Battlefield V

DPI said:
The suspension of reality/realism/authenticity/whatever you want to call it, isn't limited to "trick videos" or "1% of players". Everyone's died and respawned 60 seconds later, hidden behind a wall to auto-heal or had a nearby medpack magically fix hundreds of bullet wounds. Everyone's used a jet to get across the map or up onto a tower at some point. Anyone can jump out of a building, hold down E and instantly enter a vehicle below.
Click to expand...

Again, conflating trick videos with suspension of realism in order to create a playable video game experience that still allows suspension of disbelief.

DPI said:
The "muh realism" argument is total bullshit.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't expect any less of you given your ardent defense of that pile of garbage BF1 leading up to release. Meanwhile, the player base has shrunk to an embarrassingly small pool that has fewer daily players than Borderlands 2.

DPI said:
The "Injecting their SJW politics" is also bullshit. The reddit brigade rolling face across the keyboard about "wimin in combat" and suddenly pretending to care about "historical accuracy" based on a TV-education about WW2 is laughable. "Why was the trailer so over saturated when the real world war 2 was black and white". SMFH.
Click to expand...

And snowflakes shrieking "muh MISOGYNISM" in answer to all criticism of this game and characterizing this as some bold step forward for equality and diversity is utterly cringe worthy. They are carrying on as if playable female skins have not been available in MP games for the better part of 2 decades. Was there an uproar when Unreal Tournament and Quake 3 were released in 1999? No? Well then, how about with UT2K4, UT3, PUBG, Fortnite, Diablo 3 and Overwatch? Could it be that the majority of people don't really care about there being female skins/characters in games but are legitimately criticizing the very specific and absurd representation in BFV given that the setting is steeped in very well documented historical events? In any event that is the least of DICE's problems insofar as the ridiculousness of their trailer is concerned.

DPI said:
And you have a link to that?
Click to expand...

us5Mgkc_tZc6FQcepvnSRy-cLKEk-hFu7ULw2OTwx4o.jpg


 
As an addendum, does anyone remember the hoards of misogynists picketing DICE's offices over a female skin in the 'In the Name of the Tsar' expansion for BF1? Neither do I.

 
And here is a youtuber actually making some sense on this controversy. It wouldn't surprise me if this was part of some ill conceived grand plan by EA/DICE to generate greater microtransaction revenue.

 
SoFGR said:
want full authenticity and realism ? follow Post Scriptum on steam, it doesn't get more real than that !! personally speaking, I want to preorder both :D
Click to expand...

DPI said:
The suspension of reality/realism/authenticity/whatever you want to call it, isn't limited to "trick videos" or "1% of players". Everyone's died and respawned 60 seconds later, hidden behind a wall to auto-heal or had a nearby medpack magically fix hundreds of bullet wounds. Everyone's used a jet to get across the map or up onto a tower at some point. Anyone can jump out of a building, hold down E and instantly enter a vehicle below. The "muh realism" argument is total bullshit. The "Injecting their SJW politics" is also bullshit. The reddit brigade rolling face across the keyboard about "wimin in combat" and suddenly pretending to care about "historical accuracy" based on a TV-education about WW2 is laughable. "Why was the trailer so over saturated when the real world war 2 was black and white". SMFH.

By all, means let's have a "REALIZZTIC" WW2 game:

- Boot game up
- Sit at loading screen for six months
- Play game for 30 seconds and get shot
- Game uninstalls itself.
Click to expand...

I am so tired of this type of counter argument. People say they want more realistic and period specific weaponry and somehow that translates into we want 100% realism. All we wanted was a triple A game designed around the weapons that were common for the setting.

Even in this thread we have people saying how boring bolt action only would have been, but we never even got to find out since DICE didn't bother designing a game around the weapons from the war they chose. For some reason gamers today assume bolt action means slow because they have always slowed down the bolt action rifles to balance them. Look up any one of the various videos firing bolt actions quickly to see how quickly you can actually fire a bolt action. It is amazing how we found bolt actions fun in older games, but somehow this can't even be imagined today.

The same thing is going to happen with BFV unfortunately. Now I am sure some people will love it, but for me I enjoy playing these games for the variety of the weapons that fit the setting. I also wanted a break from modern weaponry and BF1 didn't feel that way at all. It felt like more of the same.

If it was me BF1 would have been more period correct weaponry, then when you announce BFV you will actually see the difference in the advances to the technology. Instead we get two games back to back that are going to play very similar weapon wise so it isn't going to feel fresh.

