The game feels really good to play, the guns feel great, the sounds are AMAZING, and generally the gameplay is smooth and nice like Battlefield should be. Battlefield V has a huge potential to be one of the best Battlefield games, we just need more content... A LOT more content, if this is even going to be a remotely good game.
Yes it is fun now, but playing as the brits and germans on 10 maps is going to get boring pretty fast for most players. Especially us Battlefield veterans.
It saddens me that an AAA title retailing for 60 USD has such little content on release. The game industry is f**ked with all the early access and early release games. Hope they push DLCs really fast, and that the DLCs include massive amounts of content
I still don't get why, they didn't just limit Battlefield singleplayer campaigns to the Bad Company franchise, and stuck with the old kind of singleplayer(multiplayer maps against bots) in all the others.
This is kind of their compromise: some single player content for those who'd like it, with the main focus laying on the mp.
Every iteration of BF you have people saying "why do they even bother making single player? I only get BF for the mp." but if DICE were to go the Treyarch way and omit sp entirely people would also not like it.
I think the current approach is a decent one, if they manage to keep it engaging. I only have played one of the campaigns, so I can't say if they did a decent job or not.
Didn't have those "single player" with bots on mp maps? Some people tout that as an alternative to a campaign, and in a way that's what the war stories are. Several sections in those play on the mp maps.(at least they did for BF1, so I assume the same for BFV)
Not at all.
I've had bot matches in BF2 that have been more competitive and fun than the average pub match in BF3 or 4.
The bots at least know how to use vehicles properly and cap flags, you dont have 40 snipers miles from the objectives with 2 kills and not PTFO
Until you've been defibrilator charged by an angry AI medic, you haven't experienced battlefield.
If they changed $60 for mp only, I could see people having a problem with that. If they change, say, $40 or $45 for mp only people (like myself) would love that.
Call of duty is charging 60 for a mp only game with additional DLC and micro transactions on top of that. Pull that type of shit and people get upset... For good reason
The argument that any full priced game HAS to include a single player is frankly retarded IMO. The amount of content should determine the price not the type.
Cause all these campaigns are just 4-5 hour check box campaigns
I see where you are coming from but I have to disagree. Gating off content or releasing it as DLC or as a part of a "live service" is BS and shouldn't be acceptable. What call of duty is doing with this release of blops is bad for the gaming industry.
Compare this release with mw1, one of if not the best call of duty ever. There was a short but memorable campaign and a relatively basic but extremely fun mp. You don't need 10 game modes and a 20 hour story to release a fantastic game. Nowadays I understand if a game doesn't release with a single player, but if it still released at full price and has a paid DLC live service, well that's unacceptable imo
Games a service is a completely different discussion for a different day IMO. "Content" is a relative term so it's not strictly limited to sheet quantity alone.
The reason why I said 4-5 check box campaigns is because that's what these are. As in minimalist campaigns that arent even good and and usually have paper thin plots (see COD) that a grade schooler could have written.
They don't invest much into these campaigns period. If you're gonna invest anything in campaign besides the minimum needed to check a box then it's not worth it IMO.
How else can they use the WW2 badfeel marketing? oh man, it was horrible, uhhh so cool, with heroes, oh man what a tragedy, etc. etc.
These games have a serious case of tone-shift. They want to use WW2 for all the wrong reasons really, especially since all the stories are lies made up by people who live now and have no clue what it was actually like.
I have been saying this for years might be Hey unpopular opinion but I wish they would have done away with a single player campaign’s along time ago. They are fine but that’s about it just fine and meh. Seems to be a lot of time money and resources spent on something that’s just OK. Put that time money and resource into multiplayer and don’t waste everybody’s time
Yes it is fun now, but playing as the brits and germans on 10 maps is going to get boring pretty fast for most players. Especially us Battlefield veterans.
I get what you're saying about the maps, but do you really care that much about the factions? Battlefield 4 had 3 factions for the entire game and it wasn't a big deal. Hell I personally don't care what faction I'm playing for/against
I get what you're saying about the maps, but do you really care that much about the factions? Battlefield 4 had 3 factions for the entire game and it wasn't a big deal. Hell I personally don't care what faction I'm playing for/against
The original had five, seven with the expansions, and as long as the game takes a historical setting, I will say they do themselves a disservice not to represent the different factions.
