Battlefield V Won't Launch With Battle Royale

AlphaAtlas

[H]ard|Gawd
Staff member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
1,713
According to EA's own roadmap, Battlefield V won't launch with its advertised "Firestorm" battle royale mode. Assuming everything goes according to plan, Firestorm will come alongside chapter 3 of Battlefield's "Tides of War" service "starting in March" of 2019.

Battle Royale comes to Battlefield with Firestorm and the war reaches Greece as the third Tides of War chapter is unleashed in the Spring. Firestorm: During spring, DICE and Criterion start the fire with Battlefield V’s battle royale experience. Firestorm elevates the mode by bringing in the best of what Battlefield is known for. Mix a shrinking playing field with trademark Battlefield elements such as team play, powerful vehicles, and destruction, and you get many unique Battlefield moments coming your way.

 

Darunion

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
3,931
I feel like that was their biggest "OMG Look at us we have a battle royale mode too!" and then just "yea, someday we will". So is this a free update or did their big marketing pitch for launch turn into a paid dlc?
 

Armenius

I Drive Myself to the [H]ospital
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
20,514

capnstabn

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 6, 2006
Messages
463
There are some things I really like about Blackout, but I am hoping Firestorm lands perfectly in between PUBG/Blackout. I just wish they would stick with the current time frame and have based their BR modes on MW2/BF4.
 

AlphaAtlas

[H]ard|Gawd
Staff member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
1,713
Battlefield V is going to have no paid DLC. Their monetization model is just in the cosmetic microtransactions.

https://screenrant.com/battlefield-v-free-dlc-premium-pass-expansions/
Yeah, exactly. And fortunately, it seems that EA stopped referring to the BFV updates as "free DLC"

In Mass Effect 3, big multiplayer updates were packaged as free DLC. The problem was that some players never actually saw the DLC in the Origin interface, so it fragmented the MP population and made matchmaking really funky.
 
Joined
Jun 1, 2018
Messages
692
blackout is already a near-perfect battle royale implementation... as far as I am concerned CoD got its mojo back and hit a home run with that one. Its really, really fun... EA is going to miss the bus if they are seriously going to release their own 6 months from now LOL
 

Oldmodder

Gawd
Joined
Aug 24, 2018
Messages
706
Are Battle royale not just death match on a large map, that get smaller over time.
While this do sound like a improvement and actually making the BS DM mode something people might consider.
Personally i have always preferred the CTF format, though as long as we still dont have random generated maps that also get old in a while like any game format on the same maps over and over do.

I have never tried that format with the flags in BF games, think its what the guy above call Conquest, but it always looked strange to me and so not really anything i have considered playing ( never played any BF game )
 

AlphaAtlas

[H]ard|Gawd
Staff member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
1,713
Are Battle royale not just death match on a large map, that get smaller over time.
While this do sound like a improvement and actually making the BS DM mode something people might consider.
Personally i have always preferred the CTF format, though as long as we still dont have random generated maps that also get old in a while like any game format on the same maps over and over do.

I have never tried that format with the flags in BF games, think its what the guy above call Conquest, but it always looked strange to me and so not really anything i have considered playing ( never played any BF game )
Some BR games have team modes, but yeah, it's usually just an FFA DM with no respawning in a shrinking circle. I'm not fond of it either.


Point control modes like Conquest weren't much fun in older games that topped off at 16 players, IMO. But it works well in games with huge player caps, like Battlefield. PlanetSide 2 is probably the most extreme example, as you often see 200+ players fighting over control points split across 2 or 3 bases.
 

Armenius

I Drive Myself to the [H]ospital
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
20,514
Are Battle royale not just death match on a large map, that get smaller over time.
While this do sound like a improvement and actually making the BS DM mode something people might consider.
Personally i have always preferred the CTF format, though as long as we still dont have random generated maps that also get old in a while like any game format on the same maps over and over do.

I have never tried that format with the flags in BF games, think its what the guy above call Conquest, but it always looked strange to me and so not really anything i have considered playing ( never played any BF game )
BR is last man standing starting with no equipment.
 
Joined
Sep 7, 2004
Messages
2,897
That's ok, someone forgot to forward them the memo about already losing those sales to COD when they chose to delay it a month and now longer.

But don't worry they've got a blockbuster single player campaign...which no one cares for anyway! (y)
 

M76

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
10,227
The term "battle royale" really triggers me. Maybe because it represents everything I hate about gaming.

If the trend continues and everyone starts to do these shitty multiplayer games, with paid cosmetic content, and lootboxes, and grindy progress, I may have to quit gaming.
 

Darunion

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
3,931
The term "battle royale" really triggers me. Maybe because it represents everything I hate about gaming.

If the trend continues and everyone starts to do these shitty multiplayer games, with paid cosmetic content, and lootboxes, and grindy progress, I may have to quit gaming.
If they changed the name of it, the reaction would just be "they are just making battle royale and calling it something else so they can steal from Pube-G"

I wouldn't quit gaming, you could just buy games that fit what you enjoy, the "AAA" titles are not all there is out there.
 

haste.

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
1,651
Well... womp womp. That's gonna kill sales and guessing why the game was delayed. Feel bad for QA and Devs who worked around the clock to try to get it working to meet the producers demands.
 

