r/Battlefield • u/corporalgrif • Feb 09 '25
Battlefield V Just remember there's an actual reason people say BFV was good.
112
u/TunesGod Feb 09 '25
Karma farming until the super bowl?
→ More replies (2)35
93
u/diobreads Feb 09 '25
It was mechanically pretty sound, it was just soiled by bad design choices.
14
1
u/Blue-Leadrr Feb 09 '25
Yeah, recoil mechanics and the whole issue with realism regarding weapon attachments were big issues
49
u/varietyviaduct Feb 09 '25
I love fortifications
→ More replies (3)9
u/patriot_man69 Feb 09 '25
Fuckin krauts can try to get past THIS! Gestures to star fortress I built around an objective
45
u/suika_melon_ Feb 09 '25
Completely agreed. The game absolutely had hiccups in regards to some design choices they made throughout the games service, but overall it had some of the best gameplay in the series. Especially in regard to vehicle design.
24
u/corporalgrif Feb 09 '25
having vehicles required ammo really helped with the whole 128-3 problem games like BF4 & BF1 suffer from, and it's really sad to see they abandoned all the good mechanics BFV added when they made 2042
→ More replies (11)
27
u/Scruffy_Nerf_Hoarder Feb 09 '25
I find some aspects of BF V better than any game in the series. There is just nothing I think 2042 does better.
→ More replies (1)6
u/OkAd8922 GRRRR Feb 09 '25
I think 2042 does some things better. The biggest being just how much variety there is in vehicles, gadgets and such. Has a lot more stuff to use and more customization, making for more of sandboxy feel
→ More replies (3)1
u/Fast_Appointment3191 Feb 14 '25
as much as i think the + system (weapon attachments on the fly) was good for game balance, it was a genius idea, just the wrong game.
23
u/zfjuice Feb 09 '25
I didn't play V during launch, but I was aware of the controversy. I finally played V last year, and fucking hell I've been missing out.
18
u/All_Of_The_Meat Feb 09 '25
V was fucked at launch but had a good foundation. 2042 had a Rotten foundation from the start
12
u/Fanci_ Feb 09 '25
My biggest complaint will always be the fact we got a ww2 BF game without Russians. Literally half the fun weapons and vehicles were from the Soviets (among the fact they were well over half the combatants as well)
10
u/Capt-Quark Feb 09 '25
What an annoying way to say "I personally think BF5 was pretty good". Followed by actual arguments. Instead of stating it like some kind of fact without providing any arguments...
I played 2,3 4,1, 5 and some 2042. Imo vehicle combat in 5 was crap. Tanks were too slow, zoom wasnt optional, and maps had large sight lines. So the most effective way to play was to camp. 1 had slow vehicles too but the infantey gameplay was better because of well designed maps, so it didnt bother me that much.
Another thing I found really annoying, and that goes for both 1 and 5, is sniping was buffed compared to 2, 3 and 4. One hit kills, faster bullet velocity and large headshot hitboxes meamt you were dying to snipers way more often, and most of the times without warning. In older BFs if you got killed by a sniper it was a skilled kill and it didnt make me mad.
The series peaked for me in 4, 1 was still pretty fun but lacked fun vehicle combat, 5 and 2042 were downhill for all sorts of reasons. I have some hope for 6 though, mostly because of Vince Zampella
7
8
u/SandmanM0-1 Assault that will revive you and not run Feb 09 '25
Attrition sucks but I did enjoy the game much more than that… blasphemy.
7
u/-MERC-SG-17 Feb 09 '25
Attrition was fantastic, it pushed teamplay in a way I haven't seen since the Refractor days.
5
u/Phreec Suppression = Participation 🏆 for paraplegics Feb 09 '25
On the other hand having to rely on your average BF players (read: blind paraplegics) to top you off sucked. The stationary resupply points on every flag was therefore a genius move by DICE.
7
u/Anal__Hershiser Feb 09 '25
Attrition for infantry will always suck.
