Battlefield V

Dayaks

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
8,873
I purchased BF1 with the season pass thinking it was going to be all that when they first hyped it. I have only made it to the rank of Staff Sgt and pretty much quit the game. There are still a ton of bugs in it. I still play BF3 and 4 because they are easy to learn and have that Battlefield feeling. If the plan is to stick with the BF1 mo, then I will def not be getting on release day. I will wait a while to get it.

I was tempted to buy BF1 only because my son loved the train.

I feel like the games have been lacking soul since BF4. It’s hard to describe.
 

Ripskin

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 15, 2004
Messages
2,463
I feel like the games have been lacking soul since BF4. It’s hard to describe.

They lost their soul when they switched to a release every year*. Hard to put your soul and love into a project designed and built by the the numbers.
The games are not strictly flawed, but you can see and feel the cut corners, reused this and that and feel or almost touch what was cut or held back for next years release.
 

sirmonkey1985

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
22,230
Bf hasnt been good since 2142. Loved all of.them until BC came along and messed everything up.

2142 was the best and most balanced. Almost got divorced over my obsession with it.

bad company 1 and 2 weren't bad at all, i'll agree 2142 was the most balanced though(just wish they had fixed the damn titan lag). but for me the bf series died with BF3.. that was their first real attempt at cloning the COD play style and it's only gotten worse with each release. unless DICE tells EA to go fuck themselves while simultaneously firing every moron that worked on BF3/4/1 there's absolutely no hope for BF5. my prediction is that they just use BF1 and reskin it with a 60 dollar price tag on it because why not, it's worked for COD for the last 10 years.

They lost their soul when they switched to a release every year*. Hard to put your soul and love into a project designed and built by the the numbers.
The games are not strictly flawed, but you can see and feel the cut corners, reused this and that and feel or almost touch what was cut or held back for next years release.

that's a problem industry wide though. to many companies want to make the quick buck instead of coming up with a game that warrants keeping the release price tag through it's lifespan.. these days it's to easy to say "i'll just wait 3 months and buy it for 5 bucks"..
 

Porter_

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 10, 2007
Messages
8,427
Yeah I'm trying to think of how a WWII BF will play after BF1. Outside of the tank gameplay I don't see it being any different. I've probably posted this 100 times already, but late Cold War era is probably a good mix. You don't get IRNV/FLIR, NV was very limited back then and there are less gadgets like the drones and designators which seemed to receive a mixed response from players. But you still get all of the automatic weapons that people clearly want to use, tanks that aren't lame, helicopters, and some older weapons that are not featured in the modern BF games.

i'd freaking love a late cold war era battlefield game. DICE if you're reading this, make it happen!
 

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
12,349
but for me the bf series died with BF3.. that was their first real attempt at cloning the COD play style and it's only gotten worse with each release..

No. BFBC2 was much closer to CoD than BF3/4. Smaller maps, a lot more run and gunning, no prone, no bipods, much less emphasis on vehicles, gun play that was similar to CoD and very randomized. BF3 opened the maps up a lot, made vehicles a central part in Conquest, and the weapons became even longer ranged and felt far more authentic than anything prior. BC2 had the shitty floaty CoD/early 2000s type of handling. BF4 essentially was the same, the most notable thing is the weapons become even longer range which required more skill. Especially in hard core... you can semi auto fire with many of the carbines and if you aim and control your shots hit people at great distances. BC2 was like CoD, all close range spray and pray.

The whole "BC2 was awesome!!111" bandwagon needs to die and people need to remove the nostalgia goggles. It was a heavily consolized sub series that tried to emulate CoD. Be thankful if we don't get another. Or that if we do, it is console only. I did like it for its time though...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Gabe3
like this

Gabe3

2[H]4U
Joined
May 23, 2006
Messages
3,677
No. BFBC2 was much closer to CoD than BF3/4. Smaller maps, a lot more gun and gunning, no prone, no bipods, much less emphasis on vehicles, gun play that was similar to CoD and very randomized. BF3 opened the maps up a lot, made vehicles a central part in Conquest, and the weapons became even longer ranged and felt far more authentic than anything prior in than BC2 which was the shitty floaty CoD/early 2000s type of handling. BF4 essentially was the same, the most notable thing is the weapons become even longer range which required more skill. Especially in hard core... you can semi auto fire with many of the carbines and if you aim and control your shots hit people at great distances. BC2 was like CoD, all close range spray and pray.

