yea thats what this honestly feels like tbh. instead of addressing a real issue like team balancing lets just change the TTK and say thats why people quit.
-
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.
DICE reveals what makes people quit Battlefield 5 matches
- Thread starter LordDraven
- Start date
OP
OP
OP
OP
there is also DICE talking in this thread
It's amazing how oblivious the higher ups at DICE are about this game. Community: Hey, we have a huge list of QoL issues that need to be addressed! DICE: We hear you, so let's change the TTK! They tried the same shit last year and got a huge amount of backlash. They finally did something right with the Pacific. Sure, it wasn't a huge content drop, but it was a high quality drop that led in the right direction. Then they go and pull shit like this.
BF V is a roller coaster.
BF V is a roller coaster.
Of course Battlefield V is worth 15 bucks, it's a fantastic game. Don't listen to the naysayers, they tend to nitpick too much.
BFV has another extra year of support, because EA/DiCE have announced to give more development time to the next gen Battlefield (which is a good thing).
You will not be disappointed, the game is in a supergood state and it's only going to improve in the future.
German bomber with 16xflutter bombs and 4x500Lbs is a ton of fun to fly š
Good they nerfed planes in the Pacific lol
It's not always the case that you get shot in the back simply because you are out in the open and nothing else. Often in my experience it's basically getting shot in the back or side from a place that I checked already but didn't see anyone in because the visibility in BF games is so damn poor that it'd look like there's no one only for me to get shot in the when I look the other way.
What they can do is improve visibility. The player models blend in with the environment, and both friendlies and enemies look the same (you always have to look at name tags to figure out who is who), and lastly the games have too much post processing like lens flares, dust etc kicking up these don't affect affect everyone evenly as a lot of things can be client side only. Their colour choices is also not very optimal, they want to go for a cinematic look and that often leads to an oversaturated image where colours all kind of blend in, and the bright areas are too bright.
Honestly, I'm surprised that DICE has gotten away with doing this for so long. They started this in BF3 and still do it, and imo the visibility in BF games are one of the worst of any big game.
I don't think they are oblivious. I think they know exactly what they're doing, which makes it worse. They literally had a CM come out and say "You're dying to SMGs at 100m, and that makes you feel bad." Maybe if that person had an aimbot and 10 seconds, sure, but nobody is dying to nerf guns with any sort of regularity.
They just gave up looking at data when it stopped giving them the answers they wanted to hear. I'm sure they have data points that show players quit out of 300+ ticket losses at a much higher rate than a close match. What have they done about it since launch? Fucking nothing. They even took the ability to switch teams away, so people who want to be sporting and even the teams can't do that.
The game is being run by what's left of the DICE that made previous, much better titles. And it shows. Very similar decline to BioWare.
They can now though, fixed this patch or the one before.
I think people just look at the population during pre-round and decide to quit. I had games the other day when my squad was ripping the server up and three of us had 15-7 k/d every game. Bad players kept leaving, but the server kept filling up. After a couple rounds the server became hectic as fuck as the chaff was sorted out. Point is it usually refills before the timer is down.
Only issue I've seen is when the matchmaking is trying to fill a server from 0. Again people see the player count before the round and leave, not considering that matchmakers are joining even if they don't show up in the player count yet. This goes on until the round starts and you end up with a low population.
Re: cheating I've seen exactly 1 blatant one (lewis aimbot) since the launch of pacific. He was then at level 5 and going by his profile (with a terrible stat record) that was his first day cheating. Can't verify the ban but the account has seen no activity since then and I know at least I reported him. So in EU going by my own experience cheating is very, very rare.
Still, in every game you have terrible players complaining about cheaters, the number of false reports is staggering. This is primarily because you can just shred people in this game if you have good aim, add a good squad to that and you have players with infinite heals, utility and strong weapons and bad players stand no chance. Most servers have the top half of the scoreboard with positive/neutral K/D but the bottom half is filled by players getting slaughtered over and over again.
