-
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.
RUMOR: Battlefield V Battle Royale prototype is in the works (Campaign still part of package)
- Thread starter AlexFlame116
- Start date
Got to love all the salty people in this thread mad that people like BR games/modes.
This is gonna be amazing. I just wish it wasn't set in WW2. I want a modern, realistic, AAA BR.
Edit: All it's going to take to supplant PUBG is literally just to be from a competent development studio. If they did nothing more than recreate PUBG but without the jank and the insufferably terrible midgame then it would be an overnight success.
This is gonna be amazing. I just wish it wasn't set in WW2. I want a modern, realistic, AAA BR.
Edit: All it's going to take to supplant PUBG is literally just to be from a competent development studio. If they did nothing more than recreate PUBG but without the jank and the insufferably terrible midgame then it would be an overnight success.
Dont get why people say that a BR mode fits to Battlefield. Do these people even play Battlefield?
It really doesnt fit.
It really doesnt fit.
Nobody is salty that some people like thinks that others dont. Still doesnt change the fact that this BR clone wars is getting annoying.
Perfect for this game. Huge player count, huge maps, "realistic" weapons. I can see this being a big hit. Not a waste of resources at all. If PUBG isn't on PS4 by the time this launches. Between this, Fortnite and if the COD BR mode can be moderately successful they can kiss any advantage they may have had on the PS4 goodbye.
Large map size and high player counts. Fits about as well as a pure deathmatch mode did when they added that. I just wish gun game would come back
A hero shooter that has nothing to do with these 3 games
But TF lacked that content & there is no campaign in Battlefront I. What are you talking about?
They weren't enjoyable to you. They were to me. Yes losing single player would be a loss. Removing content from games that was there before is a loss. Same with the call of duty ones. It will be very easy to avoid games & publishers that excuse to avoid a balance between profit chasing & content and just profit chasing. It's reasons like this that ppl believing Anthem will avoid BF2's mistakes are foolish. EA is proving time & time again profit matters more than anything else
And LOL & 16 maps at launch. You'll get 9 and a season pass. Now with no single player.
Why is it annoying? There's literally only two successful ones on the market that aren't extreme early access. PUBG's success in particular hinges upon the fact that it is literally the only choice you have when it comes to realistic BR games. It's not annoying at all. Myself and my friends have been clamoring for a DICE Battle Royale game for months now. This is great news.
Without a doubt I believe they can outclass PUBG but fortnite is a more Arcade / cartoonish venture.
I think both of these will go more hardcore
Exactly. But they got a ride the bandwagon until its wheels fall off
It's the most natural fit I can think of for a realistic BR game. DICE already has realistic bullet physics and gunplay, experience in large player counts and map design, vehicles and associated physics. They'll knock it out of the park.
I felt Battlefield 1's campaign was a bit weak. Personally the most interesting and creative Battlefield campaign was BF: Hardline, by Visceral. I'd like to see DICE attempt something similar. I don't think any of their campaigns have been BAD, but they could learn from their mistakes. I hope the next game avoids BF1's mistakes, in particular the feeling that 1/3 of it was some kind of MP King of the Hill training mode.
Put it this way: while BF3 was too linear and BF4 suffered from a silent protagonist and some plotting issues, you should look at the youtube videos for BF4's soundtrack. They're full of people commenting how Battlefield 4 made them cry. You wouldn't know this looking at most internet forums where BF4 tends to cop a lot of flack along the "worst campaign I ever played" lines, but DICE have got some chops. They just need need to get their formulas mixed a bit better and Battlefield could easily replace CoD as the go-to cinematic FPS experience each year. And to be honest, DICE has nailed certain emotionally manipulate Oscar Bait storytelling aspects way better than Call of Duty has over the past few years. There is going to be a void left by CoD, and BF is all too happy to fill it.
