flashbacks of playing delta force land warrior on a windows 95 PC. Are the same-ish people behind this?
Delta Force showcases new gameplay footage (Battlefield-like mode with destruction, vehicle combat (Land/Sea/Air), classes, big maps)
- Thread starter Azai
- Start date
Destruction seems nice. Will it be a F2P GAAS? Is there a beta planned and where to register for it?
OP
OP
funny, because I think that most chinese shooters lack alot of authencity and realism. that includes weapon behaviour and feeling.
and from the recent gameplay videos it looks pretty much like Modern Warfare which has the best gunplays currently.
Its F2P yes.
There is no info about Europe/NA, but china had a beta about 4 weeks ago. (see the footage at the threadmark)
Gunplay looks great except for all the weapon bouncing I see. Reminds me too much of MWII and it's adherence to realism rather than fun.
OP
OP
the bouncing wasnt the issue. thats what give weapons the punch and heavy feeling. visual recoil was the problem when ADSing.
this game seems tonhave far less.
On the contrary you have BF2042 which feels like soft-air guns because the barely move when shooting and have pretty much 0 recoil.
going to BF2042 from MW felt like a 2000s shooter in terms of weapon feeling/animations
Yeah by weapon bouncing I meant too much visual recoil. MWII guns have too much shaking and gun smoke that makes it a pain to hit people.
Looking at other clips, I see other weapons having less visual recoil. So that's good.
It's less about the gunplay and more about the movement of the players and vehicles.
To be very frank and honest the latest gameplay footage, was hoping for a good Joint Operations: Tyhpoon Rising (& Escalation)/Battlefield Refractor Era style experience that is non-existent basically (I know Battlebit but I really do want something more 'AAA' and QoL stuff that those mentioned games lack from the 00s) but a CoD/2042 mashup is just unappealing to me. Too 'casual' yet a exhausting experience at the same time (Haven in 2042 would've been a BC2 32p map, now it's constant sugar-dopamine rush) and just being another run and gun health regen shooter. I mean I feel too exhausted to play 2042 and mostly play CoD MP for casual gaming which means this game has zero appeal basically.
Really hate how Military FPSes in the ''AAA' market feel samey, hopefully the new Ghost Recon as rumoured does go in a more hardcore direction that isn't completely Milsim because Military Shooters today are either really casual or really Milsim Hardcore with nothing in between Joint Ops/Delta Force/Battlefield used to have.
Really hate how Military FPSes in the ''AAA' market feel samey, hopefully the new Ghost Recon as rumoured does go in a more hardcore direction that isn't completely Milsim because Military Shooters today are either really casual or really Milsim Hardcore with nothing in between Joint Ops/Delta Force/Battlefield used to have.
OP
OP
There are tons of shooters that could appeal to you.
Insurgency, Squad, Arma, Ground Branch, Ready or Not. and there are tons more.
Those game are niche so you wont see an AAA devs putting that much money in it.
I was hoping it would lean more BF than CoD but that doesnt seem to be the case.
I will still take it though. BF seems pretty much dead as a series. And you get maybe good CoD game every few years. Outside of those two, modern war FPS are pretty much non existent.
I will still take it though. BF seems pretty much dead as a series. And you get maybe good CoD game every few years. Outside of those two, modern war FPS are pretty much non existent.
From the footage it looks like no classes, just specialists.
That's fine to me as long as all the classic roles are filled. Support, medic, engineer, etc.
That's fine to me as long as all the classic roles are filled. Support, medic, engineer, etc.
Pretty sure I read somewhere that the parent company of this studio technically owns the animations for MW2019 somehow, they're literally the exact same ones.
Delta Force: Hawk Ops - Next-Gen Operator-based Tactical Shooter
Experience the ultimate test of skill and strategy in Delta Force: Hawk Ops, a free multiplayer first-person tactical shooter featuring special operators. Available on PC, console, and mobile soon!