That can't be fun, and I'm sure it feels like facing aimbots and wallhackers when you don't understand the game. Looking at my own videos, most multikills and killstreaks have the same players popping up again and again in bad spots to be outplayed. You can see the same in Stodeh videos and the like, players laying prone, standing still, respawning to feature again and again in the same montage.
Map awareness is huge, visibility requires practice, aim must be learned, you have footsteps instead of a minimap, and until next patch you're not notified when you are spotted. It is for the most part a game that has good design sensibilities from a competitive angle, which gives good and average players huge advantages. This is new to the Battlefield franchise and has had a whiplash effect on the playerbase. Take the complaints about prone players. If you are prone against a good player, you die because your head is static. Prone players isn't an issue, really, because they are easily countered. Watch jackfrags and see how often he prones compared to yelling "don't go prone!" as bad players react by laying down when attacked. It varies a bit from mode to mode (breakthrough for example is a bad mode that exaggerates issues with large population servers) and even map to map (even in conquest, linear maps like Metro play terribly with large populations), but good movement beats out camping 99% of the time.
It's a bit sad that matchmaking isn't better at matching skill levels. Without proper matchmaking or custom servers the good players have no other option but to pub-stomp. That causes the most frustration and inflates the number of cheat accusations, because a bad player will rarely admit that it is his/her own fault.
This thread is classic.
Devs present an anlysis of data they have collected.
Thread is full of people suggesting that either the data is wrong/ DICE have ignored the actual data/ are too stupid to understand what is really going on. Without anyone here having access to any of this data.
Sure if you disagree with where their focus on fine tuning should be but why do we have to resort to crazy conspiracy theories?
Devs present an anlysis of data they have collected.
Thread is full of people suggesting that either the data is wrong/ DICE have ignored the actual data/ are too stupid to understand what is really going on. Without anyone here having access to any of this data.
Sure if you disagree with where their focus on fine tuning should be but why do we have to resort to crazy conspiracy theories?
So that awful 3D auto spot shit is going live no matter what. Well the pacific content was good while it lasted i guess...
Yes, for now.. you know Crossplay is going to ruin our fun in the next Battlefield, because you know, it's an overblown talking point that must be implemented in the next game.
My gf keeps complaining when somebody shoots her from behind in fortnite
Everytime I š¤·āāļø
Everytime I š¤·āāļø
The fact that this game, in 2019, doesnt have private servers or auto balance is a DISGRACE
Since BF3 DICE has lost the plot. They focus on the wrong things when attempting to fix the game.
Edit: Also, half the maps are garbage, massive open sniper fests where tanks/lmgs can park off on a hill and see 85% of the map to snipe you.
Aerodrome and Al Sudan are the worst maps ive ever played on in BF game
I miss the days of Caspian Border and Paracel Storm
Since BF3 DICE has lost the plot. They focus on the wrong things when attempting to fix the game.
Edit: Also, half the maps are garbage, massive open sniper fests where tanks/lmgs can park off on a hill and see 85% of the map to snipe you.
Aerodrome and Al Sudan are the worst maps ive ever played on in BF game
I miss the days of Caspian Border and Paracel Storm
Last edited:
You mean the thing that any decent developper will either put as a opt-in option, or even solely limited to cross-platform party ?
They dont want to get robbed of their little campers paradise BFV and "dont make this game for headless chicken like CoD" etc.
So they come with excuses.
Im always hearing teams are unbalanced. Sure, no one wants to to play this game in its current state lol.
There is no data presented. Only conclusions. We disagree with those conclusions. How about DICE presents the open data? Every weapon K/D, popularity %, average kill distance etc.
Unless you can make an argument why they are right, you are just arguing from the position from authority/hidden information. For many devs, especially the ones who do it right all the time, this type of statement might not be as much of the problem. For DICE, they are the geniuses who killed Firestrorm on Day 1, lied about their dogshit coop mode, pushed the TTK prolonging patch in December and backtracked a couple of days later, 180 on their visions of chronological journey about smaller battles among other things.