Put it this way: while BF3 was too linear and BF4 suffered from a silent protagonist and some plotting issues, you should look at the youtube videos for BF4's soundtrack. They're full of people commenting how Battlefield 4 made them cry. You wouldn't know this looking at most internet forums where BF4 tends to cop a lot of flack along the "worst campaign I ever played" lines, but DICE have got some chops. They just need need to get their formulas mixed a bit better and Battlefield could easily replace CoD as the go-to cinematic FPS experience each year. And to be honest, DICE has nailed certain emotionally manipulate Oscar Bait storytelling aspects way better than Call of Duty has over the past few years. There is going to be a void left by CoD, and BF is all too happy to fill it.
I don't see how it doesn't fit. Map and player count are there. They'll obviously do some retooling and with their engine destruction will be part of it. Like of any FPS game to have a BR mode. Battlefield is the one I'm sure many can agree with.
I'll gladly trade another shitfest waste of resources waste of time campaign for a Battle Royale Mode.
Pretty sure PUBG and their 40 plus million PC and Xbox players can give a fuck
I know DICE makes glorified tutorials but BF1 had a campaign. It's hard to gauge whether a SP campaign will garner more sales when we just had so many shooters with campaigns that sold less than previous entries.
I literally put "in my opinion" in my post, so it's fairly obvious the campaigns weren't enjoyable to me. I'm talking about me. If you liked it, good for you. BF3 was poor, BF4 was poor, BF1 was decent. Ultimately it was short, linear, and it failed to create an attachment to any of the characters for me. Hey, maybe by BF7 Dice will learn to create a memorable campaign.
Your second point is what I was talking about. If your game is multiplayer only content is important. TF1 launched with not enough content. Same with Battlefront. Gamers will complain in that case. As for the season pass, I think EA will make maps free and move on to other methods of micro transactions.
If you are talking about a campaign I agree 100% THAT is a waste of resources
Do you really think PUBG and this hypothetical Battlefield BR could coexist? Like, what possible reason would anyone have to prefer PUBG over a professionally produced DICE BR unless they prefer poor performance, bugs, and a development studio which seems to somehow revel in it's incompetence.
Different styles of play. Have you played PUBG and BF? One is a TPS and options for a FPS game type. The other is a FPS. The gunplay is totally different. We don't even know how Batlle Royale will work in BF1 yet.
Imagine you are in their position, you would definitley care that you wont have an audeience bringing in even more money on ps4.
LOL these clone wars have barely begun
And plenty of people are salty... If I counted how many times on this site people used some version of "I can't wait for this fad to be over" I'd have a very large number
People always say stuff like this, and it doesn't makes sense. The well made FPS campaign costs like 3x more to make than the multiplayer, although post-release MP development can shift that somewhat. You go back to Battlefield 3, where the campaign team was like 3x bigger than the MP team. Other games have had different splits, but the basic point is that making a campaign requires an entirely different team, and they're a bunch bigger team with a wider range of skills and they cost more money. So you'd be looking at $15 for the MP, and $45 for the campaign. But they'll never do that. The economics behind these games is that the expensive campaigns are subsidized by the MP.
You're not alone, and it's kinda weird how many people find it unbelievable that EA's tactic of adding singleplayer campaigns to their games is WORKING. The demographic for MP games may be larger, but the number of people who love a linear singleplayer FPS campaign number in the millions. DICE want their money. They want that audience. And as a side effect, the campaign teams hired to make these campaigns... want to make campaigns. That's their entire job. People somehow think removing these campaigns would result in more MP content. Ignoring that the reason why modern FPS games have less MP content is due to rising production costs. Assets take longer to make. Levels take longer to make. The SP teams don't work on MP. If you tried to force them, they'd leave. They didn't join DICE to make MP games.
Last edited:
Lets assume they both shoot for the same style of BR: Realistic gunplay with bullet drop, large maps with vehicles, etc. I can guarantee with near certainty that DICE is in a better position to execute on those design goals than PUBG Corp. I have 500+ hours in both games and I come away stunned by PUBG Corp's incompetence each and every time I play PUBG.
its simply the only option
Until Ring of Elysium (and, yes, Battlefield BR) gets a wider release and more polish PUBG is the only option for people who prefer BR's with realistic physics and gunplay.
