unlock. Compare to BF4 where you might need to grind and grind and grind in order to get the sweet stuff, BFV gives you upgrades easily and really only requires points you can get from anywhere.
**Edit: Actually there's 3 last-level upgrades, not 2, but still not a lot of options.
That's about all I can say I enjoyed. Low TTK, limited support capabilities, no tactical command system. It's just not a Battlefield game, at least not why I loved playing the series. I wasnt a fan of Battlefield ww1 either though.
I was all excited to play the BF5 beta tonight. Kids are in bed, beer is cracked, I go to play and Origin tells me I need to download new Geforce drivers.
I go to do that, but first I have to update the updaer (Geforce experience.)
Then I need to remember my fucking username and password to download drivers for my hardware, which is why I never update to begin with. So fucking stupid.
Just... don't use Geforce Experience, then? There's the option to just download the drivers and not install Experience.
I really miss the recording but yeah, from the very moment they wanted me to use an account I uninstalled that shit the first time it refused to launch when I couldn't connect to their authentication servers. Fuck Nvidia.
GUY. take a breath. You sync it to your 2 form factor gmail and walk away. And you enter that a sum total of once ever and you are done.
This isnt a giant burden, this is a you problem.
Well that's nice, at least back then I didn't know it existed or it wasn't a thing. It's still stupid Nvidia now wants an account. But still, Nvidia has increasingly become a scummy company so the sentiment remains!
I was all excited to play the BF5 beta tonight. Kids are in bed, beer is cracked, I go to play and Origin tells me I need to download new Geforce drivers.
I go to do that, but first I have to update the updaer (Geforce experience.)
Then I need to remember my fucking username and password to download drivers for my hardware, which is why I never update to begin with. So fucking stupid.
Just... don't use Geforce Experience, then? There's the option to just download the drivers and not install Experience.
I really miss the recording but yeah, from the very moment they wanted me to use an account I uninstalled that shit the first time it refused to launch when I couldn't connect to their authentication servers. Fuck Nvidia.
GUY. take a breath. You sync it to your 2 form factor gmail and walk away. And you enter that a sum total of once ever and you are done.
This isnt a giant burden, this is a you problem.
Well that's nice, at least back then I didn't know it existed or it wasn't a thing. It's still stupid Nvidia now wants an account. But still, Nvidia has increasingly become a scummy company so the sentiment remains!
Completely off topic, but is that actually easier than entering an account? I mean, don't get me wrong, I completely understand anyone who doesn't want to register with the Nvidia forums to download drivers (especially considering you can still do it the old fashion way, with zero account, or hell, just not give a shit about day one GPU patches and let Windows 10 do it). It certainly sound stupid, and it's pretty stupid in real life. But between entering in a password once a year (literally) whenever the GeForce Experience sees fit to erase it, and fucking around with two form factor account authentication for my Nvidia account, of all things....I've never woken up in the middle of the night and thought, "Gosh, I'm afraid Russian hackersthe NSAJohn Brennan's stoogesIranian hackers the Taiwanese overseas mafia is going to steal my Nvidia account information!"
If it's more convenient, it's more convenient, I guess. And I can't argue Nvidia isn't doing its share of dubious shit. Two words: RTX Charts.
Synthesis on
+2
acidlacedpenguinInstitutionalizedSafe in jail.Registered Userregular
The weapons selection in the beta seemed to suck, but I just assumed that was it being the beta. Gradual addition of weapons with the DLC packs is kind of how the franchise makes its living, no? Wait until the Afrika Korps DLC for the MG34 (better accuracy than the MG42), wait until the Operational Barbarossa expansion for any Red Army weapons, that sort of thing?
The weapons selection in the beta seemed to suck, but I just assumed that was it being the beta. Gradual addition of weapons with the DLC packs is kind of how the franchise makes its living, no? Wait until the Afrika Korps DLC for the MG34 (better accuracy than the MG42), wait until the Operational Barbarossa expansion for any Red Army weapons, that sort of thing?
The weapon upgrade system is a piece of shit and I told them so in long essay form in my beta survey.
As someone who doesn't really care about weapon upgrade systems, and like, just longs for the old days when you had everything from release... what don't you like about this particular system?
