• 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.

EA: The next Battlefield is set to launch in holiday 2021, never-before-seen scale, hands-on play testing underway internally

Don Dada

Don Dada

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,093
Scale - they're going to have 200 player battle royale.

I think they'll also take a lot from the apex ping system it makes too much sense for BF.

I would much prefer them to do smaller scale maps and traditional PvP and ramp up the destruction. People like to play multiplayer games in their small groups in party chat. Massive maps that takes days to walk across and people pinging you from multiple angles is no fun.
 
grady

grady

Member
Oct 29, 2017
609
Bournemouth, UK
Problem with any new Battlefield, even just from reading this thread, is that a lot of fans want completely different things to one another. A return to BF3 seems to be the semi-consensus though.
 
Jurassic579

Jurassic579

Member
Oct 27, 2017
270
I liked BF 3 and 1 but nothing can compare to BFBC2. They have note matched the gunplay or the demolition since then.

I really don't won't 200 player battle. I played BC2 on PS3 so the max player was 32. Max 64 if you ask me :-)
 
elyetis

elyetis

Member
Oct 26, 2017
4,547
grady said:
Problem with any new Battlefield, even just from reading this thread, is that a lot of fans want completely different things to one another. A return to BF3 seems to be the semi-consensus though.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I woukd say that many people don't realize that some of the things they want actually aren't incompatible. Sadly by people I also mean Dice.

Like there isn't actually an opposition between big map with vehicules, and the more infantry oriented with closer flags, more corridor like to avoid getting shot from everywhere experience some other people like. They absolutely can design maps which offer both experience, I would say that on a smaller/imperfect scale that's what maps like Caspian border were doing, with flag cluster surounded by more open fields for vehicules.

Same with people who did want to see less kills at longer range in bfV ( -in-famous second TTK change ), it might be completely wrong to see it actually incompatible with people who did not want that TTK change. Maybe the real problem to solve was the map design which did not offer enough cover ( and chage in elevation ) on average to allow you to avoid most long range combat if you wanted to, in addition to solving the game problem with the magic bullet which made it seemed like you were one shotted when it was absolutely not the case.
 
Bookoo

Bookoo

Member
Nov 3, 2017
968
I hope it's good. I enjoyed BF5, but fell off both BF5 and BF1 pretty quickly after release. My friend group has shift pretty much shifted over to CoD Warzoneand the CoD series is slowly becoming more like BF.

It's cool they are focusing on scale, but I am really hoping they will stop dumbing the game down. I really want them to take the robust weapon customization and the rotating game mode idea from CoD. I loved various game modes in BF, but after a couple weeks they are all waste lands and people only play Conquest large in the smallest maps possible.
 
Strife91

Strife91

Banned
Aug 14, 2020
22
Yeah, still waiting for a new Bad Company. I want a game with focus on gameplay and simulation, rather than unlock/achievement dopamine.
 
Macross

Macross

Member
Nov 5, 2017
694
USA
With BF5, EA has lost all credibility and benefit of the doubt from me. They never delivered on what they claimed the game would be, their support for it was laughable, instead of adding regular content then just mucked with play balance and made it worse, and the moment their accounting numbers indicated they had reached maximum profit to cost, they cut it off and let it go to die. I thought they did a pretty poor job supporting BF1 as well, but 5 was on a level all by itself when it comes to terrible developer support.

I hadn't played and enjoyed a COD since the original MW2, but I tried out the new one once I gave up hope that EA would give a crap anymore about BF. The amount of support and content that the game has had is insane in comparison to even the decently supported BF games before BF5. I'm not sold on their newest one coming out this month, but as far as a company and their buy into their product, I am much more confident in their games moving forward. The only company I trust more to stick by and support their games more is Ubisoft.

So with the next BF, I will be waiting. If the game reviews great, if after 6 months the support is great and looking to continue, I'll consider buying it at a discount. Financially EA has been a great success, but game after game they have proven to be one of the worst for gamers.
 
xpownz

xpownz

â–˛ Legend â–˛
Member
Feb 13, 2020
2,152
Tried 4 and 5 and couldn't just get into it. Hope it's a new Vietnam heh
 
Zombine

Zombine

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,231
I'll take good rush maps with ramped up demolition. Don't need 2000 player multiplayer.
 
Pfroebbel

Pfroebbel

Member
Oct 28, 2017
242
Uh, massive Scale is not what I want. The best Battlefield for me was the 24 Players Bad Company 2 Battlefield (maybe 32 are ok too).
 