You're right, maybe Battlefield BR will be so much different than PUBG that their audiences don't overlap. You'll forgive me if I don't think so though.
Edit: I forgot to add I don't play PUBG in Third Person. As soon as First Person Perspective launched I switched to that and never looked back. Third Person is cancer for tactical games.
I'm pretty sure Xbox audiences would drop PUBG if another BR game that's close to it comes out and is polished.
I think the target audience will overlap, but I think PUBG can still survive. Battlefield will never go TPS, and it's mechanics are more arcadey (imo) then PUBG. It's similar to a COD Battle Royale vs BF Battle Royale. The games are going to feel different. The TTK will be different.
With PUBG most of the time I play the game just feels tense. How I play is very slow and methodical. I won't know until I play BF1 and BLOPSIV but I don't think I'll be playing Battle Royale in those games like that.
With that said the devs need to move. PUBG X1 needs more polish and more content. I also think F2P will clothing/skin micro transactions is the way to go and will help offset loss in population. PS4 version should aim to launch this winter as well.
Why is it annoying though? This isn't a BR spin-off, it's an added optional mode. 99% of games cloned each other.
Is a damn mode. Just like TDM, FFA, CTF, DOM, S&D and so on. You mad other shooters copy those modes as well? C'mon now.
Ain't that the truth
Proper, satisfying, refined controls, not yanky movement impro'd from third person to first control
Proper, high quality production values, not generic 3D store assets sprinkled around
Proper, fluid performance, not yanky 15fps plane rides
Proper, immersive audio, not sample deck tier effects
+ destruction
+ DICE tier support for new maps and features
I wrote an article about this - genuinely believe Fortnite (as that's what hit the mainstream) will be as influencial as COD4 was to the industry. Just like post-COD4 we saw everyone adding mp and rpg unlock mechanics with perks etc. Moving forward we'll see a lot of BR mechanics showing up .
This, I expect Battlefield to have the best BR mode this year. It fits the game and Dice's style really well imo.
I agree. Idk if DICE can make a good BR game in the WWII setting. I want the gadgets and toys of modern war.
I can see it being a beautiful setting though, but Im confused with the premise of a WWII BR game.
To me, using scopes and things like night vision and motion sensors would be really cool in a BF game. But I guess they can find a way to make it happen..
I wonder if they can add tanks ...
Same, I just don't get the nostalgia people have for it. It feels like the definition of that thing people think they want until they get it and then they quickly move on. I saw a lot of "Woo! WW2 babyyy, day one" when they showed COD's WW2 around E3 and then when it came out the sentiment seemed to switch to "well, so that came out huh?"
Can we ban the term "salty" on this board so the wrong people don't get a hold of it?
Oh yeah, this is what I'm waiting for. A polished, AAA Battle Royale game.
I never bought the modern EA shooters, but I might for this BR mode.
I never bought the modern EA shooters, but I might for this BR mode.
They have the budget and talent. It'll be a pure shooters, non-gimmick, Battle Royale mode.
I wouldn't be surprised to find out Halo 6 will include it at his rate. Huge fan of the genre mind, I love both PUBG and Fortnite (Even enjoy the concepts of Radical Heights), so very excited to see many variations explored. Hoping one of these will be closer to The Culling style.
Red Dead, Battlefield V, and Blops IIII, all coming out in the span of 2 months and all probably having BR modes.
At this rate Super Smash Bros will have one too.
At this rate Super Smash Bros will have one too.
Yeah a WWII BR would be so fucking depressing and stressful and just a soul crusher. A Bad Company BR however... ;)
Where is the campaign in Battlefront I? Did you have a special version that nobody else did?
Yea & I was replying to your opinion about it. Idk what the confusion is.
They will do microtransactions & map packs. Just like the last battlefield.