Excellent video and all true.
and not see how it's the best Battlefield to ever come out. :)
What are you playing BF1 on? I'm on XB1 and had no trouble getting into a Conquest match.Well, unfortunately there's no one to play with in BF1. There are no servers with a decent ping that have any population.
Darn it, back to BFV.
gg
INvisibility improvementsThere is some kind of divine irony at play when we complain for months about visibility problem ( imho for good reason ), and pretty much a few weeks after it's finaly improved we get stuck for 2 weeks with characters with actual invisible bodies...
Yeah :(It's really sad how they managed to turn the positive buzz they created with the new roadmap into the shitshow we've got now...
Well, unfortunately there's no one to play with in BF1. There are no servers with a decent ping that have any population.
Darn it, back to BFV.
Really can't be mad about that, game devs are treated and paid horribly compared to other fields in the industry, they deserve time off.
From our limited information and my little experience in the software industry this all sure seems like a management problem.
It's really sad how they managed to turn the positive buzz they created with the new roadmap into the shitshow we've got now...
The Beta for 5 was legitimately the most fun I ever had with a Battlefield game and I thought that only relatively small improvements would be needed to elevate that game to best entry in the franchise. Didn't actually buy the final game in the end for reasons, but I sure as heck did not expect the game to turn out like this after that Beta. Bummer.
Ps4. Strange, I'll have to try again.What are you playing BF1 on? I'm on XB1 and had no trouble getting into a Conquest match.
According to this, last night's lows were at 2,000 users - which is still decent.
The Beta for 5 was legitimately the most fun I ever had with a Battlefield game and I thought that only relatively small improvements would be needed to elevate that game to best entry in the franchise. Didn't actually buy the final game in the end for reasons, but I sure as heck did not expect the game to turn out like this after that Beta. Bummer.
I was totally ready to drop money on the expensive Edition of the game actually but the game's release was shortly after I went to Dublin for 5 months and I only had access to a crappy MacBook and a crappy office PC during that time so BFV was kinda out of the picture for the time being. And then post-launch BFV happened.
It was the most fun you had in BFV, and you didn't buy it? What reasons, the game was half-off in December. I thought that the game was broken in beta, and it was, but I said **** it, they have two months to fix it and then we will start getting French, Italian, Soviet armies. (I don't regret buying the game, because even the launch content for $30 was ok value)
Feels like a skeleton crew is working on the game now, apart from cosmetics.
True. It would be nice to have an alternative. Cod just doesn't do it for me as the maps are too small.It also doesn't help that EA/DICE really don't have any competition when it comes to grand scale FPS shooters.
Imagine if there was a somewhat decent, working-as-intended grand scale shooter from another developer....
The game is plenty playable and enjoyable to me, it's just rough in so many areas and consistently under-supported either via performance/bug crunching patches and content that the longevity of the title is one steeped in frustration rather than a sense of progress and improvement. A lot of this would be more forgivable if it was par for course for Battlefield, or if they weren't game breaking bugs, or if it was still early days, but none of this is true and I think bleeding player retention (if that is the case) is to be expected when the game simply isn't doing enough to support the playerbase.
I mean, this is a game with a damage model I adore, looks/sounds gorgeous, generally feels nice to play, and is full of stuff like the removal of spotting that I feel are absolutely massive steps forward for the franchise. I even like that they went for the whole "unrepresented battles of WW2" rather than the staples, and inherently have no beef with Britain vs Germany coming at launch.
But this is the same game that had numerous medic/revive bugs plaguing the moment-to-moment experience at launch and beyond, fixed then reintroduced in patches. That still has some of the worst, clumsy, inconsistent bipod mechanisms in a game I've played and this isn't as bad as it was for months after launch. Engine performance still spotty in the most unusual ways, odd stuttering seemingly triggered by an otherwise broken assignment tracking system. Continuous issues with hitreg, audio, visuals, and other distractions that are at best an annoyance and at worst immersion and game system breaking. And now, like I've repeated, an ongoing bug where players are invisible.
And this doesn't explore the admittedly subjective, but nevertheless frustrating post launch support window. On paper the Tides of War concept as a free content delivery service sounded great. In practice the post launch content feels thin, stretched, and measurably nowhere near as consistent or impactful as the last three mainline game's support. Throw in stuff like DICE backpedaling on aspects of their original vision, including a patch that massively reworked the damage model and imbalanced the game further, and then backpedaled again to revert the obviously initially poor change and you've got a product that seems unusually unfocused, incoherent, and unsupported.
Like...I play Battlefield V almost every second day without fail. I still really like this game! I love the series and there's enough Battlefield in here for me to enjoy. Moreover, there's enough new stuff to the series and changes to the overarching vision that warrant praise. There's a great game buried in here. Or potential for a great game. It just never, ever comes to fruition in the way it should, and so much of the game's technical and presentation issues, and other design idiosyncrasies and issues, painfully hold it back.
It also doesn't help that EA/DICE really don't have any competition when it comes to grand scale FPS shooters.
Imagine if there was a somewhat decent, working-as-intended grand scale shooter from another developer....
This broken ass game isn't playable, is unplayable unacceptable. If we got to lower our standards to play this game what's the point you know.
100% agree. I'm having a pretty good time as someone who's had the game since launch but hasn't put a lot of hours in until recently. I really like how it feels to play it but there's always some bug or some weirdness trying to butt in on the good time. Like you said, there's quite a lot in here that I feel are great additions or changes for the series so I hope the baby doesn't go out with the bathwater when it comes time for the next game.
