• Light/Dark
  • 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.

Why buy Battlefield V at release?

Gemüsepizza

Gemüsepizza

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,541
Anyone else a little bit worried about the amount of release content for Battlefield V?

Singleplayer mode:

Here is a picture from their latest trailer:

bf5wiixk.png


So we are getting 4 war stories at release (compared to 6 in BF1), and an additional one after release.

(We don't really know much about these war stories. There is a trailer from the Xbox E3 press conference, where they have shown 37 seconds of cutscenes. Then recently, in the new "This is Battlefield V" trailer, they have shown an additional 7 seconds of cutscenes from a different war story. No gameplay has been shown yet.)

Multiplayer mode:

It seems Battlefield V will ship with only 8 multiplayer maps (compared to 10 in BF4), and I have read that there might be only 32 weapons available (compared to 83 in BF4).

Their Battle Royale mode will also not be in the game at release.

I mean it's cool that they plan to add more content after release. But compared to previous titles, there seems to be less content available at release, so it kind of seems like they will first add "missing" content. And we don't know if the post-launch content will be good. So why buy this game at release?
 
RPGam3r

RPGam3r

Member
Oct 27, 2017
13,516
To have fun? I don't personally care for the franchise, but I assume many just want to get in on the zeitgeist with their friends and have a good time.
 
TheBeardedOne

TheBeardedOne

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
22,189
Derry
Liquid Snake said:
You got me there! I won't be buying it at all, period.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Same

Battlefield is such an overrated franchise. They're not well made games. Especially campaign-wise.

I bought Battlefield 3 and hated myself for spending the money. It was a buggy mess. Battlefield 4 was boring. Hardline was mediocre at best, rushed and buggy. Battlefield One was also pretty forgettable. I borrowed it from the library and am glad I didn't pay a cent.
 
MWorldII

MWorldII

Member
Oct 25, 2017
834
Saint-Petersburg, Russia
I was pretty hyped for the game when the announce it in May, but such bad marketing with unfinished features and cut short content for release is killing BFV for me.

Even after the short delay i have no interest in buying it Day One. I woud never thought i could be more interested in Call of Duty than Battlefield, even if it hasn't full single-player campaign, which i'm loving to complet every year and almost skip multiplayer.
 
DaciaJC

DaciaJC

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
6,685
TheBeardedOne said:
Same

Battlefield is such an overrated franchise. They're not well made games. Especially campaign-wise.

I bought Battlefield 3 and hated myself for spending the money. It was a buggy mess. Battlefield 4 was boring. Hardline was mediocre at best, rushed and buggy. Battlefield One was also pretty forgettable. I borrowed it from the library and am glad I didn't pay a cent.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Sounds more like they might not be for you. I mean, yeah, the singleplayer offerings are generally mediocre; but the series started off as multiplayer only and it's in multiplayer where the games continue to shine and provide a fairly unique experience within the genre. What about them isn't "well made" in your opinion?
 
SFLUFAN

SFLUFAN

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,408
Alexandria, VA
No one should give a damn about the garbage that passes as the single-player campaigns in the Battlefield series. We should be moderately pleased that there are fewer of them than BF1, if not outraged that the amount is not zero beacuse some poor developers were forced to work on them!
 
OP
OP
Gemüsepizza

Gemüsepizza

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,541
RPGam3r said:
To have fun? I don't personally care for the franchise, but I assume many just want to get in on the zeitgeist with their friends and have a good time.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

DeliciousSunnyD! said:
Idk, maybe because it's fun? Just a thought.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

But how do we know if it will be fun, when content like the Battle Royale mode or the other stuff isn't in the game, and can't be reviewed? Imo it makes more sense to wait a couple of months until they have added the missing features. By then they probably have also fixed the usual balancing issues / and bugs.

Edit: I mean the game costs 70-90€ here where I live, I'm just a bit hesitant to spend that kind of money on promises.
 
Betelgeuse

Betelgeuse

Member
Nov 2, 2017
2,941
For 4 and 1, I just waited until premium was available at around $20.