Armenius

I Drive Myself to the [H]ospital
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
20,514
How hard Did EA fuck up that they have to give stuff away for free? A lot.
This has been the trend since DLC fragments the player base and kills off the game more quickly. Activision did the same with Call of Duty. Microtransactions have more potential to have a greater return due to the whales and upper-middle class kids who don't know any better. One can only hope that this loot box craze dies off more quickly, but boy are the publishers fighting that one tooth-and-nail, with EA even risking a lot of jail time for their executives.
 

Furious_Styles

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
1,564
The term "battle royale" really triggers me. Maybe because it represents everything I hate about gaming.

If the trend continues and everyone starts to do these shitty multiplayer games, with paid cosmetic content, and lootboxes, and grindy progress, I may have to quit gaming.
There's nothing you can do about it. Companies are going to follow the money and right now it's people gambling on lootboxes or paying absurd amounts of money for skins. I hate it too and I refuse to partake in that shit revenue model.

That said, the BF devs really screwed up imo by not having a BR ready to go on release. The frostbite engine is so good compared to the unreal one in pubg. CoD is going to take lots of their players away with a polished product but BF could still put something a bit different and fun out there. Hell I'd probably buy BFV if it just wasn't the same shit repacked with a new coat of paint on it.
 

DahlKen

[H]Lite
Joined
Feb 1, 2012
Messages
104
Instead of taking the time to get everything into the game upon release it is now par for the course for the developers to release an advanced beta stage game, and just patch it over the next year. So they can say all kinds of things are going to be in the game and just use the next year after release to patch them all in.
 

filip

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Messages
2,069
This has been the trend since DLC fragments the player base and kills off the game more quickly. Activision did the same with Call of Duty. Microtransactions have more potential to have a greater return due to the whales and upper-middle class kids who don't know any better. One can only hope that this loot box craze dies off more quickly, but boy are the publishers fighting that one tooth-and-nail, with EA even risking a lot of jail time for their executives.
You know I think they were trying to copy this: "Over half of Activision Blizzard's $7.16 billion yearly revenue came from microtransactions."
So you are spot on, give all the DLC for free and then hit them in the wallet with microtransactions.
I must say if this stays the course I will probably not be playing a lot of games in the future.
 

Krenum

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Apr 29, 2005
Messages
15,823
You tell em, I would give a negative fuck about it but that would imply I had a fuck to give in the first place, ZERO fucks given!
At this point I wish EA would just release the game that they originally intended. Not that I would play it, but at least grow a backbone and stop flip flopping about changes because everyone is mad. So you made a turd, it happens, better luck next time. Or next time try to listen on what your fans want rather than giving them what they already have in other games.
 

M76

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
10,227
You gave enough shit to post all that.
I care about making it known that I don't care for it.

I'm going to make as much noise as possible before I go out. So maybe some developers realize that there is a significant portion of the market, that doesn't want to engage in microtransactions (or pvp for that matter). And they'd rather not buy games at all if the only way to enjoy them is to keep paying.

Microtransactions are a menace to gaming. If movies did it it would look like this: Every 10 minutes you have to pay $2.99 to continue watching the edited cut instead of the long boring editing floor cut.
 

Darunion

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
3,931
I care about making it known that I don't care for it.

I'm going to make as much noise as possible before I go out. So maybe some developers realize that there is a significant portion of the market, that doesn't want to engage in microtransactions (or pvp for that matter). And they'd rather not buy games at all if the only way to enjoy them is to keep paying.

Microtransactions are a menace to gaming. If movies did it it would look like this: Every 10 minutes you have to pay $2.99 to continue watching the edited cut instead of the long boring editing floor cut.

Commercials inserted into a movie or show essentially are doing this. Not that I am okay with ether format, just that greed has always been squeezing itself into everything.
 

Teenk9

Gawd
Joined
Jul 22, 2011
Messages
998
So much time, effort, emotion, and energy put into something not cared about.
 

SixFootDuo

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Oct 5, 2004
Messages
5,562
Look, here is what happened. It's simple. EA played Black Ops 4 Black Out and I swear to god they all said this and probably at the same time ....... "oh shit .. we are fucked!" ....

That's why they are pushing this back and even then I promise it will still suck haha.

Man, Black Ops 4 is amazing and I love it. I haven't slept good in like a damn week.
 

filip

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Messages
2,069
So much time, effort, emotion, and energy put into something not cared about.
Come on man, posting on the forum is the equivalent of jacking off time at work, no effort, no emotion, or energy. We just look like we are busy.
 

Spidey329

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Dec 15, 2003
Messages
8,676
Well... womp womp. That's gonna kill sales and guessing why the game was delayed. Feel bad for QA and Devs who worked around the clock to try to get it working to meet the producers demands.
The game was delayed because they're behind schedule on the other aspects of it. The standard MP mode will be missing a ton of maps and items. It won't have a lot of the planned features at launch (like dragging downed teammates that they made a big deal about).

BR mode is being made by a separate studio, it's inclusion was probably last minute and they knew they couldn't get it in.

Just like their Co-Op game mode will also not be in at launch. This "game as a service" seems more like "really early access to a game that we'll [hopefully] continue to develop once we have your money." It's the Early Access model mixed with cosmetic Mx and applied to an AAA title. Essentially EA is trying to see if they can generate revenue quicker than the usual time to market of a 3-5 year development cycle.
 

travbrad

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 11, 2005
Messages
1,253
Good. If BR became the predominant form of Battlefield then it's not really Battlefield anymore. This fad will pass like all others...I hope
 
Top