There are also rumors starting to float around on battlefield forums and reddit that EA doesn't want the rental server program and with paid cosmetics I could see user run servers completely gone with this game which means we are seeing a repeat of IWnet and COD:MW2.
 
18:20 - 18:51

"no..soo...sooo the way it works.....uhh...no...no....you can't uhhh shoot enemy players that are on the ground...thats...uhhh...thats an actual war crime....were not doing that!"

ROFL....they have a problem with you shooting enemy players that are on the ground, but no problem with purple hair, face painted, hook handed weirdos ahahahahaha.

So wait...after you shoot and wound an enemy soldier they fall to the ground and enter "GOD MODE" until a buddy man revives them or their time runs out......OMG talk about Jarring gameplay design!
 
Last edited:
l88bastard said:
18:20 - 18:51

"no..soo...sooo the way it works.....uhh...no...no....you can't uhhh shoot enemy players that are on the ground...thats...uhhh...thats an actual war crime....were not doing that!"

ROFL....they have a problem with you shooting enemy players that are on the ground, but no problem with purple hair, face painted, hook handed weirdos ahahahahaha.

I am sure the game is going to be good....but seriously not being able to shoot wounded soldiers and take them out of the action for good is a serious kill joy :-(
Click to expand...


That is seriously retarded but not surprising. The more details I read of this game the more confident I am that it will be garbage.
 
l88bastard said:
18:20 - 18:51

"no..soo...sooo the way it works.....uhh...no...no....you can't uhhh shoot enemy players that are on the ground...thats...uhhh...thats an actual war crime....were not doing that!"

ROFL....they have a problem with you shooting enemy players that are on the ground, but no problem with purple hair, face painted, hook handed weirdos ahahahahaha.

I am sure the game is going to be good....but seriously not being able to shoot wounded soldiers and take them out of the action for good is a serious kill joy :-(
Click to expand...


I was expecting to hear it in a tongue-in-cheek manner but no, he's serious and that's embarrassingly stupid. War crimes now apply to their games but not retroactively because, you know, with all that torture and shit throughout the series they suddenly decided to care about something their players couldn't give two shits about in their game.

FFS what a stupid ass company DICE has become. Guarantee they'll have terrible map design with easy kill zone spawns that the Geneva Convention could have never prepared us for.
 
Uh. Yeah. Wtf on that one. You need them gone. Just a game there ea. Not good.

How the fuck does that work? You hit a player down to a certain amount and then they have protection? So can you actually take players out or what? Seems really weird.
 
whats the issue? correct me if I'm wrong but I believe in every bf game you can't completely kill someone, they can always get revived. I think the only exception was in some games if you got run over by a vehicle you couldn't get revived.

I'd like the ability to completely kill someone so they can't get revived. but this is the way its been since reviving was introduced in bf2.
 
Last edited:
I guess maybe they are out of the fight until they either decide to respawn or get revived. As long as there is a time limit on that. I guess it is ok? Still lame though. War crime. Come the fuck on.
 
Gabe3 said:
whats the issue? correct me if I'm wrong but I believe in every bf game you can't completely kill someone, they can always get revived. I think the only exception was in some games if you got run over by a vehicle you couldn't get revived.

I'd like the ability to completely kill someone so they can't get revived. but this is the way its been since reviving was introduced in bf2.
Click to expand...

Well in normal games the enemy dies and is punished by having to wait and respawn back to a non-critical control point.

With respect to BFV it seems to be like this...after you shoot and wound an enemy soldier they fall to the ground and enter "GOD MODE" until a buddy man revives them or their time runs out......OMG talk about Jarring gameplay design!
 
l88bastard said:
Well in normal games the enemy dies and is punished by having to wait and respawn back to a non-critical control point.

With respect to BFV it seems to be like this...after you shoot and wound an enemy soldier they fall to the ground and enter "GOD MODE" until a buddy man revives them or their time runs out......OMG talk about Jarring gameplay design!
Click to expand...
yeah if no one revives them in the 10 second window they have to respawn. what makes you think this game will be any different? theres no god mode, they are just adding animation to that revive window. its actually better this way because as an enemy you can see who can be revived and who can't. where as previous battlefields theres just a dead body on the ground, you have no idea if its still in that revive window of time or not.

anyone who has played bf knows how annoying it is to come up on a couple enemy dead bodys, then an enemy come around the corner and revives both of them in 2 seconds. now its you vs three. if you had known those bodys were still in the revive window, you would have not gone in closer. now with bfv, you will know.
 
