-
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 |OT| Band of Brothers and Sisters
- Thread starter iRAWRasaurus
- Start date
- Status
Y'all seen this Final Stand mode in Grand Operations? Was playing Fjell, last day of GO, Conquest. Match ends in a stalemate with 37-50 tickets left. The game then goes into an extra "Overtime" round that operates like a Battle Royale game, with a shrinking play area and no respawns. Was kinda wild, never saw that happen before.
I basically quit playing entirely. The small trickle of fixes and cosmetics do nothing to keep the game fresh. The game desperately needs new maps. Instead of this likely meh BR mode, they should have put a team on additional maps.
Seriously though, I pretty much only play Devastation, Arras, and sometimes Fjell, the other maps bore me to death.
Breakthrough, the current system of tank spawns promotes a cautious style of play that renders it nearly impossible for a defending team to defend itself against tanks. By removing tank spawns at certain points of the map, you encourage tankers to basically stay in the back.
It is not fun as a defender to fight against tanks in breakthrough. It frankly makes defending a chore.
One, add tank spawns to the rest of the map. Two, add more AT guns and make them 360 degrees movable. Make them along the lines of BF1 field guns.
I like BFV, but I'm rapidly reaching the point where I can't stand how the balance is done in the game.
Also the decision to prevent people from switching from our level upgrades before lvl.4 is a severe handicap and frankly I need to ask, why? What's the point of this?
It is not fun as a defender to fight against tanks in breakthrough. It frankly makes defending a chore.
One, add tank spawns to the rest of the map. Two, add more AT guns and make them 360 degrees movable. Make them along the lines of BF1 field guns.
I like BFV, but I'm rapidly reaching the point where I can't stand how the balance is done in the game.
Also the decision to prevent people from switching from our level upgrades before lvl.4 is a severe handicap and frankly I need to ask, why? What's the point of this?
It doesn't take long to reach level 4, but I agree it's a baffling and unnecessary restriction. Also I wonder how many players don't even realize you can upgrade the guns like that. It's kind of buried in the menus and the player gets no notifications.
I think BF1 maps were overall much better.
Seriously though, I pretty much only play Devastation, Arras, and sometimes Fjell, the other maps bore me to death.
bf3 had the best maps of the modern battlefields by far. strike at karkland, sharqi peninsula, caspian border, damavand peak, seine crossing and plenty more
Lol no. All of BF3's launch maps were bad and several are easy candidates for worst map in the series. The only good BF3 maps are the Return to Karkand ones, and those are still worse than their original incarnations.
Finally got to play with tanks a little more, reached level 5 with the Flakpanzer.
What should I get as the final upgrade? I have a choice between flame rounds and smoke airburst. I camp infantry in most cases, but I feel like smoke in flak shells could seriously mess with other tanks because they will be 100% in smoke as long as I attack.
What should I get as the final upgrade? I have a choice between flame rounds and smoke airburst. I camp infantry in most cases, but I feel like smoke in flak shells could seriously mess with other tanks because they will be 100% in smoke as long as I attack.
I bought Battlefield 1 end of last year in a PSN sale and I only just got round to trying it today. Man it's great. Feels so much more polished than BFV. I think I prefer the core gameplay in 5 but everything else is so much better in 1, feels way more polished. I realise it's been out for a lot longer but it surely it should have been the base to start 5 from?
ive never heard anyone say caspian border, seine crossing, damavand peak, grand bazaar and norshare canals are terrible. you are for sure in the minority here
Caspian Border is a "big" map, but it's just 90% empty space where nothing goes on and all the flags are a stone's throw from each other. Grand Bazaar is literally a square with a corridor up the middle. Seine was like three corridors that devolved into a spawn camp fest after five minutes. Etc.
BF3 having narrow clusterfuck map design that breaks above 24 players is hardly an unpopular opinion. Just some people like that.
It's because we were busy playing on server with good/decent map rotation :
Kharg / Caspian / Firestorm ( in that order )
I haven't played this since RE2 came out, and I don't think I'll get the ToW outfit this week. But what's the consensus on Firestorm now that Respawn launched its own squad-based BR? Is BF BR dead even before it launches?
I need new maps, even if it's just BF1 maps ported to BFV, I play less and less because of the lack of new maps.
I'll check next week with the coop content, and Rush later, but I only play Conquest (loved Rush in the Bad Company games though).