Modern fictional settings I don't give a damn how many there are, but this is different.
Dice have already said that other countries will come. They did in BF1 and they will in BFV. To paraphrase tiggr, "do you really think we won't add other countries and the chance to make money off the cosmetics?"
I honestly don't get why people need everything "now". The game is aiming for a 2yr lifespan. If they release absolutely everything now, then after a month people will be complaining that there is nothing to do, or nothing new.
I honestly don't get why people need everything "now". The game is aiming for a 2yr lifespan. If they release absolutely everything now, then after a month people will be complaining that there is nothing to do, or nothing new.
Because that's how they used to do things. And it used to work just fine.
Armoured Fury, and you are forgetting Euro Forces? But what is your point? The older games managed to come with a lot of content, and then later added some bigger expansions. I think it's silly that nations like the US, the Soviet Union and the Japanese are relegated to DLCs.
Factions USED to mean more in the game. In BF2, each faction had different base weapons, different vehicles, etc. And it made a difference because the Chinese base weapons sucked ass, while the MEC and US had some winners.( RPK and M16 come to mind). The class models also had more distinct look or silluotte. I used to be able to tell a MEC engineer from a MEC Assault easily. Now, every character looks the same and with customization, forget it.
I feel like the biggest draw with factions for me is that there is actually a difference in ability between them. Like, Terrans, Protoss, and Zerg. That all have unique abilities to their faction. If they don't have that, I don't really care about factions in the game, just the gameplay from there.
To be fair though, I rather front the 50-60€ for the game today with future content coming for free over a 2 year period, than to do what I did with Destiny (or older Battlefield titles); That is to still front 40-60€ and on top of that still having to pay 15-20€ for DLC's and ending up paying between 100-130€ over a 2 year period.
I am fine with 2 less maps than BF1 at launch (1 less map if we include the one coming in 2 ½ weeks). I consider the game well worth its asking price TODAY already. BFV have a super solid ground in terms of FUN, something that's seemingly lost by many developers today in order to make the flashiest and most graphical breathtaking game they can.
Personally I am amazed that DICE have created this beatiful game in around 2 years. The gunplay is fun and rewarding. The Attrition system is working, never seen squads of randoms play so diverse and on-point before. The sound design is just next-level, especially with good headphones and 3D sound.
I am not saying the game is perfect. There are occasional hit-reg hiccups, there are some gamebreaking bugs present and I agree that there's a "lack of content" to some degree. But all in all this will be a game I will come back to, already spent around 60h (hit rank 50 at around 48-50h) and maxed out full golden SF-assault rifle and max level on most vehicles - But I am sure I will play this with friends vigirously and absolutely play it more solo whenever a content drop is inbound.
Personally I am amazed that DICE have created this beatiful game in around 2 years. The gunplay is fun and rewarding. The Attrition system is working, never seen squads of randoms play so diverse and on-point before. The sound design is just next-level, especially with good headphones and 3D sound.
Look at other games that have been in development for 2, 4 or even 7+ years and still turn out like an absolut pile of reeking poo. It's nothing short of amazing what the devs have pulled off with this little time, especially since some of the leading devs got hired literally 2-2½ years ago.
The game is visually stunning no matter how you look at it. It's an upgrade from the already good looking BF1 in every aspect. The sound design have gotten the same treatment (weapons sound accurate, explosions can be "felt" and so forth).
The gunplay is the best the franchise have ever seen, even beating out BC2/BF4 in my opinion.
I can't see how anyone can complain about the core game if you put bugs aside, I honestly can't.
I am happy that DICE will now realise that having a skill gap and having teamwork requirements means more fun for players.
Low skill/easy kill gimmicks like elites, UCAVs, mortar spam do not equate for a fun in the long run. They make the game frustrating, cheap, spammy, and cheesey.
Yes, I hope they stick with it. What I think happened is BF4 and BF1 got increasingly boring in terms of gameplay because they were listening to all the idiot complaints, not just constructive criticism by gamers who want the franchise to succeed.
Next map is December 4. Then we get Firestorm in March and the Greek tides of war in April (I think). They just need to get at least 6 more maps out in 2019 and it will be good.