Dan Thunder

Dan Thunder

Member
Nov 2, 2017
13,987
Didn't they already tease next-gen Battlefield a few months ago at some EA event? I seem to remember seeing some footage of loads of untextured characters running across a plain background and some face renders as well.
 
Arn

Arn

Prophet of Truth
Member
Oct 28, 2017
5,723
I agree that BC2 was the best multiplayer Battlefield in a long time (probably since BF2 & 2142 on PC) but it's interesting that we can't really specify what about it made it so good.

Reduced player count? Focus on Rush? Simplified but clear destruction? Four streamlined classes with clear roles?

All play into it for me and I'd much rather them return to that than a pure continuation of 3, 4, 1 and V.

Or I'd like to see them do something radical in terms of scale or game modes that completely changes things.
 
TheBaldwin

TheBaldwin

Member
Feb 25, 2018
8,276
Arnie said:
I agree that BC2 was the best multiplayer Battlefield in a long time (probably since BF2 & 2142 on PC) but it's interesting that we can't really specify what about it made it so good.

Reduced player count? Focus on Rush? Simplified but clear destruction? Four streamlined classes with clear roles?

All play into it for me and I'd much rather them return to that than a pure continuation of 3, 4, 1 and V.

Or I'd like to see them do something radical in terms of scale or game modes that completely changes things.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

focus on destructibility, lots of buildings with certain vehicle routes to combine infantry and vehicle warfare, a decent amount of vehicles as opposed to 60 people running around with the occassional tank sitting at the back of the map. Variety in class weapons and equipment (bring back the tracer dart!).Medics shiuld return to support characters. Engineers need better tank busting abilities. Remove prone to stop snipers locking down regions and slowing down gameplay and prevent proning in weird corners. Rush areas not being chokehold clusterfucks. Player run speed reduced slighhtly to make running across dangerous areas an actual decision.
Oh and add some god damn colours to the map
 
rebelcrusader

rebelcrusader

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,833
i'm always willing to let a new battlefield into my life

They've not been what they need to be since battlefield 4 - and even that was a launch disaster

Get it together DICE
 

BAD

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,565
USA
Are we sure they aren't making this cross gen? Sony also spoke like this for their games but we learned later they were still cross gen.
 

Indie

Member
Oct 30, 2017
44
Anything like BF4 and I'm all over it. We out so many hours into that game and the fun we all had.
 
Siresly

Siresly

Prophet of Regret
Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,564
endlessflood said:
But Bad Company is all about Rush!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No Bad Company is all about the Bad Company!

Sure, the multiplayer was all about Rush. But it doesn't have to be and I think shouldn't be for this imaginary sequel.
Rush was basically invented because consoles could only handle 24 or 32 players.
It worked well for that player count, but has always been a simpler, less dynamic mode.

I wouldn't mind if Rush just disappeared. But enough people like the more linear, repetitive, static, bunched up, progressive frontline nature of it, so it won't. I wouldn't mind that either. The main thing is that map design should be driven by Conquest. Design a proper Battlefield map, cut out a section of it, there's your Rush map. Rush should be an optional game mode for me to ignore, not something that significantly negatively affects Conquest or anything else.
 
endlessflood

endlessflood

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
8,693
Australia (GMT+10)
Siresly said:
No Bad Company is all about the Bad Company!

Sure, the multiplayer was all about Rush. But it doesn't have to be and I think shouldn't be for this imaginary sequel.
Rush was basically invented because consoles could only handle 24 or 32 players.
It worked well for that player count, but has always been a simpler, less dynamic mode.

I wouldn't mind if Rush just disappeared. But enough people like the more linear, repetitive, static, bunched up, progressive frontline nature of it, so it won't. I wouldn't mind that either. The main thing is that map design should be driven by Conquest. Design a proper Battlefield map, cut out a section of it, there's your Rush map. Rush should be an optional game mode for me to ignore, not something that significantly negatively affects Conquest or anything else.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I much prefer Rush to Conquest, and I say that as a Battlefield player who started with the 1942 Wake Island demo. The 24 player Rush matches of BFBC2 are way more intense and dynamic than any 64 player conquest match I've ever played. Don't get me wrong, Conquest is great for the more relaxed pace it affords, but BFBC2 Rush is still unbeaten in any MP game IMHO.
 
