Battlefield 1 general discussion

Spear · 15-12-2015 1:23pm #1

It's early days yet, but it's on the way, so here's a thread for it.

Dice staff have confirmed the team has moved to it, now that Battlefront is out:

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/star-wars-battlefront-team-begins-shift-to-battlef/1100-6433075/

And EA in turn have said it will be a military setting once again.

Noxin · 16-12-2015 11:18am

Difficult to comment until we know what sort of military setting.

Current day, future or past? Hope they give us a hint of that soon at least.

Spear · 16-12-2015 12:22pm

I'd like a new setting. The Korean War has always had potential I reckon.

Akrasia · 16-12-2015 12:48pm

I reckon they'll go big on this one. They're free of the old gen consoles so the maps will be huge, but they'll still want to have close quarters battles and cooperative teamwork, so i reckon they'll do this

4 or 5 massive maps based on different themes, Desert, Snow, Urban, island, Jungle or whatever. Large numbers of players in each map 128+

within these maps, you will be able to spawn into different theatres each with multiple objectives but players will be able to move freely between these environments (but the distances would way be too far to walk)

Air vehicles would be able to operate freely throughout the entire map and there would be specfiic air targets like bunkers that can only be destroyed from the air but can be defended from the ground

Transport choppers would become vital for ferrying large volumes of troops from point to point and there would be escort aircraft whose role is to protect the choppers

This means the same map could have clusterf*ck zones where people who like spamming grenades could hang out, but the tactically minded players would be able to go wide to flank them and take objectives behind them to win the round. (if they had decent chopper support)

Noxin · 16-12-2015 12:52pm

Akrasia wrote: »

I reckon they'll go big on this one. They're free of the old gen consoles so the maps will be huge, but they'll still want to have close quarters battles and cooperative teamwork, so i reckon they'll do this

4 or 5 massive maps based on different themes, Desert, Snow, Urban, island, Jungle or whatever. Large numbers of players in each map 128+

within these maps, you will be able to spawn into different theatres each with multiple objectives but players will be able to move freely between these environments (but the distances would way be too far to walk)

Air vehicles would be able to operate freely throughout the entire map and there would be specfiic air targets like bunkers that can only be destroyed from the air but can be defended from the ground

Transport choppers would become vital for ferrying large volumes of troops from point to point and there would be escort aircraft whose role is to protect the choppers

This means the same map could have clusterf*ck zones where people who like spamming grenades could hang out, but the tactically minded players would be able to go wide to flank them and take objectives behind them to win the round. (if they had decent chopper support)

This sounds more like a military sim than their usual fps games. Almost like Planetside2. An interesting idea for sure but one hullofa project. I wouldn't say no to it though

Akrasia · 16-12-2015 1:10pm

Yeah, a mix between destiny and planetside but with real world physics weapons and vehicles in a real world setting.

I reckon EA have the skills and resources to build this game (it might take them about 6 months after release to actually get it to work properly, but after that, it's all good)

MajesticDonkey · 16-12-2015 1:15pm

We can all hope, but I sincerely doubt BF5 will be anything close to what you're saying.

psnKOB79LFC · 17-12-2015 1:59pm

Re above, i wouldn't care for 128 players in a map... being 1 of 64 itself means I have little involvement in the overall game even if MVP so what would the point in really playing the objective when you are 1 of 128 players. Expect to see 80 snipers on the map!

For me they need to look at:

1. Ensure PS4 players have better servers, servers to include DLC and premium maps as standard and servers that do so in random order. I had the way the DLC is fragmented... there is one custom server which uses all maps but they cant keep it running 24/7 because to get numbers they have to make if "official" when means they can only play standard maps in standard rotation. Once that is full he then has to change it to his rotation and once the numbers drop off he then has to go back to vanilla. What kind of crap is that.

2. Like the above, I wish there was a way the DLC didn't split the player base. Why not promote the game with 10 maps from launch and another 20 to go with premium only being €15 and same only rewarding you with camos and a few guns? Surely the extra sales of the games would outweight the individual DLC and premium sales. Also would keep the game alive longer further again improving the chances of making further base game sales.

3. In gameplay; nothing major, BF4 is a great game with brilliant variation but I'd like to see more classes along the lines of what Battlenonsense said.

limitedIQ · 17-12-2015 2:47pm

unfortunately I think they will go with the Battlefront approach. they will create a Platform that they will then use to sell maps packs and modes. Premium will be replaced by a season pass with year 1 dlc and year 2 dlc. so they sell the bare bones games for €60 , year 1 season pass €50 year 2 season pass €50

The game itself will amazing but will probably be shallow without the DLC.

dreamers75 · 20-12-2015 4:01am

Would bet my balls its Battlefield 2145

Icaras · 20-12-2015 4:51pm

More of the same, they wont do anything to rock the boat. Put out a basic game with DLC to follow and push premium hard. Its a shame but with no real console compition they have no need to change.

But what I would love is completly refocused single player, finish up with the linear go here, shoot this with that gun crap. Drop you in the middle of a map and give you a mission and you do it which ever way you want - like a more focued BF version of farcry.
Multiplayer - more of the same, I like the whole "leveloution" thing and would like to see it developed and fully destructable buildings ala BC2 would be nice.

TerrorFirmer · 21-12-2015 2:34pm

dreamers75 wrote: »

Would bet my balls its Battlefield 2145

Please god, not that. I would prefer Battlefield 214B.C. than another futuristic game, people say that the market was oversaturated with WW2 shooters but the current trend of futuristic shooters is dragging on even longer.