So no, DICE made a lot of wrong decisions and I don't trust their conclusions.
Dev also state that they don't want to increase the time to kill ( it's their antivision ) yet follow up with saying that one of the reason for the changes is that they want to allow people who get killed on the back to have time to react.... because it will take more time to kill them.
How are we supposed to take what they say seriously ?
No one can tell me workarounds to play with pools of people in an online multiplayer game(even if prevention methods are in place to restrict KB/M in COD etc), as long as theres software to circumvent, theres guys capable of rising up to the challenge on pc to spoof it.
I do believe cheating happens with crossplay in Modern Warfare today, even when you choose not to opt in to crossplay or KB/M lobbies.
Im not a fan of crossplay, because I prefer to be sure cheating is unequivocally not happening where I play.
There has been talk of some saying they feel even though they haven't opted in for crossplay or kb/m lobbies in Modern Warfare, they still feel their playing against guys that are kb/m and on pc. It's anecdotal without solid proof, but it does make me suspicious none the less.
Last edited:
I'm well aware there is no data presented, I'm pretty sure there would be a lot of legal issues with releasing such a huge amount of data to the public, even anonomysied.
That's beside the point though. I wasn't saying they are right, only that we know that they must have some data, while everyone on this message board has singular personal experience and conjecture. Therefore everyone suggesting the data is wrong/misread/ ignored is being incredibly disingenuous.
What I'm actually saying is that the criticism doesn't need this extra layer of conspiracy theory nonsense. It just feeds into the dangerous trope that developers are idiots and need a good shouting at.
The criticism can just be the criticism. That's all that's needed.
Please, lets not go there. Plenty of games have data available regarding champion pick/win rates and so on. If they want the discussion or community support, they better present the data. In fact, you can literally look up individual BF players tags, seeing their personal k/d and rank.
This is why Riot is quite good at communicating the changes. People can see X hero has high pick and high win rates, so there are much less opinions. You can even stack heroes by rank, like only Gold+ player stats contribute, discarding the scrubs. Riot doesn't need paragraphs of text or whine on polygon how X hero is not fun.
X hero is overperforming, we are going to tweak cooldown/mana/damage/scaling etc. DONE.
Last edited:
I'm not saying it's impossible ( all depend on how it's implemented, like if the game put PC player playing with a controller against console player, then they probably made a big mistake ), but it's seems far more likely that if they do happen to play against kb/m player outside of crossplay those people are console player using hardware like XIM which allow them to play with a kb/m while making the console think it's a controller.
We can't definitively reach a conclusion, but anything is possible. Anything.
It's early, but did I just read that they want to nerf flanking in a game all about... flanking? Don't want to get shot in the back? Stay with your squad or learn the map if you're going to Lone Wolf it.
I haven't bought V yet for a variety of reasons (though at $15, whatever, I might go ahead and jump in) but I've been an infatry player since Battlefield 2 ā shooting shitstains the back, while avoiding being shot in the back and playing the fucking objective is literally the game. Like what's happening here?
I haven't bought V yet for a variety of reasons (though at $15, whatever, I might go ahead and jump in) but I've been an infatry player since Battlefield 2 ā shooting shitstains the back, while avoiding being shot in the back and playing the fucking objective is literally the game. Like what's happening here?
They are nerfing flanking while saying they aren't while listing things that most definitely are nerf to flanking.
It will take more time to kill, more ammo, they will get the opportunity to "to respond to that fire and take action", it will be harder to pull off at a distance... but no no no, changes of the lethality and average time to kill in flanking situations is part of their AntiVision.
Have you played since the new Pacific content update? The hacking problem is significantly worse. Like, it's every other game now I see blatant aimbotters when they used to be a rare sight. No idea why but there seems to have been a surge from my perspective. I've got around 500 hours in the game according to Origin.
And what will happen? Defending becomes easier, comebacks become tougher(which means more quitting, btw), and the talented players become gods who still make life hell for new players.
