• Light/Dark
  • Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Battlefield V |OT2| Empire of the Soon

OléGunner

OléGunner

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,275
Airborne Aquarium
Checked out Solomon Islands last night. Its....actually quite a decent map!
Despite some visual bugs, I like the jungle alleyways, tough village fights in the centre and cheeky access to capture points by boat on the rivers.

But again, the TTK nerfed my enjoyment by the 3rd round, its really ruined my BFV gun play muscle memory.
I'll check in again at 6.2, I don't think the game is fun enough in this state now to continue playing in the short to medium term.
 
elenarie

elenarie

Game Developer
Verified
Jun 10, 2018
9,798
Scottt said:
Are you feeling excited or sad to be moving on to a new project?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Excited, of course. :) I managed to finish my work on the project shortly after coming back from vacation, so after 3 years, it's nice to start on something new that I would not be able to talk about for a while. :p
 
OP
OP

iRAWRasaurus

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,729
elenarie said:
Excited, of course. :) I managed to finish my work on the project shortly after coming back from vacation, so after 3 years, it's nice to start on something new that I would not be able to talk about for a while. :p
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Good luck and I am excited for what dice will show in the future.

Btw I appreciate you posting and hanging out in here. I am sure the negative feedback of the community can be hash sometimes. But you know how the internet can be a vocal minority. Regardless I had a blast playing bfv and I hope the next game will be just as fun.
 
Serpens007

Serpens007

Well, Tosca isn't for everyone
Moderator
Oct 31, 2017
8,127
Chile
elenarie said:
Perhaps. Not sure what the plans are currently, as I'm no longer on the team after coming back from the new year vacation. :)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Wow, I feel sad and happy about it. Happy for you for starting a new project, I'm really interested in what you are gonna do next (I hope you can all unleash your creative freedoms!). Sad because you were our link to the team to give feedback lol

Good luck! And thanks for staying around here
 
Olengie

Olengie

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,377
Despite all the testing, the Lunge Mine is still broken. Either no damage or incredibly low damage like 5 at times. So much for fixing it.
 
Serpens007

Serpens007

Well, Tosca isn't for everyone
Moderator
Oct 31, 2017
8,127
Chile
Looks like a lot of the team is pulled into that other project.

RIP the dream of the Eastern Front (I'm pretty sure they'll prioritize the liberation of Europe)
 
EnronERA

EnronERA

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,056
so bf devs are getting pulled out of V, eh? I think its time to jump ship on this game. I don't think it's ever getting any better.
 
Avitus

Avitus

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,906
BFV is a failed product and they don't want to sink more dev time into something for minimal return. The studio needs the next game to hit in a major way.

There was an opportunity to pivot BFV into a fixed BF1943 style F2P game for the next gen consoles but that doesn't seem to be in the cards. Continually rehabbing Battlefront 2 is (and should be) more important to EA.

I would not be surprised if the issues surrounding BFV have been completely misrepresented to EA leadership and a lot of it simply written off as a bungled launch orchestrated largely by Soderlund. With his departure, maybe DICE gets a mulligan, even though they haven't handled BFV well with the time they've been given.

I am not at all confident in the next game, given the high profile veteran departures for what are very obviously creative differences and the forced TTK patch that no one in the community wanted.
 

icecold1983

Banned
Nov 3, 2017
4,243
Avitus said:
BFV is a failed product and they don't want to sink more dev time into something for minimal return. The studio needs the next game to hit in a major way.

There was an opportunity to pivot BFV into a fixed BF1943 style F2P game for the next gen consoles but that doesn't seem to be in the cards. Continually rehabbing Battlefront 2 is (and should be) more important to EA.

I would not be surprised if the issues surrounding BFV have been completely misrepresented to EA leadership and a lot of it simply written off as a bungled launch orchestrated largely by Soderlund. With his departure, maybe DICE gets a mulligan, even though they haven't handled BFV well with the time they've been given.

I am not at all confident in the next game, given the high profile veteran departures for what are very obviously creative differences and the forced TTK patch that no one in the community wanted.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Youd be surprised how many higher ups in companies are completely clueless and are successful in spite of themselves
 
Le Dude

Le Dude

Member
May 16, 2018
4,709
USA
Honestly I'm kinda bummed with how the map selection turned out. In addition to missing some staple maps, it never really felt like it delivered on their initial pitch of bringing us some of the lesser known locale of the war.

Overall I had tons of fun in my time with the game, and that shouldn't be overlooked, but I can't help but feel a tinge of disappointment that it will always feel like there's things missing and it could be another decade or more before we see the series return to WW2.
 
Trisc

Trisc

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,485
icecold1983 said:
Youd be surprised how many higher ups in companies are completely clueless and are successful in spite of themselves
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Rich white men tend to fall upwards in corporate jobs, and in the companies they fail through neglect or malice, they ride out on a golden parachute while the folks lower on the ladder lose their jobs outright.
 