Last edited:
Return to Castle Wolfenstein MP and all its spiritual succesors ( Enemy Territory Dirty bomb ) etc had this mechanic and it felt pretty satisfying ^

It becomes a second nature to the experienced player to finish them off whenever he has the chance.

most of the time it is more practical to kneel over the incaped enemy player and use a melee attack instead of shooting your gun tho ...

not sure if we really need this "feature" here, as long as an enemy troop cannot be revived after a direct hit from a 88m cannon, it should be OK :)
 
I wish we could go one fucking AAA game release without people bickering over the so called "SJW" nonsense. Everyday my Youtube recommendations gets more and more packed with this crap. It would be nice if everyone shouting about "oversensitive snowflakes" could grow a backbone themselves and stop crying about every fucking thing.
 
Colonel Sanders said:
I wish we could go one fucking AAA game release without people bickering over the so called "SJW" nonsense. Everyday my Youtube recommendations gets more and more packed with this crap. It would be nice if everyone shouting about "oversensitive snowflakes" could grow a backbone themselves and stop crying about every fucking thing.
Click to expand...

If companies like DICE stopped with political pandering in video games we wouldn’t have to complain.
 
Colonel Sanders said:
I wish we could go one fucking AAA game release without people bickering over the so called "SJW" nonsense. Everyday my Youtube recommendations gets more and more packed with this crap. It would be nice if everyone shouting about "oversensitive snowflakes" could grow a backbone themselves and stop crying about every fucking thing.
Click to expand...

Well when developers stop taking out satisfying features like shooting wounded enemies and T-Bagging them because those are "WAR CRIMES," I suppose we will stop bitching.

Gabe3 said:
yeah if no one revives them in the 10 second window they have to respawn. what makes you think this game will be any different? theres no god mode, they are just adding animation to that revive window. its actually better this way because as an enemy you can see who can be revived and who can't. where as previous battlefields theres just a dead body on the ground, you have no idea if its still in that revive window of time or not.

anyone who has played bf knows how annoying it is to come up on a couple enemy dead bodys, then an enemy come around the corner and revives both of them in 2 seconds. now its you vs three. if you had known those bodys were still in the revive window, you would have not gone in closer. now with bfv, you will know.
Click to expand...

Because I "killed" an enemy....but not really because they are only down on the ground "wounded" and I cannot finish them off because "THAT WOULD BE A WAR CRIME." so no matter how many bullets I pump into them over the next 9 seconds one of their teammates can come revive them at the 9.5 second mark. Thus, GOD MODE for the injured....

And for the record, I am not against women in video games. Quite the contrary, I think they should put more sexy women in all kinds of video games. The more naked the MOAR better too :)
 
Last edited:
l88bastard said:
Well when developers stop taking out satisfying features like shooting wounded enemies and T-Bagging them because those are "WAR CRIMES," I suppose we will stop bitching.
Click to expand...

See, I don't even know what you're talking about because I don't immerse myself in the new 'outrage culture' that thrives on finding anything and everything to get upset over. It's the cool new thing to be a snowflake and find things that hurt your feelings, and get together with other people who also have hurt feelings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DPI
like this
l88bastard said:
Well when developers stop taking out satisfying features like shooting wounded enemies and T-Bagging them because those are "WAR CRIMES," I suppose we will stop bitching.



Because I "killed" an enemy....but not really because they are only down on the ground "wounded" and I cannot finish them off because "THAT WOULD BE A WAR CRIME." so no matter how many bullets I pump into them over the next 9 seconds one of their teammates can come revive them at the 9.5 second mark. Thus, GOD MODE for the injured....

And for the record, I am not against women in video games. Quite the contrary, I think they should put more sexy women in all kinds of video games. The more naked the MOAR better too :)
Click to expand...
well, every bf game in the last 13 years you could revive someone no matter how many bullets were shot into them after they went down. not sure why you expect this game to be different.

fwiw I'd also like to be able to completely kill someone after they go down too. that would have really cleaned up the mess that was in bf3 metro map where it was a revive spam fest.
 
Gabe3 said:
yeah if no one revives them in the 10 second window they have to respawn. what makes you think this game will be any different? theres no god mode, they are just adding animation to that revive window. its actually better this way because as an enemy you can see who can be revived and who can't. where as previous battlefields theres just a dead body on the ground, you have no idea if its still in that revive window of time or not.

anyone who has played bf knows how annoying it is to come up on a couple enemy dead bodys, then an enemy come around the corner and revives both of them in 2 seconds. now its you vs three. if you had known those bodys were still in the revive window, you would have not gone in closer. now with bfv, you will know.
Click to expand...