Essentially it just has little depth and no graphics in the game, so you don't get sweet muzzle breaks and grips, your gun just gets better. The lack of depth is because you can only make 2** builds with each gun, though to be fair who ever had more than 1 build on their gun in battlefield games. Then there's a bunch of people who say that in previous games attachements had penalties so they weren't overpowered, they were just different choices! Except that isn't really true, a leveled gun was always much better and tons of attachements had flat bonuses.
The system sure is boring, but I will say that in BFV the system seems very fast to unlock. Compare to BF4 where you might need to grind and grind and grind in order to get the sweet stuff, BFV gives you upgrades easily and really only requires points you can get from anywhere.
**Edit: Actually there's 3 last-level upgrades, not 2, but still not a lot of options.
Just noticed that at least some of the upgrades seem to change the visuals on the gun. I mean, for sure now that I have a bayonet for the first sniper rifle a bayonet appeared on my gun. And pretty sure grabbing one of the final upgrades on my SMG added a foregrip to it. I... don't think there was a foregrip on it before? But I may have just not noticed it. For sure the bayonet wasn't there before.
I actually like a fair amount of changes in the new Battlefield. The fortification mechanic, the bigger focus on capture points and teamplay with the limited amount of ammo and limited health regeneration, the fact that vehicles aren't as unbeatable as they were in Battlefield 4, the list goes on.
And yet, I probably won't buy the game at launch for two reasons: 1. The fact that the existing Battlefield playerabase seems VERY divided on this entry really makes me fear that the game won't have a stable population, at least not for long. 2. The poor handling of news and repeated anouncements of "feature X actually won't be in the game at launch" also makes me worry how they'd handle the game post-launch. I don't want to buy a game only to finally have all features initially anounced for launch avaiable half a year later.
What are people's thoughts on here? Buy/wait/skip?
After sinking a few hours into the beta this weekend, I think I'll be skipping it. The gunplay and general chaoticness of BF1 didn't jive well with me, and while I like some mechanics here (teamplay stuff, fortifications, better feeling guns), something just isn't clicking with me. I like shooters with fast TTK (or one hit kill), but in combination with the speed of battlefield, it just feels like a bit of a mess. Like, the gunplay wants me to be cautious, but the rest of the game wants me to blitz around. Which just means I die a lot and having to interact with the resurrect screen over and over got really grating.
All I want to do is go play Red Orchesta / Rising Storm now, which is exactly the same reaction I had to BF1.
I'm waiting for multiple reasons as well. 1) I'll have a newborn to care for, so kinda not buying any games right now. 2) Everything just seems like it will be better next time. Like every iteration seems that way now but this one especially, just feels like it isn't doing anything full blown, so I'm going to wait for the refined version that comes out with Battlefield VI or whatever.
Posts
Building stuff isnt as stupid as I thought it was going to be so thats nice.
Visuals are good, even on low (the game crashes if I go any higher).
I've only used them once, but tanks seemed cool. Slow turret movement was nice.
Grenades and rifle grenades are pretty useless.
Squad revive is nice, although I dont think I've experienced it very often.
I'm a little torn on the revive animation though. I think you should have to hold the button to do it, it really sucks to start to revive someone and get stuck doing it while someone shoots you. I'd rather try and shoot back and die that way then while watching an animation happen.
They delayed it for a reason.
I just realized I can take the scope off of my rifle and go for ironsights or an aperture sight (which I'm not entirely sure what that is). Either way, it's combat recon time baby.
FFXIV - Milliardo Beoulve/Sargatanas
Imo the iron sights are a better option for combat recon, since you won't need to unscope to chamber the next round
My Steam
It frustrates me a little how frustrated I am about a silly videogame, but after latching onto BF1942 as a kid (and still playing it at LANs), it's depressing to see a franchise I loved move away from me. There are some nice new features here, but it really feels like the gameplay as a whole has regressed, and the setting itself is honestly baffling as shit.
The low TTK is something I think I could maybe get used to over time. Not my preference, but it can work. I dislike the idea as a BF game inherently has so many angles of attack that the "respawn, run, shot by someone you couldn't see" effect is unavoidable.