It's sad to hear about the current state of the game. I got bored with daily play back when Firestorm launched and comments like I'm seeing here don't do anything to encourage me to return.
It's also sad that not only is there no excuse for such bugs etc., this is the first time they've not had Premium, so the dev team is saving a ton of time not creating 16+ new maps in 12-18 months. And yet they still have these quality control issues.
I suspected a while ago DICE may be in long-term trouble due to Epic and also their ex-GM both hiring nearby, both probably offering more exciting work and perhaps more money too.
I think the overall issue is the time between releases is pretty small.
Battlefield 3 - 2011
Battlefield 4 - 2013
Battlefield 1 - 2016
Battlefield V - 2018
Three years has generally been a sweet spot from what I've seen. In the past they released Battlefield Vietnam, Battlefield 2, and then 2142 year after year but that's just not possible anymore. Two years is too short in my opinion.
Valid point. You may as well add in SWBF too since there are obvious similarities. EA wanted a game like this on an annual schedule from the start of this gen, and DICE can't keep up. OTOH, I'm sure DICE staffed up to help with this, and EA threw other studios in to handle DLC and Hardline.I think the overall issue is the time between releases is pretty small.
Battlefield 3 - 2011
Battlefield 4 - 2013
Battlefield 1 - 2016
Battlefield V - 2018
Three years has generally been a sweet spot from what I've seen. In the past they released Battlefield Vietnam, Battlefield 2, and then 2142 year after year but that's just not possible anymore. Two years is too short in my opinion.
Add to that 2 battlefront games in between and its clearly too big a load for Dice to handle. The state of BFV confirms it.
But i will say, BF4 was also a broken mess for months so, this seems to be more of a Dice thing than a time thing.
Valid point. You may as well add in SWBF too since there are obvious similarities. EA wanted a game like this on an annual schedule from the start of this gen, and DICE can't keep up. OTOH, I'm sure DICE staffed up to help with this, and EA threw other studios in to handle DLC and Hardline.
Bring back MAG, Sony!It also doesn't help that EA/DICE really don't have any competition when it comes to grand scale FPS shooters.
Imagine if there was a somewhat decent, working-as-intended grand scale shooter from another developer....
Agreed about 3 years. The way it works with 2 teams in a studio is if the next shipping game is falling behind schedule, which games invariably do, the easiest thing to do is grab staff from the game shipping in a future year. They're right there in the building, they know the tools and engine. You could hire contractors but that's costly and time consuming, and means some training and ramp-up time, while the staff sitting over there are seen as "free" since the studio is paying them anyway. That creates a debt in the later shipping game, which is hard to pay off, and you can see it as a gamer at launch. Also the higher level people at the studio may be split between two games instead of focusing on one.Yeah I left out Battlefront I and II because I'm kind of assuming other teams work on those but still, I think it's too much for a single studio to release a project of this size and scope every year. Compare that to Call of Duty who release games annually but are supported by tons of studios. I'm trying not to make too many conclusions because I don't know the internal structure.
Like I said before, after years of gaming I've noticed three years being a pretty good spot for larger AAA games.
It also doesn't help that EA/DICE really don't have any competition when it comes to grand scale FPS shooters.
Imagine if there was a somewhat decent, working-as-intended grand scale shooter from another developer....
I'd jump at a slower TTK and the return of spotting as well. They fixed the massive blob of players running around capping flags in BF1 by making most of them not move and not go near flags here.
It was if I started on Rotterdam that it was crashing, if it appears in the rotation there's no problem. It's avoidable if you know about it and use the server browser.with all the gloom here, on YT and on reddit I was really scared yesterday when firing up my xbox to play...
i was expecting crashes everywhere after reading all the recent problems on this platform. Amazingly I did'nt have any for the 6 or 7 matches I played, including Fjell and Rotterdam which should have been the main problems. Is it because I'm on a X or simply a lucky guy ?
i even had pretty enjoyable conquest matches...except the stutturing when you kill someone using a HMG in a tank, or the invisble players or some strange TTD (but just a few TBH) everything was (as) fine (as it could be right now). It seems that the palyer population changed a lot recently and that only veterans are still here, like it usualy happens after 12 or 18 months on any BF title, except that we are only 7 months after BFV launch...almost no MMG prone players, a lot of people PTFO, majority of the games were won or lost with less than 50 tickets left, no stupid campers hidding miles away from the flags.
Just one thing : I played a bit of recon just for the ToW assigments. this is a class I don't play usually, but I'm pretty sure that before the latest patch you could have a maximum of 3 flares, but now it's only 2. Am i wrong and it was always 2 ? Same thing for support and Piat, thought it was 2 max, but now it's 3 ?
Startup BF V.
Join a server.
The enemy team has all the flags.
Enemy team has 10 players all part of the same clan.
Quit server.
Join a different server.
Constantly get the icon for bad frames. I have everything on the lowest possible settings.
Alt+F4 because I can't take the shit performance.
Startup BF V.
Join a server.
The enemy team has all the flags.
Enemy team has 10 players all part of the same clan.
Quit server.
Join a different server.
Constantly get the icon for bad frames. I have everything on the lowest possible settings.
Alt+F4 because I can't take the shit performance.
It was the +122 damage death that finally got me to laugh out loud. This game.