SpottieO

SpottieO

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,598
I was disappointed by BF1 but even moreso by BF5. Very excited at the prospect of a next-gen modern era battlefield game. The additional dev time will really do wonders I think.
 
HelloMeow

HelloMeow

Member
Oct 25, 2017
456
I hope it will have better map design. Recent battlefield games all have maps that are designed to look nice, but aren't fun to play at all.

Most maps are essentially large open areas with a few landmarks near the objectives. There's no interesting map design in between the objectives. Cover seems to be spread around randomly instead of deliberately to create interesting areas to play in.
 
noodlesoup

noodlesoup

Member
Feb 21, 2018
2,252
Chicago, IL
Take all of the good stuff from Battlefield 5 (Attrition, gunplay, etc), the good stuff from Battlefield 1 (Operations, presentation, etc) and mix it all together with the sandboxes that are Battlefield 3 and 4.

Guaranteed seller.
 
Tovarisc

Tovarisc

Member
Oct 25, 2017
24,389
FIN
TacoMasters said:
Take all of the good stuff from Battlefield 5 (Attrition, gunplay, etc), the good stuff from Battlefield 1 (Operations, presentation, etc) and mix it all together with the sandboxes that are Battlefield 3 and 4.

Guaranteed seller.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

What BF5 you played or play? 🤔

Attrition hasn't been a thing in it since early months after release because people kept whining about limited ammo, so now you get ammo from everywhere. Gunplay I do give you, it's really good and would be even better with proper recoil models for KBM. Now too many high RPM spray hoses become death beams with mouse because you can negate all recoil so easily.
 
noodlesoup

noodlesoup

Member
Feb 21, 2018
2,252
Chicago, IL
Tovarisc said:
What BF5 you played or play? 🤔

Attrition hasn't been a thing in it since early months after release because people kept whining about limited ammo, so now you get ammo from everywhere. Gunplay I do give you, it's really good and would be even better with proper recoil models for KBM. Now too many high RPM spray hoses become death beams with mouse because you can negate all recoil so easily.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I've played Battlefield 5 since the beta and I found the attrition to be really tight. It really did get diminished over time so I hope that with a new direction, DICE doesn't cave to non-existent demands.
 
DaciaJC

DaciaJC

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
6,685
Siresly said:
No Bad Company is all about the Bad Company!

Sure, the multiplayer was all about Rush. But it doesn't have to be and I think shouldn't be for this imaginary sequel.
Rush was basically invented because consoles could only handle 24 or 32 players.
It worked well for that player count, but has always been a simpler, less dynamic mode.

I wouldn't mind if Rush just disappeared. But enough people like the more linear, repetitive, static, bunched up, progressive frontline nature of it, so it won't. I wouldn't mind that either. The main thing is that map design should be driven by Conquest. Design a proper Battlefield map, cut out a section of it, there's your Rush map. Rush should be an optional game mode for me to ignore, not something that significantly negatively affects Conquest or anything else.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I'm not sure that's entirely true, since BF2: Modern Combat on the PS2/Xbox featured a stellar Conquest mode with 24 player maps. I always figured DICE envisioned it as the best showcase for their new destruction physics: more players crowded together into a tighter area = more explosions going off in a dense area = more crap getting destroyed.

Far as I'm concerned, Rush should have died with the first Bad Company title. DICE's common practice of designing maps for Rush first and then shoehorning them horribly into Conquest, exemplified in BC2 and BF3, was practically insulting.
 
arsene_P5

arsene_P5

Prophet of Regret
Member
Apr 17, 2020
15,438
Thomas said:
Looks like the entire studio is working on the game. That is a huge number of people.

Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They are going all in aren't they? Say what you want of the gameplay, but their technical expertise is something to be hold and this game being next gen only and having all members behind it, surely will blow our socks off.
 
Vidpixel

Vidpixel

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,637
Man, really hoping for a modern setting again, or even future for that matter. Had some good times with BF4 at the launch of the PS4.

Minus all the networking issues that is lol.
 
Fawz

Fawz

Member
Oct 28, 2017
3,654
Montreal
I don't think focusing on Scale is the solution to fixing the series and getting their identity back, but it's better than the opposite so here's hoping they do something more interesting this time around. With all the technical advancements made in recent years I could really see them being able to do significantly more impressive things now, but they'll likely also release on Current Gen and so be shackled somewhat
 
You must log in or register to reply here.