Looks fine as its own standalone thing and I think it'll do better than World War 3 did... But this isn't what I want from the IP as a fan of the Novalogic games (RIP).
There's enough run and gun break neck speed modern multiplayer shooters out there. How many slower paced modern era tactical shooters have there been recently?
ARMA3 (really pushing 'recent' here at eleven years since early access)
Insurgency Sandstorm (maintenance mode)
Ground Branch (early access)
Six Days in Fallujah (early access)
Ready or Not, a police game
Squad
That's all I can come up with.
There's enough run and gun break neck speed modern multiplayer shooters out there. How many slower paced modern era tactical shooters have there been recently?
ARMA3 (really pushing 'recent' here at eleven years since early access)
Insurgency Sandstorm (maintenance mode)
Ground Branch (early access)
Six Days in Fallujah (early access)
Ready or Not, a police game
Squad
That's all I can come up with.
It's the same devs who made CoD Mobile and it's been shown they're reusing some of that games assets and animations for this.
Well, there's actually a lot of these, but the good ones are the few.
View: https://youtu.be/khfG4lyZgQI
None of those are like Joint Operations or BF2/2142 (maybe Insurgency closer but that's more Milsim, & Ready or Not is a SP experience with SWAT teams) which is my point. Everything is super-polarised AA/AAA Military Shooters into CoD style or Mil-Sim.
I mean BF2042 as of Season 5 onwards is so CoD-like with running and gunning, I mean Haven with Season 7 which would've been a BC2 32P map feels like an exhausting sloppy mess with 64p. I mean crazy considering BC2 when released was the fastest paced BF when that came out.
Honestly I feel the problem of every BF-esque shooter and BF itself is that ever since BF3 it's all been "we've got to make the BF-esque mode faster and less friction in them to get where the fun is" but in the process have made the reason for 64+ players pointless. No developer has actually gone with "look at BF and make it deeper". We had like cool concepts in games like Joint Ops, BF2/BF2142 (and BFV to an extent with fortifications) but feels like we're in an endless cycle of trailer/score fest slop cycle or spiral where it becomes almost impossible to satisfy the demand of instant satisfication with action or cool social media moments where more 'friction' is removed to sate this.
And Delta Force: Hawk Ops' Havoc Warfare falls into this trap it almost seems certainly and will likely share the same fate as people will drop it after a month or so. People want to 'relive' 2011-ish when the Dudebro CoD player on the Xbox 360 was the most dominant demographic then.
That sounds interesting and makes sense?
Insurgency is way less milsim than Squad or Arma. If there is a sweet spot between CoD and milsim, Insurgency is the best you're gonna get.
If you disagree, then I have to ask what about Insurgency makes it too milsim for you?
Weapons shaking all over the screen is a dumb trend since MW19, I prefer being able to see what I'm aiming at. It also makes it way harder for m/kb players to aim since we don't have the aim assist that's doing all the work tracking through the insane amount of visual recoil, gunsmoke, muzzle effects that have become common in shooters now as a cheap trick to make the guns feel 'punchy'.
Add some real recoil ffs, enough with these dumb effects.
Nah, they're important to simulating the actual recoil of the weapon going back into your character's soldiers instead of just moving it up a bit.
Older Battlefields balanced the weapons through recoil and bullet spread. I'd prefer that to excessive amounts of shaking.
Also that guy behind the beta videos recently did a livestream. 3 hours of gameplay if you're looking for more. (Keep in mind he's playing with 300 ping so that explains kill delays)
View: https://www.youtube.com/live/Ijte5GEau9Y?si=0eQMVak2gjRBi7FV
Really hoping the global beta is soon.
Also that guy behind the beta videos recently did a livestream. 3 hours of gameplay if you're looking for more. (Keep in mind he's playing with 300 ping so that explains kill delays)
View: https://www.youtube.com/live/Ijte5GEau9Y?si=0eQMVak2gjRBi7FV
Really hoping the global beta is soon.