Because I "killed" an enemy....but not really because they are only down on the ground "wounded" and I cannot finish them off because "THAT WOULD BE A WAR CRIME." so no matter how many bullets I pump into them over the next 9 seconds one of their teammates can come revive them at the 9.5 second mark.
Colonel Sanders said:
See, I don't even know what you're talking about because I don't immerse myself in the new 'outrage culture' that thrives on finding anything and everything to get upset over. It's the cool new thing to be a snowflake and find things that hurt your feelings, and get together with other people who also have hurt feelings.
Click to expand...

Well hopefully the actual game play reveal is good....and hopefully they go back to their roots and add large maps with naval battles, etc, etc.

I don't think your getting me....I WANT TO LIKE BFV and have no problem with creative license, but its gotta be done with some tact. If the actual multiplayer experience is like the trailer, then they should have called it Bad Company 3.

In fact I think they should use the "Bad Company" branding to make the creative license versions of games
and should use the "Battlefield" branding for their classic style.

Why the fuck they are crossing "Bad Company" branding with "Battlefield" branding is very confusing to me as a consumer.

Gabe3 said:
well, every bf game in the last 13 years you could revive someone no matter how many bullets were shot into them after they went down. not sure why you expect this game to be different.

fwiw I'd also like to be able to completely kill someone after they go down too. that would have really cleaned up the mess that was in bf3 metro map where it was a revive spam fest.
Click to expand...

You are 100% right and now I finally have been able to put my thumb on what has irked me about the revive system!
 
Well thank God I found this additional footage of actual Multi-player for BFV!!!!

Man I was really worried after seeing that first trailer....but now can honestly say it looks AMAZE BALLS!!!





^^^^He is already singing in German....all he needs to be "WW2TM" ready is a Claw Hand!


x
 
Last edited:
DPI said:
The "muh realism" argument is total bullshit.
Click to expand...

Anyone who makes your argument is at best intellectually dishonest, or at worst a mental midget. Which mindset to you adhere to?

Realism or visual realism has its place in games. It adds to the setting or sets the mood, and immerses you into the theme. If I play a war game I want to see uniforms, equipment, sounds and characters that look somewhat authentic. Having a neon faced, one armed lady running around minimizes that immersion. It is hard to get immersed into a theme when it looks absolutely nothing like what it is supposed to be portraying. It separates the lazy developers from the ones who take effort to really design a game around their setting.

Your counter arguments are complete bullshit. Games are meant to be fun and permanent death is not fun to anyone. Just because you want to play a war game with some nods to authentic artwork to better immerse yourself in the theme doesn't mean you want a fully realistic "life of a soldier" documentary.

Shades of gray. If you see things as "full real world documentary" or "missing arm, blue pained females riding dinosaurs" with no in between, you're an idiot.

Colonel Sanders said:
See, I don't even know what you're talking about because I don't immerse myself in the new 'outrage culture' that thrives on finding anything and everything to get upset over. It's the cool new thing to be a snowflake and find things that hurt your feelings, and get together with other people who also have hurt feelings.
Click to expand...

You want to see outrage? Have a major publisher release a war game and not feature playable female soldiers. Then you will see massive outrage.
 
Flogger23m said:
Shades of gray. If you see things as "full real world documentary" or "missing arm, blue pained females riding dinosaurs" with no in between, you're an idiot.
Click to expand...

WUT?! NO DINOSAURS?!? Fuck realism and authenticity then! Whilst they are at it, DICE better throw in a pansexual time traveling neon pink cyborg seeking to exact revenge on Hitler for his poor fashion sense and terrible mustache....because you know.....VIDYA GARMEZ. Imagine facing off against a panzer division riding one of these bad boys.

f9964e9f610e78aed6e1d3e5b9fa6e8ef6d6521f621b070bf606f9830ac889e8.jpg
 
System requirements

OS: 64-bit Windows 7, Windows 8.1 and Windows 10
Processor (AMD): AMD FX-6350
Processor (Intel): Core i5 6600K
Memory: 8GB RAM
Graphics card (AMD): AMD Radeon™ HD 7850 2GB
Graphics card (NVIDIA): nVidia GeForce® GTX 660 2GB
DirectX: 11.0 Compatible video card or equivalent
Online Connection Requirements: 512 KBPS or faster Internet connection
Hard-drive space: 50GB
 
DPI said:
System requirements

OS: 64-bit Windows 7, Windows 8.1 and Windows 10
Processor (AMD): AMD FX-6350
Processor (Intel): Core i5 6600K
Memory: 8GB RAM
Graphics card (AMD): AMD Radeon™ HD 7850 2GB
Graphics card (NVIDIA): nVidia GeForce® GTX 660 2GB
DirectX: 11.0 Compatible video card or equivalent
Online Connection Requirements: 512 KBPS or faster Internet connection
Hard-drive space: 50GB
Click to expand...

