I hope DICE takes a good hard look at Modern Warfare. Even at launch, in both quantity and quality/polish it is just objectively magnitudes better.
-
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
- Thread starter iRAWRasaurus
- Start date
I hope DICE takes a good hard look at Modern Warfare. Even at launch, in both quantity and quality/polish it is just objectively magnitudes better.
So long as they don't follow the blueprint set by Ground War. MW's big team modes are an unmitigated disaster.
Dice (and the frostbite team) have lost so much staff i dont think they are capable of making a battlefield game on the level of previous entries.
They shut down servers in Dubai and South Africa last week, so I think we're pretty far down that road. People seem convinced that more maps are coming, but I can't really see it.
It says it all about this game that there's so little fuss about the mess they made of the elites. They're less customisable than the normal character models but you can use them in the wrong theatre of war. There's so little thought gone into the whole thing.
It's not an oversight. They decided that so there is more of an incentive to buy the Elites.
I still have like 18 levels left despite most chapter rewards being a tier skip, mainly because I'm playing a lot of Apex. From time to time I come back to BFV, and enjoy what's there, but I don't know, it feels that something's missing. The momentum the game got with the pacific fell quite quickly
A rework of Operations and Eastern front would make me go back for sure
A rework of Operations and Eastern front would make me go back for sure
I've had that on PS4 and had to restart the console before I could connect.
I'm afraid that will be the case, sadly.
Hopefully we are both wrong.
The original plan was to have all the weapons like the M2 as chapter 6 unlocks but DICE released 3 guns by accident ahead of time. Tier skips would have made a little more sense if they hadnt F'd up.
Honestly that may be for the best. Cut the campaign, focus on delivering a high-quality multiplayer experience with a live service that has actual strong support and content, as well as community servers from launch. Diverse variety of guns, plenty of vehicles, more than 8 maps at launch (aim for 12), and soldier customization that works in the class framework. No Battle Royale either.
This x1000!!!!!!!!
I just want good old fashioned battlefield with tight gameplay and good balance. Focus on that and nothing else matters.
I'd guess that there are still loads of people who buy every Battlefield, but only dabble with the multiplayer for a few weeks. The single player will be to add enough value to the package to make sure they keep on buying.
Maybe the disaster that BFV has been with all the bloat convinces them to go MP only, but I'd be surprised.
Maybe the disaster that BFV has been with all the bloat convinces them to go MP only, but I'd be surprised.
Single player campaigns for games like Battlefield are over-expensive marketing. Does anyone even like them that much? I haven't even finished all of BF1 or V's because they are both so stunningly mediocre. I feel like they just use the cutscenes for trailers and then make a roughly four hour, underwhelming experience just to tack on.
Just look at the new Call of Duty; yeah, it has historically been known for its campaigns, but then again only a small minority of players even touch it. They even scrapped it for Black Ops 4, not that it was the right call to make given the franchise's history, but nonetheless most friends of mine playing the new CoD haven't even touched it.
Here's what they need to: Invest in Operations. Operations worked brilliantly in BF1 when it fused the multiplayer experience with the actual history of the war, creating an immersive game mode that was supposed to bring you to the battles. Using their incredible score, sound design, and narration, they were able to bring you into an engaging experience based around the Battlefield. It was basically what the campaign tried to do but actually engaging, enjoyable, and very replayable. I was just playing BF1 last night with some old friends and they still love Operations. Grand Operations was a huge misfire that absolutely gutted the potential WWII Operations could have had (and I'm still so angry we may never see Iwo Jima at the very least), but that doesn't mean the mode should be abandoned.
For the next Battlefield, I really think that Operations should have the red carpet rolled out for it like they did for Firestorm, except actually have it come out at launch. Since I assume they will have a return to form in the Modern Era, they could create their own conflict that would normally be explored in the campaign, but instead present it through Operations. Maybe they could even add AI, turn the narrators into characters, and make the opening intro a cutscene that details the progress of the war up to that point and fills you in on the objective of the mission. The team that wins the game could effect the narrative going forward, too in terms of how the next map is presented potentially. There's a lot of potential to be explored here.
I don't think that is the case.
BFV:
All story on medium 23.5%
Individual campaigns are around 30% each
Don't remember how the difficulty goes on BFV, could be that there is story-difficulty, and if that is the case, I think overall BFV will be around 32% SP completion on any difficulty.
Last edited:
I'd guess that the campaign is even more of a selling point in Battlefield because it has such a reputation of being eye candy. I haven't liked them since BC2, but I still remember the hype that the shinies created for BF3.
Your stats are wrong, because it's only counting the players who have an account on the psnprofiles.com. When it comes to PSN as a whole, only 17,9% of players completed the campaign.