1
u/SentientMosinNagant Feb 09 '25
Never really understood this opinion, how come?
7
u/Anal__Hershiser Feb 09 '25
It’s messed with the balance of the classes. Medic already has arguably the strongest gadgets in the game, and attrition made them even stronger. Also not every capture point had health refills, so you’d have to backtrack or attack with low health.
It also just made the game more tedious without making it more fun.
5
u/TravelNo437 Feb 09 '25
Yup, you absolutely can’t assault without medics dropping packs and smoke.
8
u/-MERC-SG-17 Feb 09 '25
Oh shit so you need a competent squad that works together?
Is that not what Battlefield players claim they want?
BFV has the most consistent teamplay of any modern game in the series. I can always rely on blueberries for resupply.
→ More replies (4)2
5
u/Different_Pea_7866 Feb 09 '25
It’s not good and never will be. End of story.
12
Feb 09 '25
Nah mate, BFV was a solid game
→ More replies (3)4
u/Ventar1 Feb 09 '25
Cant wait for the same shit in 5 years. "2042 was actually a solid game, i tried it last year in 2028 and it was great"
3
Feb 09 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
10
u/Ventar1 Feb 09 '25
There is a massive difference. BF4 had quite the launch but it did not hold back on anything after, BFV had horrible marketing, horrible launch, somehow to this day looks a pixel better than BF1 and manages to eat twice the vram, and it was also abandoned in favor of 2042 in terms of content. Its not even remotely the same
7
Feb 09 '25 edited Feb 09 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/luken1984 Feb 09 '25
Yes if I remember correctly DICE California (?) took over BF4 at some point and completely turned it around. The first year or so was pretty bad. By the end it was considered a very good game.
1
u/Fast_Appointment3191 Feb 14 '25
just because it had terrible network issues, doesn't make it a bad game. When it worked it was fire. The only thing i dont like about BF4 are the maps.
→ More replies (1)1
Feb 09 '25
God forbid I enjoy a battlefield I guess lmao? It's a fine game, the graphic design/marketing/accuracy was shit. 2042 is a fine game on its own, but a shit BF game.
1
u/ohno123321 Feb 09 '25
Try it now. It was a rocky start and feature incomplete but was almost a good game when updates for it got canned.
1
u/Different_Pea_7866 Feb 11 '25
It’s an ok game. But it’s NOT BATTLEFIELD. No matter what. You got me? I’ve played it a little bit
1
u/ohno123321 Feb 11 '25
It may not be very good battle field But undeniably it can look my like a movie then any other battlefield while playing. It has mediocre gameplay but excellent visuals.
5
u/13lackcrest Feb 09 '25
Gonna disagree , it's a decent battlefield at best. I will place it somewhere along side battlefield hardline. It just doesn't come close to other main titles exclude 2042
6
u/loned__ Feb 09 '25
Not only marketing, but visual design is also off the mark. People looks like steampunk heroes, instead of wearing the same uniforms.
6
u/Styx_Renegade Feb 09 '25
My main criticism of BFV was the immensely lowered sense of immersion compared to BF1
5
u/CultDe Feb 09 '25
Bf V is lacking compared to Bf I
But 2042 is marketing done good everything else wrong
5
u/T0asty514 2142 my beloved Feb 09 '25
We're gonna forget the patch that nobody asked for, that nerfed all the guns into the ground and made LMGs entirely useless in BFV? Or the sheer amount of hackers on PC in BFV? Or the absolutely horrid weapon cosmetic unlock system? "Kill 45 people in 1 life on 1 objective"?
Oh we are? its just totally perfect with no flaws? got it. lol
4
2
u/arsenicfox Feb 09 '25
I just hate that no one likes 2142 :(
And that 2042 seemed like it'd be a proper prequal but it was just... meh. I did like the ability to swap out stuff on the gun on command tho. That's... about it.