The whole "BC2 was awesome!!111" bandwagon needs to die and people need to remove the nostalgia goggles. It was a heavily consolized sub series that tried to emulate CoD. Be thankful if we don't get another. Or that if we do, it is console only. I did like it for its time though...
you speak the truth
 

Porter_

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 10, 2007
Messages
8,427
The whole "BC2 was awesome!!111" bandwagon needs to die and people need to remove the nostalgia goggles. It was a heavily consolized sub series that tried to emulate CoD. Be thankful if we don't get another. Or that if we do, it is console only. I did like it for its time though...

BC2 was a ton of fun. it put the "holy shit did that really just happen?" smile on my face the same way BF2 did. different strokes for different folks man.
 

Eshelmen

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
5,546
What? Every soldier carried full auto primary weapons in WWI. /end sarcasm


yeah, because we all know that having only single shot rifles in a Battlefield game would be the most amazing game ever...

zzzzzzzzz
 

Sicario

Weaksauce
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
113
I just want the return of "true" dedicated servers and a web based game search like BF4 had. I don't much care what the theater of war is going to be. Modern would be better for the franchise though.
 

5150Joker

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
4,569
Probably another reskinned bf1 with more loot boxes to unlock. Publishers like EA are addicted to loot boxes and that’d be fine if was just cosmetic but with Battlefield that isn’t the case. You either have no life and constantly grind to unlock weapons or you pay them money to unlock guns for a game you paid full price for....fuck that and fuck dice for selling out to EA.
 

dragonstongue

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Messages
3,162
I personally found BF2 and 2142 (kind of) were DIC/EA pinnacle of the BF franchise, they just started screwing them right up to make BC2 or BF3/4 piss poor performance (for most people using "normal computers") instead of focusing on "quality" they have focused on "gots to have the hollywood special effects" you never see in the real world and just load them to rat shit with extra vetran packs, seasonpass etc etc.

BF2/2142 had a more or less perfect formula as far as "uncaps" were (for the most part) that you (as a server provider) could auto-designate them as true uncaps vs cannot go in them at all, or you could fly within x feet of them and kill everything the moment it spawns (BC2-BF3/4)

They all have their good and bad points, but at the very least, they seemed to actually give a damn about quality expansion packs/DLC with BF2/2142 era in that you could not "buy your way to the top" you EARNED IT, oh yeh, and an M1A1 no matter who was using it was the same damn tank, you were not "screwed over" because someone else used it for FAR longer so it was loaded with a bunch of shit you did not have on yours.

------------------------------------------
-------------------------
I think EA will have to do something drastically impressive with their forced to use Frostbyte via their devs BS they are doing as of late, and focusing on making the game as "lean as possible" to force DLC or seasonpass mentality is an automatic will not bother with them anymore (not to mention, releasing the full price games in a "final beta state" they have been doing the last couple of years)

Mass Effect Andromeda was more or less "perfect" in its vanilla state (for me) till they butchered it via first patch where many missions could no longer be completed etc.
Dragon Age Inquisition (DA3) was bang on great except for the massive twist to crud that the "new" tactical view mode was compared to the "first style" used in Dragon Age Origins (BioWare bitched MANY limitations of Frostbyte which they were forced to use, otherwise many issues they would have avoided and been a far more "polished design" out of the gate, such as the "tactical view mode" used in DA Origin)

then there are games like NFS Shift where they royally butchered and did not patch at all making a crud fest to try and play it, then they released NFS Shift 2 which is prety much identical game but was "fixed" all for the same low price of paying again the same price of the crudfest that you just bought from them (lo and behold ~2mths after Shift 2 was released something like that, they "patched it" and was "perfect" even though now you own basically 2 copies of the same mofo game, only difference was in Shift vs Shift 2, S2 the brake calipers glod red when hard braking was done) LOL.