You can check those stats on psnprofiles.com. Just hover the mouse cursor over the stats and it will show the number from PSN.
My one wish for future battlefield games is that squad spawning reverts to only the squad leader so Conquest games have something resembling pacing for the first time since BF2142. And as a bonus wish, ditching all the superfluous game modes and just designing the whole thing around conquest.
OP
OP
If it wasn't for the terrible mistake named 5.2 BFV would have been my favourite BF ever. BF3 is still my personal fave, but BFV is clear second.
Sometimes i think i play a different game than the majority of people out there... for instance i loved Hamada from the get go, yet everybody hates it, for no good reason.
Everytime i play Hamada in conquest you can "feel" how everyone is trying to push and win, same goes for Panzerstorm, which has authentic WW2 atmosphere on top of being an epic Battlefield map on its own.
The reason why i enjoy BFV so much is its impeccable gunplay and movement system. It's the best.BF4 or BF1 for instance feel like children carneval in comparison to BFV in those aspects.
For all the imperfections BFV admittedly has i still love it and prefer it to any other shooter out on the market today.
Sometimes i think i play a different game than the majority of people out there... for instance i loved Hamada from the get go, yet everybody hates it, for no good reason.
Everytime i play Hamada in conquest you can "feel" how everyone is trying to push and win, same goes for Panzerstorm, which has authentic WW2 atmosphere on top of being an epic Battlefield map on its own.
The reason why i enjoy BFV so much is its impeccable gunplay and movement system. It's the best.BF4 or BF1 for instance feel like children carneval in comparison to BFV in those aspects.
For all the imperfections BFV admittedly has i still love it and prefer it to any other shooter out on the market today.
Last edited:
Reinstall yesterday WTF is with TTK? i played Pacific content only, of the 4 maps i hated Jima.
Yesterday to my shock didn't run into any hacker, first game today blatant hacker....haven't played in a while and see Dice haven't done any thing to stop hackers, i might as well use a hack too.. j/k
Yes, just let me have vehicle classes again. And don't make two planes that look the same but have different unlocks. Don't lock me into my choices until fully leveled up when some options are clearly not viable. Vehicles are so complicated in this game. Why does a tank need so many different unlocks? Only thing that does is discourage me from trying them because everyone with the right unlocks is clearly at an advantage.
Thanks!
This is the same company that used to lock the medics revive gadget behind an unlock
So
OP
OP
I think so infrequently about wanting to play Battlefield V that I'd forgotten I'd uninstalled it, and don't recall how long ago it was. A month or two maybe? I remember at the time being suspicious I'd end up feeling the itch and reinstall it at some point, because surely, but man...nothing. Not a single urge. It's like I uninstalled the game from my consciousness.
BFV didnt deserve this. But EA and DICE flubbed this game so hard. Its absolutely ridiculous theyre skipping D Day and the Eastern Front.
Focusing on unseen and famous battles my ass.
I just hope we get a second chance at a WW2 game next gen. I don't want CODWW2 and BFV to be the last WW2 games we see for another damn decade.
I'm already getting burned out with modern warfare again with CODMW. I can't take more than one more.
I'm already getting burned out with modern warfare again with CODMW. I can't take more than one more.
I think the probability of seeing one from DICE is extremely low. Battlefield V's design and support failings aside, I suspect EA/DICE also see this as a failure for a revive of WW2 themed titles (even if COD WW2 did fine). Battlefield: WW2 I reckon is well and truly dead for the foreseeable future.
I reckon we'll have to look to other devs for a historically accurate WW2 experience. I dunno, maybe someone can coax Ubisoft to revive Brothers in Arms.
I honestly would be up for a new modern Battlefield game where multiplayer is the focus again in the vein of BF 2-4, just crazy Conquest focused fun gameplay with Commanders and everything. Basically give me a modern version of this:
All fun, none of this wannabe War Documentary thing.
Bar that I would also take a Bad Company 3 fully focused on the Vietnam War with crazy jungles and the old level of destruction.
All fun, none of this wannabe War Documentary thing.
Bar that I would also take a Bad Company 3 fully focused on the Vietnam War with crazy jungles and the old level of destruction.
Cut singleplayer (outside of maybe a SWBF2 styled Instant Action) and don't have a Battle Royale. Have DICE Sweden, DICE LA, and Criterion all work on the multilayer together.
I really miss going in with my squad of recons and sneaking into a Rush point just to plant C4 everywhere and bring the whole building down.
They nerfed this in BC2 but in BC1 the terrain deformation was crazy.
I never played BC1since it was console-only but wait it had even crazier destruction than BC2? o.o
The main thing about it was with big enough explosives you could create massive craters in the ground. Big enough to act as foxholes.
BC2 didn't have that as much but BC2 introduced being able to level buildings.