I'm really not into battle royale games, so it sadden me that they spend so much time on a BR mode I'll never play (or maybe just try once) and we only get a single map every quarter or so.
With Anthem coming I'll play BFV even less, it will really need maps to make me come back (a bunch, not a single one).
I'll check next week with the coop content, and Rush later, but I only play Conquest (loved Rush in the Bad Company games though).
I'm really not into battle royale games, so it sadden me that they spend so much time on a BR mode I'll never play (or maybe just try once) and we only get a single map every quarter or so.
With Anthem coming I'll play BFV even less, it will really need maps to make me come back (a bunch, not a single one).
This is what you get when you play a game that's been constantly tweaked and expanded upon for the last 2+ yrs. If it wasn't more polished I would be pretty surprised! I also remember all the bitching and moaning about lack of content and no incentive to continue, people "dropping the game after 2mths"...sounds oddly familiar.
Edit: Also, I can't believe they are launching two new modes in the next two months...who asked for co-op? Everyone is asking for new maps or balance/bug fixes.
Last edited:
Flame rounds. Also the Flakpanzer is broken op atm. They messed up some of the values this patch. So, it's doing more damage than it should.
Yeah yeah I understand it's obviously going to be a lot more polished. I was just surprised at the difference between the two.
I wasn't around when BF1 first launched but what you are describing there, it sounds like history repeating itself with 5.
For what it's worth, I am really enjoying 5 too, having a lot of fun with it, even with a its flaws.
At launch BF1 was in a way better state than BFV was at launch.
EA's earnings report just came out. They cited FIFA strength, and also lowered the fiscal year revenue projection by $275M, so their fiscal year revenue guidance is now $625M less than it was back in July. Much of that is BFV related, first with the delay causing lowered sales projections, then it appeared to sell even less than those. There may be more info in the call soon.
"The video game industry continues to grow through a year of intense competition and transformational change," said CEO Andrew Wilson. "Q3 was a difficult quarter for Electronic Arts and we did not perform to our expectations. We are now applying the strengths of our company to sharpen our execution and focus on delivering great new games and long-term live services for our players. We're very excited about Apex Legends, the upcoming launch of Anthem, and a deep line-up of new experiences that we'll bring to our global communities next fiscal year."
FIFA stands out as a robust franchise through a tumultuous year in the video game industry," said COO and CFO Blake Jorgensen. "Elsewhere in the business, we're making adjustments to improve execution and we're refocusing R&D. Looking forward, we're delighted to launch Anthem, our new IP, to grow Apex Legends and related Titanfall experiences, to deliver new Plants vs. Zombies and Need for Speed titles, and to add Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order to our sports titles in the fall."
https://s22.q4cdn.com/894350492/files/doc_financials/2019/q3/FY19-Q3-Earnings-Release-Final.pdf
"The video game industry continues to grow through a year of intense competition and transformational change," said CEO Andrew Wilson. "Q3 was a difficult quarter for Electronic Arts and we did not perform to our expectations. We are now applying the strengths of our company to sharpen our execution and focus on delivering great new games and long-term live services for our players. We're very excited about Apex Legends, the upcoming launch of Anthem, and a deep line-up of new experiences that we'll bring to our global communities next fiscal year."
FIFA stands out as a robust franchise through a tumultuous year in the video game industry," said COO and CFO Blake Jorgensen. "Elsewhere in the business, we're making adjustments to improve execution and we're refocusing R&D. Looking forward, we're delighted to launch Anthem, our new IP, to grow Apex Legends and related Titanfall experiences, to deliver new Plants vs. Zombies and Need for Speed titles, and to add Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order to our sports titles in the fall."
https://s22.q4cdn.com/894350492/files/doc_financials/2019/q3/FY19-Q3-Earnings-Release-Final.pdf
EA earnings have come out. While we wait for market analysts to comb through this and their earnings call in an hour, we have initial outlooks to look at.
Edit: dunno what I'm going on about, EA readily admits they failed their expectations. What a disappointing result this was, especially considering EA's previous warning and revised earnings estimate, that they missed that revision is bad news.