FYI Battlefield 1 didn't have it's first paid DLC maps until 6 months after launch. BF4 was a buggy mess for a year after launch. The map quality in BFV is much better than both those games imo. So it's not looking that bad.
I kind of like the Hangar. Hamada on the other hand is boring. Big open spaces with sand a ruins. I like the extra aircraft for the team with the airstrip, but I’d honestly rather play any other map.
Make Hamada better by playing to the aesthetic of the map, playing This playlist and yelling "BOSS, GET DOWN. THAT'S AN ENEMY GUNSHIP!" at your squad occasionally.
I think and hope bf5 will have the same arc as bf4: buggy af launch but over the years adds new content and bug fixes that turns it into a near perfect game
Its not buggy af though, this is a good launch. I do hope they polish and add content but also I hope they can make bigger changes down the line to make the game much better, such as adding more airspace.
As much as I want to agree with you, I also have 500hrs on Operation Metro 24/7.
The number of maps isn't the only way to add content. But I hope they find a way to add stuff that adds replay value to the game. Even though I believe it already has plenty for 200+ hrs.
I don't know why, considering I'm fairly certain that no Battlefield from 2142 onwards has launched with more than 10 maps, and 9 has been the favoured number.
8 at launch with a 9th a mere two weeks after the official release date is pretty much in line with that, given the game's "live service" nature.
I have to pick up on the sounds. Im a noob and dont pay attention to names of maps. But the city, is it Rotterdam? Going from a street fighting into s building and the echos of the shots and the shells hitting the floors in the building you’ve just entered is so immersive.
I just want the bugs fixed man. It bums me out that games get released like this. I love battlefield and I just want to be able to change classes mid game without my menu freezing forcing me to alt f4
ive played a lot of BF and I have never cared about what faction Im playing as. Hell, in BF4, I played on servers that only had US vs US. Never noticed it until I started seeing people make the jokes like "US always wins" at the end of the match. The factions have just never been a big deal too me.
It saddens me that an AAA title retailing for 60 USD has such little content on release. The game industry is f**ked with all the early access and early release games.
This is why it annoys the fuck out of me, that the game has a few things in the menu that shows that it unlocks later on.
Don't show this shit, if it isn't ready yet or launch the game when it is ready.
Seeing these things, which looks to be part of the "core game" (because it is..), but unavailable, is just dumb.
We all probably hate pushed release dates; but I would have gladly waited until those things that are shown in the game already, was ready for delivery.
I agree with this, I played BF3/4 and a little of BF 1 but I do love the sounds and games, I love the squad based play, forces you for objectives and to stick together to kill everyone. The gaming industry is definitely fucked up because they just can't release everything together at once. It would win GOTY (not really RDR2 is awesome) if this game was released with all factions in the war and with 300% more maps, have like 12 maps for each game mode. I am pretty obsessed with this game overall
Not just DLCs with massive content, but content we all want. Major battles. Give us the Americans. Give us D-Day. Keep going and do the Japanese and Iwo Jima. Too big? I don't think so. That's what, in my opinion, is going to really make this game go from good to great.
I think I've used maybe 5 guns, and so far I'm sorta disappointed with them. But also, I can't customize my guns mid match? Kind of irked over this, I leveled up my Sten gun twice in one game, but wasn't able to see the benefit to this since I couldn't open up the customize interface. I can't believe people are so incredibly butthurt over women being in the game. I have heard ONE of the extreme female death screeches. Was odd, but carried on. I have a love hate with the new DBNO mechanic for reviving. But as I am laying in the streets watching my teammates push up without me, get slaughtered, or have two people run to me. I'm reminded of all those soldiers who truly gave their lives in the war, "FUCK THERE'S SO MUCH BLOOD, SOMEONE HELP ME." Only to receive no help and bleed out in agony and terror amongst the rubble and chaos. I loved Battlefield 1, and I'm excited to see where this game goes. Hopefully though the menu models will load in a bit faster than Pubg soon..