Looks like Multi cores still rock for this game the last upgrade I made for my PC was a 8700K coffee lake a few days later Retail Edge banned all Walmarts from the program =)
So I won't be unnecessarily upgrading for a while I was upgrading every year or two.
 
brennok said:
I am so tired of this type of counter argument. People say they want more realistic and period specific weaponry and somehow that translates into we want 100% realism. All we wanted was a triple A game designed around the weapons that were common for the setting.

Even in this thread we have people saying how boring bolt action only would have been, but we never even got to find out since DICE didn't bother designing a game around the weapons from the war they chose. For some reason gamers today assume bolt action means slow because they have always slowed down the bolt action rifles to balance them. Look up any one of the various videos firing bolt actions quickly to see how quickly you can actually fire a bolt action. It is amazing how we found bolt actions fun in older games, but somehow this can't even be imagined today.

The same thing is going to happen with BFV unfortunately. Now I am sure some people will love it, but for me I enjoy playing these games for the variety of the weapons that fit the setting. I also wanted a break from modern weaponry and BF1 didn't feel that way at all. It felt like more of the same.

If it was me BF1 would have been more period correct weaponry, then when you announce BFV you will actually see the difference in the advances to the technology. Instead we get two games back to back that are going to play very similar weapon wise so it isn't going to feel fresh.

There are also rumors starting to float around on battlefield forums and reddit that EA doesn't want the rental server program and with paid cosmetics I could see user run servers completely gone with this game which means we are seeing a repeat of IWnet and COD:MW2.
Click to expand...


"I think there's some great authentic WW2 experiences out there, from Day of Defeat to Post Scriptum, each offers its own flavor. Let’s not forget the first Battlefield WW2 game had a Jetpack DLC, and the Russians used an MP18/Japanese SMG. "




tenor.gif


:D
 
Last edited:
SoFGR said:
"I think there's some great authentic WW2 experiences out there, from Day of Defeat to Post Scriptum, each offers its own flavor. Let’s not forget the first Battlefield WW2 game had a Jetpack DLC, and the Russians used an MP18/Japanese SMG. "




View attachment 77370

:D
Click to expand...

Post Scriptum goes back to the point you seemed to miss. I am not asking for a WW2 sim or 100% realistic WW2 game. The other point that people seem to miss is some of us didn't want a WW2 or WW1 game at all. Since they made it, I would rather they make it using weapons which were the common ones from the period they chose. If the whole reason is to take a break from modern warfare, I don't see how focusing on the more modern versions of the weaponry is actually a break. As it is now, I definitely don't see how it is going to be much different from the WW1 game since the weaponry won't play much differently.

No one is saying DICE can't have some fun with it since WW2 is somewhat known for crazy prototype weaponry and ideas from the Nazis, but this doesn't have to be the primary focus of the game. If they had stuck with a traditional Battlefield game, one or two DLC dedicated to these prototype weaponry and vehicles would have been fine.

Was the game was designed around the jetpack though which is what DICE did with BF1 and designing the game around automatic weapons? Personally I was a COD player at that time playing on the modded servers like FKR and various rifle only servers so I didn't really play any of the early Battlefields since vehicles weren't a draw for me and never have been.

Hopefully I end up being wrong and BFV turns out to be a big reversal of BF1. Worst case I go another 2 years without a FPS to play.
 
I don't think they'll be streaming live MP rounds until tomorrow, but the youtubers have released some MP footage. Looks very promising... Sound design is top notch. The lack of spot markers littering the screen is also a big breath of fresh air since they all but removed spotting (there's apparently still an intra-squad spotting mechanism).

JackFrags on Grand Operations



Flakfire on Vehicles



Westie on Fortifications

 
Last edited:
Stupid Question: With the knowledge that there will be no Premium Pass, what will DICE do about new maps?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top