I think the biggest issue is that there's no feeling of a greater battle, just small shootouts in a larger map. There's little sense of a frontline, nor a flow to battle, just people plinking at each other in small groups. I'll occasionally press tab just to make sure that, yes, there are indeed still 64 players in the server.
I tend to main medic and occasionally support in BF games, as I tend to enjoy supporting from midline more than assaulting positions. The lowerd amm and health regen is a good change, I think. While I thought health and ammo crates needing interaction to work was a good idea when I heard of it though, in reality it means positions will get overrun as people fail to utilise them (either not knowing they have to ineract with them now, or more likely, simply not noticing the box in the chaos and detailed environments). Building is a nice idea, but feels far too scripted and artificial, and doesn't have much of an effect. I do hope that building does get into the next BF game though as a more thought-out feature, as it's a good idea for the franchise.
Like the building, the explosives are generally better and should work well for the next franchise entry. Ammo not regenerating grenades keeps down spamming, which is a big improvement over BF1's constant explosives fest. Tanks also feel alright. Not especially good or bad, but fine. Planes feel completely pointless right now, but that could vary depending on map.
The gun upgrade system feels pointless and clunky - it's hidden behind submenus, can't be reverted (I believe?), and has no visual effect beyond changing invisible gun stats. It's rubbish design. The gun customisation keeps pulling me out of the setting, with things like ridiculous sights on rifles and such pulling me out of the setting. The UI in general is pretty bad, as despite liking the clean look obviously ported from BF1, the amount of menu switching and lack of ingame functions is a huge oversight given the obvious focus on customisation and specialisation. Willing to give that they might fix this in a patch, though.
Adding to this, the wider customisation grates. Requiring a UI marker to tell apart enemies and allies is poor design, and doesn't really work at extreme close ranges like house to house fighting. An example of this done well is Red Orchestra 2, with not just obvious colour and uniform differences between Soviets and Germans, but also different animations in how they run with their rifles making target identification extremely easy. The immersion is shot to shit, as none of this feels anything like WW2 any more. Allies and Axis using each other's weapons, wearing weird outfits, and having regalia, labels, and logos all carefully sterilised removes any sense of the conflict this is supposedly set in. When CoD:WW2 did this I shrugged and moved on, as I preferred BF, but now it seems to be copying the very things I avoid CoD for.
Overall, the game feels like a confused mess. A Battlefield entry pulled in so many directions that it's lost any sense of identity and become a faceless shooter. There are a lot of ways I think this could have won me over, but it manages to just avoid every one of them in favour of a more clumsy way of doing things. If it had struck out as a scifi, alt-history, or post-apoc game, DICE would've been free to get the most use out of the new ideas (soldier customisation, building, gadgets, upgrade trees, soldier subclasses), fresh and inventive maps, and develop an aesthetic style with more easily differentiated teams, without awkwardly shoehorning them into a setting where nothing quite sticks together as a cohesive whole.
I'll sit this one out, which I never thought I'd say about a BF game. Hell, even Bad Company 2 managed to win me over despite extreme scepticism. I do have hope that the next Battlefield game can take what works and fix what doesn't, and improve on what are some genuinely solid ideas stuck in an otherwise mediocre game.
I hope others can enjoy this, though. BFV just Isn't For Me. If you like it. more power to you. As I said before, ain't gonna shit on anyone for liking something I don't.
Old PA forum lookalike style for the new forums | My ko-fi donation thing.
What's really baffling to me though is how fucking awful the UI and customization system is. I can understand how they arrived where they have in terms of gameplay goals even if I don't like it, but jesus christ some of the UI decisions are just dumb. It just keeps getting worse every Battlefield.
And man, that feels bad.
I was hoping the beta would sell me but honestly I got bored. Super quick deaths in between few and far between one or two man engagements with lots of running around while... nothing happens. I had nothing close to a Battlefield moment during this beta. It felt too spaced out and boring. No real sense of a frontline and no areas that attracted a lot of heat. Rotterdam mostly saw flags changing hands by the minute. That tells me nobody was actually fighting, but instead running circles capping flags and getting in passing shootouts.