That depends on how old you are going, because since BC2, it has been a balance of recoil and spread, but the visual recoil has really been in since 4. They lowered it in 4 and 1 after complaints, and 2042 had lower visual recoil than either of those initially.
Last edited:
The only element that looks bad to me atm is the aesthetic its literally the same near future crap that Battlefield did and failed and wasn't very popular in COD as well.
Though I guess it's kinda understandable, "Modern Warfare" is an extremely bland aesthetic so others try to lean into sci-fi to add a little something.
One of the side reasons I'd like the next Battlefield to be Bad Company 3... it would technically be "pre-modern"
Though I guess it's kinda understandable, "Modern Warfare" is an extremely bland aesthetic so others try to lean into sci-fi to add a little something.
One of the side reasons I'd like the next Battlefield to be Bad Company 3... it would technically be "pre-modern"
I'd say BF5 should be the blueprint going forward. Strong but predictable recoil and just enough spread so people can't laser beam. It's one of the reasons the gunplay is praised so much.
I can adapt to visual recoil (as I did for MWII's god awful recoil) but it does make gunfights that much more frustrating.
I have to get my hands on this game to see how it is here.
BFV's spread had a weird system where it was added to recoil, so you could laser people quite effectively and more so than current 2042. I do not think the visual recoil is bad in the game solely because the aim point is not really affected like in the previous games. Would agree with BFV's system if the spread stayed as spread though, so higher like 2042 but not as much as BF1. This game definitely looks like COD's style of visual recoil.
Giving classes more personality to sell skins.
It's such a dumb system that I wish we'd get away from.
For all its problems I do think Battlefield 2042 improved on the system Call of Duty has been running for a while now.
Wish it would be refined further
I feel like Hell Let Loose kind of hits the sweet spot between arcadey immediacy and the deeper, more milsim tinged gameplay. In many ways it's similar to a match of Breakthrough on BF. You have to capture specific points to push a frontline forward or backwards, depending on which side you're playing. I feel like Conquest as a game mode, or whatever it ends up being called in anything aping BF, tends to just devolve into chasing capture points in circles around the map because nobody wants to sit and defend a point while people push the attack elsewhere, and I think a lot of that comes back to these games being catered to everyone in the lobby having main character syndrome. I've thought about this quite a lot since playing a healthy amount of both HLL and BF2042 (and other BF games,) and a mixture of the core of the Conquest mode, and BF leaning further and further towards a more infantry based, main character syndrome type of gameplay with every entry, and HLL deals with a lot of these issues for me and encourages teamwork a lot more effectively than any BF ever has and is generally a fair bit more involved than a typical round of BF. You communicate with your squadmates and your team, or you lose horribly, which can be a terrible experience when you get on a team that just isn't playing the game the way it's intended (ie, using mics,) but if people are using mics, it toes that line of milsim and arcadey immediacy really well for me, and the Breakthrough-esque core of the game solves all of the circular flag chasing of Conquest. Well worth checking out if you haven't already!
But at this point, I think BF is never going to lean towards "this - but deeper" and that Conquest as a mode has some very foundational issues, and if BF and the games that are so clearly inspired by it aren't hitting the spot, it's definitely time to look elsewhere. But for my money, 2042 also found the fun in BF again for me after several games of not managing to do squad play well, OR individualistic main character syndrome play well. In 2042, you can be a flying squirrel with a rocket launcher, and you are the main character. Everyone is the main character. It's a hero shooter in BF's clothes. And, frankly, I think it's better for them having picked a lane. It means when I play BF, I go into it not caring if we win or lose but instead caring if I did anything particularly cool that round. And who can blame them for going that way? Everyone cried about BFV introducing attrition, it was a clear effort to FORCE people to play their role. You *needed* to have a squad composition of someone being a medic, someone dropping ammo, and you needed to stick together and keep each other alive and loaded with ammo to be effective during the beta. It meant that nobody could be the main character, and people hated it. That, to me, shows that BF was at an impasse, and really, that it had already long since crossed it. I had some great times whipping squads of randoms into shape in the beta though. One well organised squad could, and would, dominate a lobby, because nobody else was gonna play it that way except you - and it was great. Everyone hated it. Now? Flying squirrel with a rocket launcher. It makes total sense and I do think BF is better for it. But is it what I ultimately want from a shooter, really? No. I want positioning, teamwork and smart plays to win, not chasing the flags in circle harder than the other team did.