EatChildren

EatChildren

Wonder from Down Under
Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,029
I'll die on the hill of Battlefield 1 being legit great with strong post launch content, so it's whatever happened between then and Battlefield V that messed up the production pipeline.

That being said, gossip of leadership and management issues at DICE echoes a lot of what we've learned from Kotaku's reports on BioWare; very large, expensive, difficult projects headed by management and leads that failed at cementing a coherent vision and following it through production. A lot technology issues, entering production too early, not having a complete vision of what was to be accomplished, and so on and so forth. Both Mass Effect: Andromeda and Anthem suffered precisely for these reasons. They were games that started as one idea that was not appropriately outlined or cemented in a technically sufficient vertical slice before entering production with a clear vision, and resulted in haphazard production with content constantly getting cut, changed, and reimagined without a defined focus or competent leadership.

That does make me wonder if DICE has had similar issues, and identifying exactly how these problems manifest and are allowed to grow so large that they hinder projects is the real question. It's telling that DICE and BioWare share similar problems are both come under the EA umbrella.
 

Deleted member 135

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
11,682
I like the new map on Conquest, I just wish that they'd stop shoving Breakthrough down our throats. I just want a Pacific Conquest only server lineup, hell just Wake Conquest 24/7 and I'd be happy to play that forever.
 
Serpens007

Serpens007

Well, Tosca isn't for everyone
Moderator
Oct 31, 2017
8,127
Chile
I actually really like the map on Breakthrough, but it does lack a couple of vehicles in the final stand. It's fun anyway, good map. Haven't played much of Conquest on it though
 
Naru

Naru

Member
May 11, 2019
2,373
EatChildren said:
I'll die on the hill of Battlefield 1 being legit great with strong post launch content, so it's whatever happened between then and Battlefield V that messed up the production pipeline.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I am with you on BF1. People love the atmosphere but hate the gunplay. I love both. My favorite BF to go back to once in a while.
 
RadioactiveLobster

RadioactiveLobster

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,722
USA
So I've used the lunge mine against armor at total of 7 times so far.

4 did 5 damage only
1 did zero damage
2 have done 50 damage


Thought it was delayed to stop the bugs?
 
Evolution of Metal

Evolution of Metal

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
6,960
EatChildren said:
I'll die on the hill of Battlefield 1 being legit great with strong post launch content, so it's whatever happened between then and Battlefield V that messed up the production pipeline.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It had a huge gap between Giant Shadow and French maps, and the last 2 DLC packs were oof. Naval maps had some interesting ideas, but I don't think they were fleshed out and balanced. Apocalypse had nothing interesting or fairly useless things like air supremacy. On the other hand, BF1 received a lot of interesting and needed tweaks. The entire perks system was bolted midway through the lifecycle. No doubt BF1 was going forward with balance and features.

The main difference is that BFV was a broken (and still is) early-access game, where BF1 was much more fleshed out from the start. To this day you have to wonder why DICE is ignoring cheaters/teambalance. If it wasn't for the core problems, BFV support would have been fine even with the huge gap between launch and Greece.

Plus the way DICE split Pacific/Western factions is wrong. It might be a correct choice if resources weren't thin in the first place, but we got 1 vehicle and 2 call-ins for the European maps last winter. Specializations have not been touched upon ever since the launch.
 
IgnotumCL

IgnotumCL

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
1,170
Olengie said:
The placement of the Beach Guns on first Sector are at the most unhelpful spot compared to Pacific Storm. Pretty much useless like the Type 10s on Wake Island.

4 Pacific Maps with Beach Landings. Always Japan on Defense. Smh.

If we get a 5th Map for Chapter 6, I hope it is an Urban Map.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Battlefield_V_Screenshot_2020.02.05_-_17.13.58.16.png


Agree, developers are really stupid doing this
 
IgnotumCL

IgnotumCL

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
1,170
And if you never has played BFV and look that screen you don't know what faction you are... man, I really hate how was made this game.
 
Last edited:
Naru

Naru

Member
May 11, 2019
2,373
Is there a way to play around on an empty map/server to tweak some settings etc without getting interrupted? It seems like the servers shut down when there is no one on them and the shooting range isn't really ideal for that.
 
ThisOne

ThisOne

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,938
The terrible recent changes to TTK and gunplay aside, the main thing that I like about BF1 over BFV are the maps. BF1 had some truly great maps (Amiens, Ballroom Blitz, Empire's Edge, St. Quentin Scar, etc.) while BFV has nothing of the sort. What's the best BFV map? Pacific Storm is pretty good but wasn't even in the base game. Al Sundan and Arras are both decent. I mean, Twisted Steel is probably the best map for Conquest but would only rank like a 6/10 when compared to maps from all other Battlefield games.
 
Olengie

Olengie

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,377
IgnotumCL said:
Battlefield_V_Screenshot_2020.02.05_-_17.13.58.16.png


Agree, developers are really stupid doing this
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Pacific Storm and Iwo Jima are the only maps where the Coastal Gun Placement make sense.