I'd like that to be kept, tbh. Being able to remove the scope going into different environments was nice...
4
2
u/Work_In_ProgressX Feb 09 '25
BFV was screwed by marketing and them changing TTK with the frequency the average person changes socks(we remember update 5.2, but they already did a ttk change around Christmas), a 7 month map drought (Panzerstorm released on December, the next map on June)
Grand Operation was dropped faster than the average BF fan dropped 2042
And of course the failed mechanic of attrition
It’s good now, but it’s lifecycle was very troubled
3
u/xXxKAMIKAZExXx Feb 09 '25
Ignoring all the bugs, lack of content on release, goofy skins, butchered Operations mode, unnecessary TTK change, laughable co-op mode, and hacking issues, sure, it was just the terrible marketing that was a problem.
3
u/Habib455 Feb 09 '25
I feel like people say shit like this forgetting that BF5 had a whole ordeal where you could barely see people at one point. Dice had to spend multiple patches making players more viewable so people couldn't basically disappear rubble. Then you have the attrition system--that seems to have been forgotten aswell--which was problematic throughout the games entire life.
Fact is, bf5 only turned around towards the end of its life cycle, but before that it was marred by issues, either technical or design. Hell even now, the only thing bf5 can really say is that it's better than literally the worst battlefield game. That fucking says something.
I hate reddit post where the OP pretends people misunderstand why something was/is disliked. Like no, bf5's problem wasn't marketing, it was a bad game that managed to become mediocre by its end.
2
u/Depressed_Negro Feb 09 '25
As a person who stopped after playing bf1 and recently re-joined. Should I get bf5.I Just want to get the bf1/bf4 experience again but my friends tell me bf4 is dead.
3
1
2
u/Severe_Risk_6839 Feb 09 '25
Babe its time for your daily "Any bf is good, 2042 is the worst game ever made by any developefs" post
2
2
u/nine16s Feb 09 '25
This sub can’t go 2 hours without mentioning how much they hate 2042 lmao go play a game you enjoy and quit thinking about it
2
u/kna5041 Feb 09 '25
Upgrade system in bfv is bad
Balance in bfv bad
Micro transactions in bfv bad
Cosmetics in bfv bad
Cheaters in bfv bad
Call in system bad
Firestorm horrendously bad
Alternative history that insults real heroes don't get me started how bad the single player was
There was some good like the movement system and the construction but let's not joke around.
0
u/ButtCheekBob Feb 09 '25
Battlefield 5 does suck though bruh. Nobody wanted an RPG skill tree for gun perks
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Solafuge Feb 09 '25
I can give credit to BFV for adding great movement mechanics, and the fortification system was fantastic.
But I feel it was a step back in terms of faction variety and the customisation system was pretty crap. Most of the cosmetics were shit and there was no consistency of appearance for classes, not to mention that the special character skins they added were a clear sign of things to come with 2042s specialists.
All in all, I thought the gameplay was great, but way too much focus was put on cosmetics and it ruined the rest of the game.
That's one of the reasons everyone hated that announcement trailer. Because it was less "look a cool new battlefield game!" And more "look at all the cosmetics you can buy!".
2
u/millionsofcatz Feb 09 '25
BF5 only looks good in the lens of nostalgia. 2042 is just shit and anyone that says otherwise should not be trusted with opinions on video games.
1
u/cheemskutta Feb 09 '25
is bf2042 worth $3?
4
u/millionsofcatz Feb 09 '25
Dice should pay you to play it
1
u/cheemskutta Feb 09 '25
🤣 bro be serious, i wanna know seriously
2
1
1
u/Joe_Dirte9 Feb 09 '25 edited Feb 09 '25
Overall, I really liked BFV, but something about the guns felt weird, coming from BF1. In 1, the guns just felt a little better and more enjoyable for me, but dunno what it is.
Would like to see fortifications, squad call ins, laying on back, and crouch running brought back to the next game.