Edit: dunno what I'm going on about, EA readily admits they failed their expectations. What a disappointing result this was, especially considering EA's previous warning and revised earnings estimate, that they missed that revision is bad news.
same opinion. Amiens beat any of bfv. imo ofc. Same for Q.scar ..
i dont touch in BF:V around 1 week and until visibility and ttd fix's, im out and keep on BF1 and operations. Still a lot of fun to me
I like the Battlefield V maps.
But I was looking at Battlefield 4 maps the other day, and it's interesting how regressive DICE has gotten with topography and pathways. Maps were more inclined to experiment with verticality and wider topography before Battlefield 1. Greater emphasis on various terrain heights, and capture zones broken up with rivers, bridges, mountains, and larger buildings.
Battlefield 1 and V follow kinda formulaic design, much more consistently flatter topography with mild height variances, with templated buildings scattered around. I still enjoy playing them, but there's a lot of map design style in Battlefield 3 and 4 (and earlier) that is really nowhere to be found in both Battlefield 1 and V. While still fun, topography has gotten simpler, less varied in heightmaps, and I'd also argue diminished play space. Panzerstorm is flat, but the play spacing is a lot more like older Battlefield titles.
I think that's why I liked St Quentin Scar, Monte Grapp and Empire's Edge so much as they're the ones most reminiscent of older Battlefield. But even so, the topography between capture points is still largely open without much in the ways of design breaking up the flow.
But I was looking at Battlefield 4 maps the other day, and it's interesting how regressive DICE has gotten with topography and pathways. Maps were more inclined to experiment with verticality and wider topography before Battlefield 1. Greater emphasis on various terrain heights, and capture zones broken up with rivers, bridges, mountains, and larger buildings.
Battlefield 1 and V follow kinda formulaic design, much more consistently flatter topography with mild height variances, with templated buildings scattered around. I still enjoy playing them, but there's a lot of map design style in Battlefield 3 and 4 (and earlier) that is really nowhere to be found in both Battlefield 1 and V. While still fun, topography has gotten simpler, less varied in heightmaps, and I'd also argue diminished play space. Panzerstorm is flat, but the play spacing is a lot more like older Battlefield titles.
I think that's why I liked St Quentin Scar, Monte Grapp and Empire's Edge so much as they're the ones most reminiscent of older Battlefield. But even so, the topography between capture points is still largely open without much in the ways of design breaking up the flow.
Its pretty bad when you compare it to BF1 or even BF4.
I think 7m is about half of what BF1 did in the same time period. You also have to take into account that many of those 7.3m units were sold at big discounts.
SWBFII sold around 7-8m too and EA was also disappointed with that because it was a lot less than what Battlefront 2015 did. And we all saw how EA had no problem sending that game out to die with a skeleton crew releasing minimal content even if it did sell 7-8m.
It looks so much better (on the Pro), too. Almost no LOD pop-in, better AA, more realistic looking lighting, and consistent visuals in general. Meanwhile on Twisted Steel everything further than an arm length away is a cardboard cutout. So distracting.
Also, does BFV even have dynamic weather? Never witnessed it.
The third paragraph is interesting. So BFV had the highest concurrent player count in the entire franchise when S2 released? Or am I reading this wrong?
They are supporting the game through 2020, so that's good to hear. Maybe we will get the Pacific and other things.
So far I'm more on board with BFV than with 1 and 4. It's probably due, in no small part, because I've been able to devote more hours to it than I was able to in 4 and 1. I'm closer to the player I was in BF3, which is to say a pretty good one. It's amazing how many hours it takes me. After about 20-40hrs I'm good but everything beyond 90hrs gets me into that excellent range. Wish I'd been able to devote more time to 4 especially. It just felt closest to BF3 which is my favorite of the series to date
Even with my continued enjoyment of BFV I'm starting to really ache for new maps. I'm pretty tired of doing devastation and fjell and am ready for more panzerstorm arras type maps. More vehicles, more topography variety. Glad to see they're planning on supporting it for at least the foreseeable future
Also I couldn't be less interested in firestorm. I'll give it a shot but no BR game has connected with me yet. And coop? Fucking lol
Even with my continued enjoyment of BFV I'm starting to really ache for new maps. I'm pretty tired of doing devastation and fjell and am ready for more panzerstorm arras type maps. More vehicles, more topography variety. Glad to see they're planning on supporting it for at least the foreseeable future
Also I couldn't be less interested in firestorm. I'll give it a shot but no BR game has connected with me yet. And coop? Fucking lol
Finally finished up this weeks ToW.