If I buy V at all, it's going to be the same thing there.
 
ghostcrew

ghostcrew

The Shrouded Ghost
Administrator
Oct 27, 2017
30,364
Yeah, I'll probably pick it up at launch. I like Battlefield? I'll probably play my 10 hours that I get with EA Access then pick it up if I'm still enjoying it after 10 hours.
 
Orochinagis

Orochinagis

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,548
Played the open beta, not gonna buy the game until they fix that weird physics when you try to do walk or ride something and you character gets stuck deciding where to land due different surfaces
 
defaltoption

defaltoption

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
11,486
Austin
I love battlefield but since 4 things have gone to shit, it is still though my favorite fps franchise and I will try to always support it to some degree, this year that means EA access premier, why? Because anthem is being made by one of my favorite devs of all time and it comes with both. For $99 for both honestly you can't go wrong. It it weren't for EA premier both games would be picked up around $30 each and not on release. That's why I'll be playing bf5 day one this year but honestly from what I've seen from previous BF, 1 and Hardline seen from the two star wars games recently released and even worse how EA had agree the past 5 years I'm just about at my breaking point, at this point all this company has on me is memories of great games and they are slowly replacing what I have left with things like Battlefront 2 or BFV's lack of content or MEA's lack of support and structure. EA has almost become a sort of virus you learn to deal with even though it's destroying you because you remember that it also gave you superpowers.
 
TheBeardedOne

TheBeardedOne

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
22,189
Derry
DaciaJC said:
Sounds more like they might not be for you. I mean, yeah, the singleplayer offerings are generally mediocre; but the series started off as multiplayer only and it's in multiplayer where the games continue to shine and provide a fairly unique experience within the genre. What about them isn't "well made" in your opinion?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I like shooters. I wanted to like Battlefield, and I really tried. I honestly don't know what it is. I've put thought into it. I mean, I don't really like vehicles in multiplayer but even without them I didn't really enjoy what I played of Battlefield 3 and 4.

The really weird thing is that I was obsessed with 1943 and played it a TON, and beat Bad Company twice. The multiplayer was much better in those than in the other games. Bad Company 2 wasn't as good as the first, though, in my opinion. The campaign was forgettable and it didn't have as much personality.

I waited in line and got Battlefield 3 at midnight. Tried to play the campaign, but it kept freezing and I had to continually restart a mission. It was also very glitchy and poorly made. The multiplayer didn't impress me, either. Battlefield 4 was a glitchy mess also, and Hardline was rushed and dated. The multiplayer felt like a last generation game, and not a well made one.

One had the most shine, but it was nothing I'd want to own.
 
Atom Heart Mother

Atom Heart Mother

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,298
new jersey
I'm gonna give it a a year or so. It's not a bad game, but I'm in no rush to start it. By then it'd be fixed, updated, balanced and probably cheaper. Game's gonna fall to $20 - 30 by June or so anyway.
 
Sande

Sande

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,981
Because you want to play it? It sounds like one of the few games where buying at release does make some sense since it's not build around season passes and GOTY editions so you're not paying out the ass when you buy in early.
 
texhnolyze

texhnolyze

Member
Oct 25, 2017
23,170
Indonesia
I believe most people buy this kind of games for the MP. Content doesn't mean that much if the community have already moved on to the next shiny big thing months later.
 
DeliciousSunnyD!

DeliciousSunnyD!

Member
Oct 31, 2017
9,623
Gemüsepizza said:
But how do we know if it will be fun, when content like the Battle Royale mode or the other stuff isn't in the game, and can't be reviewed? Imo it makes more sense to wait a couple of months until they have added the missing features. By then they probably have also fixed the usual balancing issues / and bugs.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Speaking for myself, I have zero interest in the 'Battle Royale'.

This will be the first Battlefield game I've bought since Bad Company 2. Why? Because the shooting and core game design are great and I feel like they should be rewarded with my purchase for going with a game design that is more towards my personal tastes (low ammo on spawn, limited health regeneration, huge reduction in spotting).