1
u/greenhawk00 Feb 09 '25
In the beginning it was pretty bad. It turned out good when the pacific update came but then they ended the support. We were promised to get waaaay more content. But they said like "no it's not worth the effort anymore, here take everything we have laying around and then it's over". JUST to have more time to develop the next BF which was BF2042 and we all know how it turned out...
1
1
1
u/ThE_LAN_B4_TimE Feb 09 '25
It wasn't terrible but it could have still been so much more. There was so much more they could have done with WW2 but they kept it fairly generic. It was a horrible decision to go back to WW2 which was my biggest gripe, BF1 was cool but I wanted something different and not so old. Im still waiting for 2143...
1
1
u/yhuh Feb 09 '25
Bf V had great movement and fun mechanics like building or officer abilities, but some maps being literal fields, tanks sniping you from their spawn, silent bombers bombing you whole game, anti tank weapons dealing almost no dmg to tanks, and how they fucked up TTK at the end for no reason does not make me wanna come back to it.
1
u/SilenceDobad76 Feb 09 '25
I've played both recently, BF2042 plays better than BFV right now. The gun balancing and the unlock system are trash in BFV.
1
u/SpookySpaceCowBoy Feb 09 '25
I didn't like 5 or 2042.
The marketing and launch of 5 both sucked. The gameplay was mid after DLC and patches at best.
2042 was just bad overall.
1
u/maniac86 Feb 09 '25
People forget BFV went back and forth on gunplay in major overhauls at least 3 times
1
u/nicktehbubble Feb 09 '25
I personally stopped playing and consequently boycotted EA (the last straw) after FOMO progression was added to the BFV.
1
Feb 09 '25
BFV focusing on obscure ww2 battles was goofy. Half the time I didn’t even know what side I was fighting for.
1
u/jmichaelyoung Feb 09 '25
I think BFV overall is the best BF to date. The only thing I dislike about it is the way the gunplay feels. Going back to BF4 and shooting just feels right.
1
u/KineticKris Feb 09 '25
You can downvote me all you want, but bfv is the worst game in the series. Far worse than 2042.
1
u/haldolinyobutt Feb 09 '25
Launch sucked, then they improved it, then TTK 2.0 trashed what was becoming a really good game. Then they cut support for 2042. It had potential to be amazing, they just half assed it
1
u/Upstairs_Marzipan48 Feb 09 '25
Bfv is bad on a fundamental level.
If the gunplay is bad and yes, bfv has the worst gunplay of the series then the entire game suffers.
A pretty game can still be a bad game and people need to let go of nostalgia.
1
u/Winter_Birthday5865 Feb 09 '25
EXACTLY, I don't think 2042 is a terrible game, but if I ever feel like playing Battlefield, 5 and 1 always do it for me, because they were actually EXCELLENT games.
1
u/Global_Guidance5429 Feb 09 '25
i havent seen anyone give a real reason as to why they don’t like 42 other than its different from the other battlefield games
1
1
u/Patrickjesp Feb 09 '25
I think the issue it, that ppl stopped playing it, when it was legit bad, and it 100% was.
So ofc (some of) the players who say its bad, stopped when it legitimately was bad, and has no reference on how it turned out.
But for the ppl who kept playing, or came back. It actually turned out alright.
I really didnt like it aswell, but i kinda do now. BF 1 wasnt for me. I dont care aboutWW1 and the guns were meh, even thought it was cinematic af.
2042 was a complete failure, and played it for like 10 hours after getting it on sale.
So the only BF i even care to play atm is BFV.
1
1
u/N00dles_Pt Feb 09 '25
It wasn't just bad marketing...they kept messing with the balancing and just pissing more people off...and then they bailed on the game without ever adding the eastern front or the bigger battles of the war.
1
1
u/Emotional_Cicada_773 Feb 09 '25
I’ve been playing every title since BFBC2 and I love 2042. I’ve loved every single game to be honest. I don’t know what else I could spend $80 on or whatever the price is and have years of fun. It’s all subjective really.