I love DICE, I really do, but they've been going around this endless loop of trying to make Battlefield all things to all players for far too long.
I have played for a few rounds but nothing much. Usually the leader-board warriors are in tanks so I tend not to think much about people with silly KD ratios.
Last edited:
They aren't nerfing flanking, at all.
They are changing the engagement range of some automatic weapons and making more weapons more viable overall. If you use them within the intended ranges or if you are good enough to stay on target and land headshots they will be just as effective as before.
Right now all of the SMGs, except the ZK, have the exact same damage model. That a dumb as fuck.
You can't look at K/D ratio you gotta look at how they're getting the K/D ratio. When you're 2 minutes into a match and the killfeed is 90% one guy with a MMG with all headshots and he's 25-0, that's your aimbotter.
And they generally choose MMGs because they have the most bullets so they just hold down the trigger and the aimbot does the rest.
I think I have been lucky then as i have never had this happen to me and i always watch the killcams.
Weapon balance is a small part of why people quit, so naturally we're changing weapon balance drastically!
That's collated data on an individual hero. It's quite easy to say X hero is picked regularly, Y hero is barely picked, let's do something to try and adjust it to be more even.
What DICE are speaking about here is measuring real human behavior within a game, multiplied over thousands of matches. Then picking out trends from that data. Then trying to interpret what the trends mean in regards to the player experience.
When I refer to legal issues, I mean that I would assume they can't just dump the data on the net, even when anonymised. So instead they would, again, just be them given you their interpretation of the data. Maybe it's wrong, it could well be. If everyone is going to call them stupid no matter what they say why bother releasing all that data.
Again, I'm being very clear to not say no in here should complain, only that it can be done without suggesting that a whole team of people is idiots. Also that a single person's individual experience is comparable to whole dataset.
BF5 (or any popular multiplayer game) is almost impossible to enjoy if you're in Asia. 9/10 games I'm in are dominated by Chinese hackers :/
Playing Battlefield on PC is really frustrating, because every single match that's at least 16 players has at least one cheater. It's been this way since BF3.
I never noticed a cheater in a console multiplayer game.
And when I play PC games it is so rare, so rare to find a cheater that I don't even care.
I think the last time I found one was in early access games, like The Forest or H1Z1.
I play a lot of Overwatch, BFV, Apex, and fighting games on PC.
I really never noticed a cheater in them, and I even got to Grand Master in Overwatch.
I quit BFV when our team is very unbalanced or when I get tired.
And when I play PC games it is so rare, so rare to find a cheater that I don't even care.
I think the last time I found one was in early access games, like The Forest or H1Z1.
I play a lot of Overwatch, BFV, Apex, and fighting games on PC.
I really never noticed a cheater in them, and I even got to Grand Master in Overwatch.
I quit BFV when our team is very unbalanced or when I get tired.
It's probably not the only factor, but it's most definitely a factor.
This shit is infuriating, even in single player games. This is the type of stuff that made me hate games like Rainbow Six back in the days. You enter a room that appears to be empty, you carefully look around and see nothing, you proceed and *BAM*. One-hit-kill sniper headshot from some camped enemy that you couldn't have seen or predicted. It feels so cheap and unfair. I dropped many games because of this.
This shit is infuriating, even in single player games. This is the type of stuff that made me hate games like Rainbow Six back in the days. You enter a room that appears to be empty, you carefully look around and see nothing, you proceed and *BAM*. One-hit-kill sniper headshot from some camped enemy that you couldn't have seen or predicted. It feels so cheap and unfair. I dropped many games because of this.
The part about the changes intent being that the flanked ennemy will now : "gives the enemy an opportunity to respond to that fire and take action. Our expectation is that they still lose the fight, but that you're at least able to participate and learn from the experience vs. simply being left with the frustration of being deleted." is what Dice say.
You can't both say that the ennemy will have more time to react to your flanking, and say it's not nerfed.