Building felt completely useless as a mechanic. Destruction seemed to be toned way down (though, this may just be the maps in play, one being snowy and having largely predestroyed environments, the other being a city) The limited ammo wasn't really a big deal. I don't feel like it really changed my gameplay except that I found out the ammo depots were more reliable than my teammates. Gun play was good but I dunno. It's not enough.
Honestly feels like they took several big steps back coming off of BF1 and they don't really know what they're trying to be.
I guess you guys play a lot of conquest when you say there isn't a focused frontline? On grand operations you have huge mashes of people, like over 50% of the server will continuously fight the same piece of land. But I've always preferred the more focused game modes like rush.
For me I have more or less constant action, because youre so fast and nimble I can always be fighting something, and the shooting is tight, easy even. Which is why it's so easy to just get killed over and over, but at the same time I keep dodging out of situations a lot.
Having a medic pal to play with makes a huge difference, but even solo while I cant take objectives I can still play it like a shooter.
I had much more of your guys experience with bf3 and bf4, just tons of instasnipes from any gun category, and I hate the stagnant explosive spams of earlier games. The weak explosive weapons and the new revive/ammo mechanics of bfv are really attractive for me. I wasnt even interested in this game before the beta.
I guess in the end it comes down to what a battlefield moment is for you. For me it was always a crazy clutch objective you take with your squad in BC2 against all odds. And we took objectives and shot a ludicrous amount of germans in the beta when the squad system didn't screw us so it seems right in my ballpark.
Didn't catch that it got delayed.
Well now I'm pretty worried. I really, really didn't like how restrictive BF1 was, so with the sudden removal of archetypes into combat roles and the fact they're absent from this beta, I wonder if they're making it go back to that very rigid, limited playstyle.
PSN: ShogunGunshow
Origin: ShogunGunshow
If you want a defined frontline and have it feel like something epic, do the grand conquest. Having one attacker and one defender really changes the flow. Also one side air dropping in at night while the other fires AA guns is pretty fun.
I've been mostly playing medic and for the most part I don't see the point of the crate, outside of when you establish a solid defensive line on grand conquest and are holding a point for a while. Otherwise the packets seem perfectly fine, they are very easy to spam out while on the move, and you can easily keep 10+ people topped off with them. People don't need to notice them, people don't need to interact with anything. You just quietly keep your sector of the battlefield kicking ass. So, for general gameplay I vastly prefer the grenade launcher on my medic for the situations when lobbing something through a window is what the situation calls for.
The system is broken, I think it's because they're testing the servers so they cant handle the requests. You keep getting "sucked" into requests that happened minutes ago. If you go into a bunch of squads during a session you'll start pinballing around later, including into squads in other matches!
It'll probably fix itself if they give the servers enough juice in the live version. They seriously have to fix the respawn bug though, dont res people you're not sure are critically dead or not.
And that's part of the reason I've lost interest in the franchise, because it's become another game.
That's not saying anyone who enjoys those other modes doesn't have a valid opinion. They're fun.
I miss my muzzle breaks and suppressors and a variety of sights to choose from, each with positives and negatives etc.
PSN: ShogunGunshow
Origin: ShogunGunshow
There are a variety of sights to choose from for each gun, but I guess the attachment system has been replaced by the weapon upgrade system.
But, but you can get a skill that makes your bullets go faster!
From what I understand some of the archetypes have smgs in the recon branch. Sounds like that there will be differences
As someone who doesn't really care about weapon upgrade systems, and like, just longs for the old days when you had everything from release... what don't you like about this particular system?
Because I did this whilst walking around the maps and admiring the handiwork:
Which is like the exact opposite of this game, which is ridiculously good looking and sounding, but nowhere near as fun as the fun I had many years ago playing BF1942.
Or even BF1943, which is on XB1 back-compat and I already own. (Actually it's amazing that EA/DICE are still keeping the servers up for that!)
I mean, every step that of the process is annoying to accomplish as a process of playing or as an implementation of the UI. I like filling bars like any other person, but what I don’t like is not having a clear path of achievable progression. It’s like endlessly frustrating trying to figure out what loadout I would like to have and then realizing it’s going to be like 350 hours of focused gameplay before I can achieve it.