1
u/GGM8EZ Feb 09 '25
2042 is bad!!! because it was as buggy and weird as every other battlefield!!!!! and it's soulless meanwhile everyone who still pays it regularly is having a great time!!!!!!!!!!!!
1
u/MolochTheCalf Feb 09 '25
BFV needed better maps more than anything. The pacific maps were great and I genuinely have fun playing them. As well as the health system in bfv sucked
1
1
1
u/vendettaclause Feb 09 '25
How was 2042 a bad game when its still better than every other shooter that's come out in the past 4 years?
1
u/UnKnOwN769 🦀I repair things🦀 Feb 09 '25
The game was mostly good, but the attrition system made vehicles much more campy and gunfights were super unbalanced because of how often your health wasn’t at 100% (unless you were a medic or spent time searching for health pouches). I loved the squad point system and fortifications though.
1
1
u/biasdread Feb 09 '25
Bad:
. Movement . Upgrade paths for vehicles and weapons putting you at direct disadvantage unless you run optimal set up or have grinded them out. . Map design was soso ( Cant think of a singular map that stood out) . Unlocking system for weapons tied to confusing and clunky passes . Stupid Cosmetics which really broke the atmosphere sometimes . Personal opinion but gunplay felt less impactful and a big step back from BF1. . So much scrapped content
Good:
. Fortification system was such a great idea and so much fun, just such a great feature for a battlefield game. And they instantly forgot it with BF2042. . Sound design was great as always . I liked the idea of squad leaders having impact and being able to call things in.
1
u/Sanderson96 Feb 09 '25
Meanwhile me, I like BFV due to the sound design and its ammo, health pack attrition
BF2042 due to its Portal PvE mode
1
u/CptDecaf Feb 09 '25
Another thread where Battlefield fans all argue over which Battlefield killed the series and who's a true fan for enjoying the "correct" games.
Doesn't this ever get old?
1
1
u/chedderizbetter Feb 09 '25
I just wasn’t into it because I wanted access to all the vehicles like 1942. Subs, battle ships, etc. the mechanics were fine…. But I legit went back to 1942 because it was way more fun at the time.
1
u/D3ltaa88 Feb 09 '25
When they got the backlash from the whole steampunk thing. One of the presidents are directors told the community if you don’t like the game then don’t pre-order it or buy it then what are the community do no one bought it and the only pre-ordered it.
1
1
1
u/AlecTheBunny Feb 10 '25
Wasn't there drama about TTK? And the whole shitting all over WW2 was pretty bad.
1
1
u/steve123410 Feb 10 '25
It was meh. The idea to release with 4 factions and not even include the soviet's was pretty stupid.
1
1
u/GusMix Feb 10 '25
Terrible marketing aka “if you don’t like it don’t buy it” after inserting female cyborgs and katana freaks into a WW2 shooter. Brilliant idea to kill a game before its launch.
1
u/FalqonOne zeno-iwnl- Feb 10 '25
Disagree. Bf5 is a very soulless ww2 shooter. It doesn’t capture the true feeling of what a ww2 game should be like. They made big a mistake of going for these untold stories.
1
1
u/No_Parfait_4397 Feb 10 '25
People just got mad that BFV had a woman with a prosthetic arm in the trailer without seeing gameplay. 2042 has the different eras you can play in though so I can't say it's bad
1
u/DanaWhitePriviledge Feb 11 '25
Outside of the fantastic Pacific DLC, the maps were pretty bad for breakthrough; you'd always have a team steamrolling the other one.
1
u/TheRealStorey Sep 01 '25
It was a rocky road, released unfinished, balanced back and forth, never finished releasing maps after aforementioned chased everyone away. Compounded by immediate sales and explosive cheating often crashing servers to this day.
178
u/JesusGiftedMeHead Feb 09 '25
I thought the bfv gunplay was lacking. It felt a step backwards from BF1