-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
I hate what BATTLEFIELD V became and that is trying to pursue "COD with 64 players" type of gameplay
- Thread starter klik
- Start date
Lmfao
Battlefield 4 is still casual as fuck and easy to play. You just need to tap tap tap and you can master ANY gun in the game.
There are definitely at least a couple of maps in BFV that I don't care for because they feel so cramped (Fjell especially), but that's not true of every map in the game. I've only managed to play them once each so far, but Hamada and Arras are rather decent. I really hope that all future content focuses on large-scale vehicular warfare, though, especially if DICE is going to take their time putting out new maps.
That's absurd. Not to say you can't have a quality BF experience with just 24 players, but it's not an ideal player count and BC2 sure as heck didn't pull it off well. It's the closest thing to CoD in the entire series.
That's absurd. Not to say you can't have a quality BF experience with just 24 players, but it's not an ideal player count and BC2 sure as heck didn't pull it off well. It's the closest thing to CoD in the entire series.
Are you really trying to claim that the game with a fuckton of automatic weapons, had a higher skill ceiling than the game that lacked them?
This is the most strategic/tactical Battlefield I've played in a while, and it's reflected when one side has a squad or two that knows what they're doing and steamrolls the other side.
Lol what. It almost feels like a classic Refractor Battlefield with modern movement. Just needs better infantry-vehicle combat now.
Bad Company 2 is probably the worst BF game besides 3.
It's weird because BC1 was actually a pretty good translation of the formula to console limitations. But I guess that didn't get them the CoD $$$.
Bad Company 2 is probably the worst BF game besides 3.
It's weird because BC1 was actually a pretty good translation of the formula to console limitations. But I guess that didn't get them the CoD $$$.
Indeed, indeed. But picture this...
I use an Elite controller on PS. Customized to perfection. So I run through the competition at an alarming rate. If I showed you the spike in messages about me hacking since I picked up an Elite for PS, you'd shed tears laughing. So it's even easier than it already is. I don't get it. EA carved out their own place in the market and then abandoned it for COD like experience while forgetting COD is already a BEHEMOTH in the COD market.
It's still the best shooter visually and that sound design is unmatched in the market. But the skill gap that makes BF BF, is gone. I'll jump back in the moment it returns until then I'll wait for another shooter or stick to BF4.
Battlefield V smallest maps still has more flanking routes than the likes of operation metro/locker, majority of BC2 maps are rectangles with a single lane down the middle and some paths at the side that lead nowhere, BF4 is impossible to play in a vehicle because of the amount of lock on weapons, and every Battlefield game pre Bad Company 1 wasn't suited for run and gun because the shooting mechanics were straight up broken due to random deviation and lack of "true" recoil.
Just my opinion guys.
> skill gap
> BF4
BF4 protip: Bind fire to scroll wheel and say hello to perfectly accurate ARs!
It's a stupid, thoughtless comparison that shouldn't be payed attention to.
The single act of shooting feels completely different in both series. Battlefields gunplay changes from every iteration. I don't even understand the comparison, really.
Agreed, I'd go one further and say that the Desert Combat mod for BF 1942 was better than all of the Battlefield games that came after (except for the 2142 beta rip).
This is what I'm concerned by. I only have a few hours in the full game, but I spent some time playing the betas, and the tanks - unlike in BF1 - felt pitiful. Doesn't seem like much has changed for the final release in that regard, whereas the TTK feels significantly shorter now compared to beta. Players just melt before automatic weapons, and the silly upgrade system does the game no favors at all.
> skill gap
> BF4
BF4 protip: Bind fire to scroll wheel and say hello to perfectly accurate ARs!
You forgot that he also plays on console.
It's just kind of a weird opinion.
Like BF4 vehicle combat doesn't involve aiming. At all, it's basically 100% lock-ons. And then infantry combat is just explosive spam that makes BF1 blush (remote mortars, instakill impact grenades that resupply instantly at an ammo box, etc.) and infinite-range laser guns because of tap firing (especially if you're using the scroll wheel like a pro). It's basically a pure twitch shooter.
It just sounds like it was your first Battlefield.
True, true. Maybe BF4 is balanced and fun on consoles.
I purchased both and I feel they are very different from each other. BF is very open and COD is more corridor ish, both chaotic.
I've played BF4 on PC also. I'm not saying it doesn't have it faults and some unbalanced weapons/perks. But to me BF1 and 5 have the gun mechanics of COD.
Idk if it was the best but I definitely loved it. Would love to see a proper sequel with 5-6 remastered maps.
It feels like a mix of BF1 and BF42 to me. I'm enjoying it. Universal spotting made sense in a modern war, but not BF1. The class breakdowns feel like class breakdowns.
But 1&5 have completely different gun mechanics.....not to mention BF4 is more similar to COD gameplay wise
OP, thats one way of looking at it..It doesn't play like COD... but it has its issues
I like the TTK, but have a major issue with gun balancing and how the TTK is slowing people from playing the objective. Its leading to landslide victories on maps like Hamada where they stupidly have one side take over all the flags. People just want to camp and fire from there.