Nah money is fine, its thinking they need the unique specialists/operators to sell a bunch of cosmetics.
The 2042 system is already an improvement where you buy a bundle and the head and uniform are separate pieces.
This already promotes more potential purchases than just 1 set skin like Call of Duty.
"Ok I'll buy this bundle for this awesome uniform" "i'll buy that one for this cool helmet"
Now to refine it further, let's use Call of Duty's Snoop Dogg as and example,
Instead of the old system of just getting a set Snoop skin,
I buy the Snoop bundle and get a Snoop head and Snoop uniform, I can then put Snoops head on any male body I own or any male head I already have can go on Snoop's uniform.
Basically can be packaged mostly the same without getting back into the crazy boots, gloves, sunglasses lootbox levels
but can also tempt people into a further purchase being able to mix and match
Maybe its just me but there's always a character that I prefer so I'm not likely to buy further bundles after I have that favorite.
This way maybe they put a bundle out after that with a uniform I like but dislike the character, well I'll buy it and give it to the character I like
Last edited:
I was more in the realm of BF2/2142. I mean Insurgency is what I'd say "too exhausting"? (though only free weekends and that was on my older computer when a 1TB SSD wasn't enough to really get into the groove :s, will likely pick up it on a sale within the next few months) Like there's little anything like BF2 & 2142.
If you want a more visually 'realistic' large scale Military Shooter these days it's either "Battlefield but we've made it baysplosions" or Milsim stype stuff. Nothing in between (WW3 I know but that has fundamental class & vehicle selection issues and a too grindy BP that really puts me off).
I mean you do raise a lot of good points but "this - but deeper" was done with BF2 & 2142 (because DICE barely acknowledges BF2, though probably because they didn't actually do the entire design, Trauma Studios did which I get the feeling explains a lot) and then a lot of mechanics where simplified or even removed afterwards. And while BF3 was financially successful (and BF1), the problem is a load of casuals (speculative ofc) that have moved to digital and embraced Battle Passes likely has caused structual issues beyond the games themselves commercially. Feels like every "BF Esque" mode in the AAA space is basically "let's take the mechanics of BF2/2142 but frictionless and flashier" and the "deeper" large scale Military Shooters in the 'indie' space are Milsims overwhelmingly
And on your point of 2042 being a silly run and gun shooter is probably why the next BF and this Delta Force game won't do well; if people want a 64p run and gun experience CoD literally has that right now as a side mode and that's 'good enough'. I literally expect Hawk Ops just released, get a bunch of FPS influencers (who where the ones that actually hated the most, BFV playerbase is suprisngly strong) will play it for IDK, maybe a month tops and then drop all coverage on Twitch/YouTube.
I just don't see the point of Hawk Ops: Havoc Warfare, when I first saw it being annouced before watching it I was thinking "oooooh this gonna be like Joint Operations two decades ago (just checked, damn it's 20 years old this June)?" but then more and more footage puts me off, because this just looks like a 2042/CoD mashup when 2042 is in a better state and CoD being the cutural juggernaught it still is. I mean WW3 could've been that but the way content was launched and did have a freeform class & vehicle selection system fundamentally hurts BF-esque games.
I may try out the Beta to see how I really feel about this but again I just expect some 2042/CoD mashup that doesn't seem worth 'investing' to me.