Solomon Island should be more of a front facing since theyre pretty much supposed to bombard the enemy while also being a high risk/reward thing imo. Especially since a LVT can take em out in one hit.
 
Reckless Onion

Reckless Onion

Member
Oct 27, 2017
484
elenarie said:
Excited, of course. :) I managed to finish my work on the project shortly after coming back from vacation, so after 3 years, it's nice to start on something new that I would not be able to talk about for a while. :p
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Can you say if anyone is looking at this snap aim assist that nobody asked for and you guy's just dumped on the whole community?
Is this even talked about? I completely stopped playing because of it.
i played every single day before this, i loved the gunplay.

There's no reason to hip fire anymore when i can just snap on to target
There's no reason to pre aim anymore when i can come out of sprint and be 100% on target with snap.

you got these guy's running around like headless chickens with fast firing smg's coming out of sprint melting you in 0.1 seconds, that shit didn't happen before at all or at least not all the time.

No recoil, snap aim assist .. it just became so boring, zero skill
 
Evolution of Metal

Evolution of Metal

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
6,960
ThisOne said:
Al Sundan
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

giphy.gif


How? Why? The map is oversized, with the huge empty areas. If you play as an infantry, you are constantly bombed by planes or shot-at by tanks. The distance between points is enormous, only good if you have transport. There is no flow in this map, it might be alright if you had more tanks for the Panzerstorm-like vehicle heavy rounds. Infantry fighting over the hills, while the tanks duke it out in the open field and occasionally going up those hills.

Rotterdam is a lot like Amiens:
• No planes
• Fight over the bridges/canals
• Alleys
• Urban interiors, shops

One of the Amiens problem was that if you lost both C and D, it was really hard to capture the bridges back. Rotterdam is better because you can circle around, or go above on the train bridge.
 
Last edited:
ThisOne

ThisOne

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,938
Evolution of Metal said:
How? Why? The map is oversized, with the huge empty areas. If you play as an infantry, you are constantly bombed by planes or shot-at by tanks. The distance between points is enormous, only good if you have transport. There is no flow in this map, it might be alright if you had more tanks for the Panzerstorm-like vehicle heavy rounds. Infantry fighting over the hills, while the tanks duke it out in the open field and occasionally going up those hills.

Rotterdam is a lot like Amiens:
• No planes
• Fight over the bridges/canals
• Alleys
• Urban interiors, shops

One of the Amiens problem was that if you lost both C and D, it was really hard to capture the bridges back. Rotterdam is better because you can circle around, or go above on the train bridge.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I didn't say I loved Al Sundan. I just think it's a decent map. But your point is taken and just helps prove my point that BFV is filled with mediocre maps that don't really stand out when compared with the rest of the series. And for the record, I think Amiens is a way better map than Rotterdam.
 
Trisc

Trisc

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,485
I still believe that planes have no real place in Battlefield. They've never felt like they acted as a part of the general combat loop, and were simply present in gameplay because there were planes used in combat in WWII.

The question is, if DICE clearly struggled so much to balance them in BF1 at all (I still feel they're among the biggest problems that game had, along with Elite Kits, Behemoths, and a botched Conquest rework), then why bring them back for BFV? To appease the incredibly small subset of players that love hopping in planes and dropping bombs that take minimal time to master and reward you with multiple kills?

In my opinion, the pace of the game without airplanes was already so good (prior to 5.2). Infantry and land vehicles go hand-in-hand, since they directly interact with one another. Planes only interact with the battlefield when they're dropping bombs before they fly out of Fliegerfaust range.
 

icecold1983

Banned
Nov 3, 2017
4,243
Triscuitable said:
I still believe that planes have no real place in Battlefield. They've never felt like they acted as a part of the general combat loop, and were simply present in gameplay because there were planes used in combat in WWII.

The question is, if DICE clearly struggled so much to balance them in BF1 at all (I still feel they're among the biggest problems that game had, along with Elite Kits, Behemoths, and a botched Conquest rework), then why bring them back for BFV? To appease the incredibly small subset of players that love hopping in planes and dropping bombs that take minimal time to master and reward you with multiple kills?

In my opinion, the pace of the game without airplanes was already so good (prior to 5.2). Infantry and land vehicles go hand-in-hand, since they directly interact with one another. Planes only interact with the battlefield when they're dropping bombs before they fly out of Fliegerfaust range.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Bf4 handled them the best in the series IMO. They were great at killing choppers, could provide support to help infantry kill tanks and weren't particularly effective against foot soldiers. Now they are flying fortresses with magic armor and instagib weapons that 1 shot everything
 
Nephilim

Nephilim

Member
Oct 28, 2017
5,275
5.0 was my favourite in the series after BF3.
Haven't played in over a month now and still counting.
Thank god there are plenty of other good games to play out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.