Kid you not, Ive had 10min games on that map where everyone just stays at the start and fires/returns fire at the hills.
Im not going to even mention the overpowered KE7 and how it rips into health even while standing a mile away (without bipod or anything) and mowing people down.
Fix this, Dice. All of it.
I like the TTK, but have a major issue with gun balancing and how the TTK is slowing people from playing the objective. Its leading to landslide victories on maps like Hamada where they stupidly have one side take over all the flags. People just want to camp and fire from there.
Kid you not, Ive had 10min games on that map where everyone just stays at the start and fires/returns fire at the hills.
Im not going to even mention the overpowered KE7 and how it rips into health even while standing a mile away (without bipod or anything) and mowing people down.
Fix this, Dice. All of it.
Last edited:
Zerging has always been a problem in battlefield. People just go where everyone else is at. Squads encourage separation from the pack but most people don't really play the game like that. I do agree that battlefield feels like a console series now, they aint going to ever go back to old battlefield. It's kind of weird for me because when I look at my time played for all the battlefields before BF1 I have over 200 hours in all of them. However with BF1 and BFV I have less than 30 hours in both. No plans to go back and play BFV either. Maps are few and mostly garbo and I feel that conquest isn't really that great anymore. At least this year it only cost me $15 instead of $60.
I would like to hear more why current is trash.
If by current you mean BFV.
Despite bugs and issues, the gunplay is solid, team and class play is great and even though the map quantity is lower, the quality is better.
I really love the feel of bfv, everything is much tighter. And unlike cod you can still play a support role and be very useful to your team. Hanging back and getting picks has value, map knowledge and flow is just as important as direct gunplay skill.
I absolutely love that someone can go 50-2 and their team still loses. As it should be.
I absolutely love that someone can go 50-2 and their team still loses. As it should be.
The cycle of a previous BF being the better one opinions never fails to take hold. This is what I miss about the ea.uk forums the most.
BFV is not a bad game and it can be fun at times but, its definitely watered down. In its current buggy state, it is one of the worst releases Dice has ever put out. The lack of polish is low-key embarrassing and is only topped by the farce that was BF4's launch. The ttk has definitely been lowered and the game is heavily balanced towards infantry. The map design is honestly not my favorite and its kinda disappointing tbh. Even then, BF4 was more content rich. People debate the skill gap in this game compared to other iterations but what I will say is this, in BF4 on PC, I wasn't able to win as many shootouts with a controller as I do in BFV on PC.
I gave up on BF, did not liked any after BF3. For me the pinacle of BF is BF 2 PC version.
Nowadays i play SQUAD on PC wich is a spiritual sucessor to BF 2: PR mod, and CoD on console.
In my opinion they should continue BF:BC series for consoles and separate entries of mainline BF on PC.
In that way each game could play on the strenghts of the plataform, with no compromise. I know this is a pipe dream, but would be great.
BF 3,4,1 and 5 feels too console centric to play on PC, and too PC centric to be played on consoles.
Nowadays i play SQUAD on PC wich is a spiritual sucessor to BF 2: PR mod, and CoD on console.
In my opinion they should continue BF:BC series for consoles and separate entries of mainline BF on PC.
In that way each game could play on the strenghts of the plataform, with no compromise. I know this is a pipe dream, but would be great.
BF 3,4,1 and 5 feels too console centric to play on PC, and too PC centric to be played on consoles.
I agree with everyone saying that Bad Company 2 was the best online shooter there's ever been.
It was just so well designed in almost every aspect, you could absolutely boss a round and have a huge impact on your team without even firing a shot.
It's the shooter I've been the best at apart from CoD4 (when I still had quick reflexes) and Halo 3 (because all my mates were a bit shit at it).
It was just so well designed in almost every aspect, you could absolutely boss a round and have a huge impact on your team without even firing a shot.
It's the shooter I've been the best at apart from CoD4 (when I still had quick reflexes) and Halo 3 (because all my mates were a bit shit at it).
I mean, it's not really unfair to point out that Bad Company 2 and Battlefield 3 just so happened to make major departures from the previous games (even the previous console games like BF2 Modern Combat and Bad Company) right as CoD Fever was a thing.
The weirder part is suggesting that BF1 and BFV are where the "CODification" occurred.
BFV plays nothing like COD. The gunplay is completely different. The maps are small? BFV hosts some of the largest maps DICE have created.
Reading between the lines OP runs around solo like a headless Rambo chicken. Moaning about being out numbered by opposing players squads and being out gunned. This gives it away - "One minute you are taking a flag on your own way out at side of map then all of a sudden are surrounded by about 10 players.".
BFV needs some work e.g. TTD bug, but it has the potential of being up there if nailed right.
(Been playing BF since Wake Island Demo)