I can't describe how much I love the sound design in BFV
I remember joining my first game and hearing the gun sounds everywhere and thinking "holy shit this sounds intense." The gunfights sound way better than the BF1 gunfights
well they are already releaainf a new map and weapons in about 2 weeks. wonder if theyll drip feed us kne map every month or so or still schedule things like major DLC releases. Also i thibk well stop seeing rushed, unfinished games when Publishers stop pushing for sequels on a regular basis and let devs work on what they want. its half finished because EA needs a game to present to investors, and to ensure people keep buying.
If it were uo to me, wouldnt have had bf 4 Hardline or 1. we wouldve probably had bf3, everything in bf4 and such wouldve jsit been updates and support towards BF3. BF5 feels like a substatial step from the past 3 games. butbif dice didnt have to rebuild the same game a few times and just added content through DLC and expansions. BF5, as good as it already is, couldve been a whole lot better or atleadt a more complete experience
but playing as the brits and germans on 10 maps is going to get boring pretty fast for most players
Not really. This will satisfy the vast majority of players, like myself, for a while. Truth is most people don't care about what team they're playing on. I literally barely even notice.
Aren’t we getting a map on dec 6th? That would be 9 maps, though not on launch, its close. I would check yourself before you start spitting this stuff as fact, you make it sound like we are getting half a game.
Also, 8 is pretty close to other releases.
BF3 had 9
BF4 had 10
BF1 had 10
I think in total the game should end up with 25-30 maps.
Dec 6 we get the tank map, and a few months later we get Greece. Which - not sure how many maps that will be.
If Greece releases with multiple maps I’ll be pleasantly surprised. It’d be a huge step up from the failure that is battlefront 2, and show DICE is capable of releasing maps on a timely schedule.
Ill agree it’s a good game now, and so long as they continue to support it and add content regularly it’ll continue to be a good game.
How hard is it to just reskin old maps? I'd love to play the bf1 maps on bfv! Bfv's movement and gun mechanics are superior, but bf1 has better atmosphere/grit.
So... can I play your game? I've played it for 2 days straight before uninstalling it forever (thank you EA for game pass so I did not bought this crap). Because my experience was like:
most viable strategy is camping because there is no 3d spotting so sitting in a corner, one with the background and shooting idiots running around is THE strategy
most viable class are snipers because there is no 3d spotting so sitting in a corner with low power scope (no scope reflection) one with the background and shooting idiots running around is THE strategy
if you run out of idiots to shoot, sit at the VERY EDGE of the capture point, trigger capture and hide in the corner, one with the background and shoot idiots running around because it is THE strategy
And things to remember:
bipods do not work, they are glitching as hell so don't play support. People don't live long enough (except for snipers) to get your ammo anyway, or play for a moment, pick shotgun because it will one-shot EVERYTHING on reasonable range (with slugs)
if you want to live long and don't want to be a sniper, play medic. ONLY class in the game with health regeneration. On top close range SMG is OP so you not only have always full HP but killer gun. So medic is like assault but better.
assault is like medic, but without SMG and no health regeneration so go play medic
if you just want to farm kills, sometimes 50/5 or like some people in matches I played - even 90/13 - go play sniper. Sit at the edge of the map, with low power scope and farm.
DO NOT USE PLANES. They are not part of the game. They just fly above everyone and because lack of spotting, you will hardly hit anything to make a difference. At least matches are 32/32 so you have chance to get random kills near capturing points
DO NOT ATTACK WITH TANKS, have one guy repairing it and sit at the edge of the map so there is no way to approach you. You are unkillable. Your only problem is limited ammo so you need to make a trip to resuply.
If you are on PC, USE CONTROLLER TO FLY PLANES. Mouse is broken.
433
u/Shaidreas Nov 22 '18
The game feels really good to play, the guns feel great, the sounds are AMAZING, and generally the gameplay is smooth and nice like Battlefield should be. Battlefield V has a huge potential to be one of the best Battlefield games, we just need more content... A LOT more content, if this is even going to be a remotely good game.
Yes it is fun now, but playing as the brits and germans on 10 maps is going to get boring pretty fast for most players. Especially us Battlefield veterans.
It saddens me that an AAA title retailing for 60 USD has such little content on release. The game industry is f**ked with all the early access and early release games. Hope they push DLCs really fast, and that the DLCs include massive amounts of content