=======================================
========
got off track, sorry, but seriously, the one person who said they should go to Roman Numerals, that would make a ton of sense, this way here if the release a "new one" in the same franchise they could avoid having to figure out how to confused numbering/naming system...BF1 was "just released,, BF2-2142-BC-BC2 etc etc, so "start over" and just call the next one BF II, next after that BF III, then BF IV (like rocky movies) this way here you KNOW it is the "newest one"

so to explain it to "friend" when he/she wants to buy the same version "just go get a copy of BF i i (eye eye) not 2" ^.^
 

pendragon1

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 7, 2000
Messages
39,960
v-invasion-extraterrestre-G.jpg
 

polydiol

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
1,428
looks like this will test my ability to stay away from EA. I hope I'm successful.
 

MrWrong

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 3, 2013
Messages
1,460
looks like this will test my ability to stay away from EA. I hope I'm successful.
This is EA we are talking about I'm sure that after everything that has happened with their recent games they will still make all the same mistakes and make it easy not to buy this. I hope that they have learned their lesson finally and this wont be a complete shit show, but I'm not getting my hopes up.
 

Ripskin

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 15, 2004
Messages
2,463
BF1 already felt like a semi battle royal with the large maps, large amount of players and stuff. Just remove the objectives and its another BR clone really. At least the objectives give it more to go for. But perhaps a moving objective to work with for loot rewards. Not needed to play or win but a different take on drops.
 

spaceman

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 7, 2005
Messages
14,875
Loot crate drops? Lol

I can see it. Need an in game upgrade? Hit the loot boxes drop button and viola! Just link your CC and enjoy your 20% damage boost. Or power dildo melee.
 
Last edited:

fallguy

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 8, 2001
Messages
3,964
I'm looking forward to it. BF1 is my top game I play, with Fortnite coming in close second now. I would like a 1943 refresh. Hopefully they at least carry over some of the maps, but they're probably too small. The bomber was fun as hell.
 

DPI

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
12,174
A "new setting"? Might not be WW2 after all.

Or a WW2 setting other than played out D-day, like Pacific theater. But V-Day was in Europe so who knows.

In any case the fact they mention "War Stories" returning makes me assume no chance this it'll be a followup to 2142.
 
Last edited:

4saken

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 14, 2004
Messages
12,053
Or a WW2 setting other than played out D-day, like Pacific theater. But V-Day was in Europe so who knows.

In any case the fact they mention "War Stories" returning makes me assume no chance this it'll be a followup to 2142.
hopefully no chance of that.
 

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
12,349
I think its WWII. "New setting" doesn't mean "never seen in BF before". It can mean "new from the previous BF". So we know it won't be WWI at least.
 

Krenum

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 29, 2005
Messages
18,758
If it turns out to be WWII, I hope they include Stalingrad, I'd love to see what that would look like on a modern engine.
 

DPI

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
12,174
If it turns out to be WWII, I hope they include Stalingrad, I'd love to see what that would look like on a modern engine.
That could be something if it has to be WWII. A gritty, bombed out Stalingrad on the latest Frostbite with the full photogrammetry treatment. Eastern front is where the real war was fought anyway.

But I wouldn't say no to a solid Pacific conflict with kick ass island jungle maps and naval scenarios.
 
Last edited:

SixFootDuo

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 5, 2004
Messages
5,824
Battlefield series died with Battlefield 1. They copied the close quarters small maps run and gun ZERG button mashers format. fcking horrible now.

Go watch videos. Zero skill required with Instant gratification pay-out for all the short attention span kiddies.

Face it, games are getting smaller, shorter, faster, easier.

The only difference here in 2108 is it has a WW2 skin applied.

Enjoy ... I guess.
 
Top