Essentially, I like how the game plays and feels. "Battle Royale" is irrelevant to me personally and would be nothing more than a distraction from the core Battlefield gameplay.

Basically the same reason I bought the original Destiny day 1. I liked how it felt to play at a fundamental level, despite "missing" extraneous trappings and "content".
 
BrickArts295

BrickArts295

GOTY Tracking Thread Master
Member
Oct 26, 2017
13,765
I think DICE might be cracking. I don't think developing yearly FPS is doing them any favors. I'll give a rent on launch and see where it goes.
 
Dr. Caroll

Dr. Caroll

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
8,111
SFLUFAN said:
No one should give a damn about the garbage that passes as the single-player campaigns in the Battlefield series.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Battlefield: Hardline's campaign was outstanding. It was basically a detective/cop show game with all that tonally dissonant Battlefield multiplayer nonsense tied to its back like a dead elephant. Poor Visceral. Sure, the game sold better because it had the Battlefield branding, but the PvP multiplayer goes against everything the game represents.

Battlefield 1's campaign was rather weak. But most of the Battlefield campaigns have been more good than bad. Battlefield 3 was an interesting liberal remake of BLACK. Battlefield 4 has some structural problems but a remarkably emotionally resonant story. And of course both Bad Company games have really fun campaigns.

I'm taking a "wait and see" approach. With Call of Duty's campaign being MIA this year, I'm hoping that Battlefield V can deliver.
SFLUFAN said:
We should be moderately pleased that there are fewer of them than BF1, if not outraged that the amount is not zero beacuse some poor developers were forced to work on them!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Just because there's fewer doesn't necessarily mean the campaign is shorter. It more likely means they've decided to have a smaller number of longer campaigns instead of constantly jumping from one character/location to the next. One of the problems with BF1 is that the individual campaigns weren't long enough to allow players to truly connect with the characters and the story.

In addition, the idea developers were "forced" to work on these campaign is nonsense. You really think someone spends their entire career making singleplayer games, joins DICE to work on their singleplayer games, and is then "forced" to work on the latest big budget campaign? Series like Battlefield and Call of Duty offer an increasingly rare opportunity to work on story-driven FPS games with extremely high production values that aren't craven open world time sinks.
 
KrAzY

KrAzY

Member
Sep 2, 2018
1,922
This goes for any games as a service though. Why buy anything until its all in one package, why buy Hitman seasons while you can wait for the full thing, why buy Injustce when you can wait for the full thing, why buy Witcher 3 when I can wait for the full thing, why buy anything at all when the complete package is just a year away. These days thats how games are being done, to keep you coming back. Side stories, new fighters, new cars, new updates, changes for the better(or worse). Thats how it is... I remember how slim Overwatch was, what an investment for someone who just payed the $40. Also depends on if they can deliver of course.
 
Klobrille

Klobrille

Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,360
Germany
What a strange questioning. There are games that will offer much, much less hours of fun for your money - yet people still gladly pay their $60. At least here I know I will get regular updates - which is kinda part of the experience I really like these days.
 

m29a

Member
Oct 25, 2017
387
I'm buying it on launch because I'm having a lot of fun with the beta. The MP alone will keep me hooked for countless hours.
 
Dimir Agent

Dimir Agent

Banned
Sep 8, 2018
9
KrAzY said:
This goes for any games as a service though. Why buy anything until its all in one package, why buy Hitman seasons while you can wait for the full thing, why buy Injustce when you can wait for the full thing, why buy Witcher 3 when I can wait for the full thing, why buy anything at all when the complete package is just a year away. These days thats how games are being done, to keep you coming back. Side stories, new fighters, new cars, new updates, changes for the better(or worse). Thats how it is... I remember how slim Overwatch was, what an investment for someone who just payed the $40. Also depends on if they can deliver of course.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Over watched changed the game.
Free content with cosmetic loot boxes is the way to go. Haters like Jim Lardo can suck off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.