OP
OP
2042 is better than at launch but for most people its still a big failure. personally its a fun game but lacks anything that made game like BF3,BF4 nd BF1 great.
You barely have this Battlefield feeling or Battlefield moments.
The aesthetics alone are a far cry from what we got from BF3 13 years ago.
BF2042 still looks way too clean and the character designs just look goofy as they are a mix between real-life and sci-fi. (eg removing the Picatonny-Rail from guns and replacing it with a fictious rail)
And gunplay even with the latest recoil update still feels like they are 10 years behind other games in the genre.
Developers going for that massive sandbox-shooter genre is a no brainer in this situation.
And this game (despite making the same faults like the hero characters instead of normal soldiers) even got working destruction and all kinds of vehicles.
If it gets the basics right BF will be in a bad spot if they dont finally get their shit together woth the next game
So what you're saying is BF1 Operations was a great mode and they should definitely bring it back? I agree đź‘Ť
I think this game can really scratch the BF itch for a lot of people, regardless of sci-fi elements.
The gunplay looks good, the destruction is about BF3 levels, there's plenty of vehicles, there's multiple big modes (including an extraction mode), and best of all it's F2P instead of dropping $70.
Hopefully that means a release around September.
Don't want to launch too close to CoD.
OP
OP
played some BF2042 again and I cant express how much I hate the aesthetics of that game.
the weapon modells, the weapon viewmodel (making guns look very bulky and goofy), the weapons being too big compared to character bodies, every single scope causing flip-up iron sights to just dissapear instead of being flipped down...
Even when the gameplay is somewhat fun now... these things are so annoying... how can indie devs get that right but Dice just doesnt give a F about the aesthetics.
Im glad this game has this aspect at least somewhat right.
the weapon modells, the weapon viewmodel (making guns look very bulky and goofy), the weapons being too big compared to character bodies, every single scope causing flip-up iron sights to just dissapear instead of being flipped down...
Even when the gameplay is somewhat fun now... these things are so annoying... how can indie devs get that right but Dice just doesnt give a F about the aesthetics.
Im glad this game has this aspect at least somewhat right.
Yeah even if it does not become some breakout hit, another moderate success in the space would nice and we would have an extraction shooter on the market. BF will remain my main game and I greatly prefer CQ to the BT style mode, but it could be a potential addition to the rotation. Might as well try it since it is f2p.
Because HZ was such a major part of the game and influenced the design. At least the leaks from Henderson about the next BF are positive.
Lol I've never seen anyone else complain about this but me going all the way back to OG MW trilogy.
It's such a nitpick but so stupid looking especially when they do it to ones that aren't even meant to be
Last edited:
Delta Force.... now that's a name I've not heard in a long time.
Brings back memories of the demo of Delta Force (1). The procedurally generated endless landscapes were mind-blowing back in the day.
Brings back memories of the demo of Delta Force (1). The procedurally generated endless landscapes were mind-blowing back in the day.
OP
OP
Lol I've never seen anyone else complain about this but me going all the way back to OG MW trilogy.
It's such a nitpick but so stupid looking especially when they do it to ones that aren't even meant to be
yea, I mean... how can you remove the MP5s iron sights snd make it look like this:
its beyond me...
New campaign footage. Reminds me a lot of Battlefield 3's campaign.
View: https://twitter.com/DeltaForce_Game/status/1788207323858747827?t=tpHO_Jgnk7hyzlfD3qK8Xw&s=19
View: https://twitter.com/DeltaForce_Game/status/1788207323858747827?t=tpHO_Jgnk7hyzlfD3qK8Xw&s=19
I just wanna say I chuckled. Cause I didn't want to offend when it got announced but it being an American cop game was/is a 100% non-starter to me.
I haven't played Ready or Not but I played tf out of Red Orchestra 1 and 2 and rising storm. And if I were to extract experiences from those games. I know there's large group suburban dudes role playing as a cop and using slurs while playing lol.