Finally got a squad that knew what the fuck it was doing and we won a few games of Breakthrough.
It's an entirely different mode when you are on a winning team. It sucks getting steamrolled though.
Finally got a squad that knew what the fuck it was doing and we won a few games of Breakthrough.
It's an entirely different mode when you are on a winning team. It sucks getting steamrolled though.
OP
OP
This is true and i wonder if its due to their tessellated terrain. Could also be the increased overall fidelity already taxing consoles too heavily
I thought it didn't until I encounter a sandstorm on Hamada. I've noticed subtle lighting changes on Rotterdam and Arras but it seems to be very dialled back compared to BF1 which is a real shame.
Not sure I can agree about BF5 looking worse than BF1 on pro though - Arras in particular looks glorious and apart from some pop in when the camera swoops in at the start of a match, I'm not sure the LOD is any worse? I'll look next time I'm on Twisted Metal for cardboard cutouts but if they're there they haven't registered with me.
I have to vent about the team of idiots I just had on Hamada Breakthrough, playing as Attack. I went the whole game as Recon, 3rd highest scorer from both teams, with a 1.0 K/D, because I was PTFO with spotting flares and spawn beacons. With two flags in the sector, I helped take A something like 9 maybe 10 times and each time the enemy would swarm in, and despite me firing flares like they were going out of style, the defenders would retake it quickly. Over and over again. I look around, and there's a ton of Recons on the neighboring hills never moving forward, and something like 4 tanks were hanging back as well, never going in. Useless fucks. It's not rocket science. You take a flag, you spawn on the flag so the other team doesn't take it back. Ugh.
I think BF4's map design was still just a somewhat expanded version of Bad Company's choke-heavy maps, and focused on funneling players into specific areas. That's why the BF4 Commander was so stupid compared to the BF2 version - you don't need a guy telling your squad where the fight's going to be when the fight is always going to be in one of two areas, so they had to like quadruple the Commander's explosives to make them worth playing.
BFV and (especially) BF1 still have this issue, but it feels like more of the maps are being utilized instead of just everyone cramming into a parking lot the entire match.
At first glance it seems ok, but this game is reliant on cosmetic sales to pay for the post launch content.
So in that regard half the sales of the previous entry (that had a season pass) seems pretty bad. And by the sound of it, people aren't invested in BFV as much as they were in BF1 or even BF4, so apparently they have a problem with player retention as well.
"Largest Battlefield game ever"... like wtf does this even mean?! Size on hard drive? lol
I also bet "doubling down" means mostly Firestorm and cosmetics. I think the earliest we will see "real new MP content" (if ever except for the map in march) will be Q3/Q4. Maybe one map in between that but forget new factions and stuff before that.
Yeah for the most part fortifications don't make enough of a difference because it takes a long time to fully fortify a flag for usefulness. Then a plane/tank comes in and destroys it all. I think it needs streamlining somewhat. Your comment is spot on though :)
I have a feeling BR is going to also address the map issue somewhat. BR as a mode needs at least one very, very sizeable map with clearly defined zones and areas. Those areas can be broken down and used for other modes - including CQ. Wishful thinking, and obviously tricky to get right - but it would be the sensible thing to try and do.
I'd also like to see BF1 maps brought in too - you'd think it would be a quick win for what some see as a big weakness in the current content levels, but how they get included and integrated would be interesting.
If I recall correctly BF1 was the largest launch. It was like almost 700k concurrent players at launch. However, they did a lot of things right. A new era most games haven't touched and some great marketing. BFV was the complete opposite. A horrible reveal and marketing, plus an era we've seen too many times before. Also there was an era fatigue. WW1 and WW2 feel similar in a lot of ways. They should have done a modern/BC3 (Vietnam to present) or future BF then saved WW2 for later, not coming off the heels of WW1. That's why EA is disappointed with the numbers. BF1 did like 15 million compared to the 7.3 million.
Last edited:
Ugh, cheaters are doing the same thing they do in BF1, which made me jump ship
I'm wondering, just as a thought that when cheaters are banned anyone they killed should get a "death refund". It might not work, but it nullifies the reason why lots of cheaters cheat.
I'm wondering, just as a thought that when cheaters are banned anyone they killed should get a "death refund". It might not work, but it nullifies the reason why lots of cheaters cheat.
- Status