Shotgun, incendiary grenade, s mines. Cut off as many entrances to the point as you can with fortifications, drop mines at the entrances farthest from you, then camp one side with the shotgun. Take potshots with the slug rounds as you like. Really like that you don't have to choose between slugs or buckshot in this!
My Steam
Eh, this game isn't really interested in historical accuracy at all so I don't see why they'd limit themselves on gun customization.
Personally I have quite enjoyed the beta and will probably be picking up the game. This game just has a lot of cool moments for me.
Our recon spotted an enemy tank at a distance so I ran out as my assault with our support. He threw up some sandbags while I laid down covering fire and then he got some tank traps up on the road. This stalled the tank out and let me put some panzerfausts into it's side, which only served to enrage it. We both sprinted back to the point under heavy fire so I could grab some more ammo from the crate, only for a plane to drop a bomb on the ammo crate as I was using it, knocking me out and destroying the crate. The support rebuilt it while my medic got me back up. Got 3 more panzerfaust rounds, recon got eyes back on the tank, I hid in a building, and slammed panzerfausts into the side while the support threw mines on it from above and it blew up in a glorious fashion.
Essentially it just has little depth and no graphics in the game, so you don't get sweet muzzle breaks and grips, your gun just gets better. The lack of depth is because you can only make 2** builds with each gun, though to be fair who ever had more than 1 build on their gun in battlefield games. Then there's a bunch of people who say that in previous games attachements had penalties so they weren't overpowered, they were just different choices! Except that isn't really true, a leveled gun was always much better and tons of attachements had flat bonuses.
The system sure is boring, but I will say that in BFV the system seems very fast to unlock. Compare to BF4 where you might need to grind and grind and grind in order to get the sweet stuff, BFV gives you upgrades easily and really only requires points you can get from anywhere.
**Edit: Actually there's 3 last-level upgrades, not 2, but still not a lot of options.
That's about all I can say I enjoyed. Low TTK, limited support capabilities, no tactical command system. It's just not a Battlefield game, at least not why I loved playing the series. I wasnt a fan of Battlefield ww1 either though.
Well that's nice, at least back then I didn't know it existed or it wasn't a thing. It's still stupid Nvidia now wants an account. But still, Nvidia has increasingly become a scummy company so the sentiment remains!
Completely off topic, but is that actually easier than entering an account? I mean, don't get me wrong, I completely understand anyone who doesn't want to register with the Nvidia forums to download drivers (especially considering you can still do it the old fashion way, with zero account, or hell, just not give a shit about day one GPU patches and let Windows 10 do it). It certainly sound stupid, and it's pretty stupid in real life. But between entering in a password once a year (literally) whenever the GeForce Experience sees fit to erase it, and fucking around with two form factor account authentication for my Nvidia account, of all things....I've never woken up in the middle of the night and thought, "Gosh, I'm afraid Russian hackers the NSA John Brennan's stooges Iranian hackers the Taiwanese overseas mafia is going to steal my Nvidia account information!"
If it's more convenient, it's more convenient, I guess. And I can't argue Nvidia isn't doing its share of dubious shit. Two words: RTX Charts.
but it was known for its neon-green painted guns.
Yeah beta always has limited weapon selection
Just noticed that at least some of the upgrades seem to change the visuals on the gun. I mean, for sure now that I have a bayonet for the first sniper rifle a bayonet appeared on my gun. And pretty sure grabbing one of the final upgrades on my SMG added a foregrip to it. I... don't think there was a foregrip on it before? But I may have just not noticed it. For sure the bayonet wasn't there before.
And yet, I probably won't buy the game at launch for two reasons: 1. The fact that the existing Battlefield playerabase seems VERY divided on this entry really makes me fear that the game won't have a stable population, at least not for long. 2. The poor handling of news and repeated anouncements of "feature X actually won't be in the game at launch" also makes me worry how they'd handle the game post-launch. I don't want to buy a game only to finally have all features initially anounced for launch avaiable half a year later.
What are people's thoughts on here? Buy/wait/skip?
Steam ID: 76561198021298113
Origin ID: SR71C_Blackbird
All I want to do is go play Red Orchesta / Rising Storm now, which is exactly the same reaction I had to BF1.