I'd love a new era - but I'd be happy enough with more of the same broadly speaking, BF4 was an excellent game overall.

Lord Nikon · 21-12-2015 6:00pm

I would like the idea of being able to purchase single maps, not like a DLC package like they had, because some DLC pack had maps people would never play.
Would be nice to have transport choppers, that could transport a tank or vehicle(with troops or not).
Something ingame, that you build up time or unlock time, you could use this time to play on maps that you haven’t purchased, or you don’t have the DLC for.
They should really bring the back being able to use commander on tablets and phones, as I think this was under-utilized the last time, and cut short too.

….and other stuff I can’t think of yet.

Oh, maybe have vehicles/weapons specific to the team, ie. Russian team, Russian only vehicles/weapons. ..etc

Blazer · 27-12-2015 8:59pm

Single maps would be a nightmare for servers...if a map was in the rotation for a server and you didn't have it you wouldn't be able to join.
Maybe after the disaster of Battlefront they might change their minds about DLC passes or at least offer a season pass at half the price.

Here's what I want.
Proper jets flying again--the bf4 ones are awful and the 30mm cannon is crap
Get rid of scope glint--it's a farce and catering to noobies. Enforce sniper caps if necessary.
Dump half the ranks for BF4 and widen the gaps between them much like BF2. When you ranked up in BF2 it was an achievement. Ever since BF2142 ranks have been meaningless.
Get rid of all accessories bar sights. Too many of these add-ons are ruining weapon stats and they spend half the time patching unintended perks back out.

EGriff · 05-01-2016 4:40pm

What about bad company 3?

Spear · 06-01-2016 10:44am

EGriff wrote: »

What about bad company 3?

I for one, would welcome that. I still prefer its destruction model and gunplay over the more recent ones.

Lord Nikon · 06-01-2016 11:55am

I would like some BFBC2 maps ported to BF4. Miss some of those maps.

EGriff · 06-01-2016 12:03pm

Spear wrote: »

I for one, would welcome that. I still prefer its destruction model and gunplay over the more recent ones.

Me too it was slightly more arcadey than the later ones, more fun IMO.

Dcully · 06-01-2016 6:25pm

Lord Nikon wrote: »

I would like some BFBC2 maps ported to BF4. Miss some of those maps.

I still play it, thriving community still, best BF game imo.

Lord Nikon · 06-01-2016 6:46pm

Dcully wrote: »

I still play it, thriving community still, best BF game imo.

I can reinstall it with the game key that came with it?

Dcully · 06-01-2016 7:06pm

Lord Nikon wrote: »

I can reinstall it with the game key that came with it?

Id imagine so, maybe you can add to steam or origin?
I have the game on both accounts, [long story] only installed on origin though.

Akrasia · 26-01-2016 9:55am

One feature that I would love to have in BF5 is dynamic communications between team-mates

In BF4 you can only talk to people in your same squad but that's stupid if you get into a tank driven by a team mate in a different squad, you should be able to talk directly to anyone in the same vehicle as you as if they were in your squad.

Also, there should be an option where you can communicate with players that are within a short distance of where you are on the map. If you're capturing a flag with a guy from a different squad, you should be able to call out enemies and coordinate with him.

In BF3 you could choose team or squad chat, but there was to much chatter on the team channel. BF5 should allow 2 communication optons
2. Dynamic (you can communicate with anyone in your squad or within 'earshot' of your player' and 'Squad only' for the teams who want to just play tactical squad gameplay without having to deal with the chatter from more casual/racist players

MajesticDonkey · 26-01-2016 11:01am

I'd also like the ability to "lock" vehicles...some sort of mechanic so you can get out to repair your tank and not worry about others just getting in and driving off.

Akrasia · 26-01-2016 11:53am

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

I'd also like the ability to "lock" vehicles...some sort of mechanic so you can get out to repair your tank and not worry about others just getting in and driving off.

If there was dynamic audio you could at least shout at them when they're fecking off with your tank

5uspect · 15-04-2016 10:52am

Unfortunately I really disliked BF4. I whinged so much about it that I stopped posting here because I'm sure you were all sick of me.

I reinstalled it (again) recently to see if all the patches have changed anything. Certainly the game is much smoother and less frustrating but it's still got many of the fundamental issues that irked me so much.

It's probably just me but the games art is ugly as hell. It's a classic example of great graphics terrible art design. That orange kill cam is probably the worst offender and only served to break immersion and highlight the janky player animations. The colour pallet was drab beyond reason, the textures were busy and noisy and the lighting was flat and weird. The BF3 supernova lighting was miles better. Just compare Caspian Border on both games. BF3 is lush, that initial gameplay trailer still impresses, whereas BF4's version looks like a noob got their hands on a tone mapper and made everything gray.

Just like BF3 destruction was gimped and levolution was laughable. Bring back the complete annihilation that BC2 allowed. BC2 allows for pitched battles between entrenched groups across local geometry like buildings. Punching holes or demolishing the building allows for these mini stalemates to become dynamic and a lot of fun. As a result maps had flow and clearly defined fronts. BF3/4 had kill corridor cluster****s. Destroying the central tower in Locker made no real difference.

They need to seriously revisit the levelling and unlocking system. Currently it's designed for ADHD kids who need to level up every couple of rounds and unlock pointless ****e. Why do I need to unlock a red dot for each weapon? Reduce the total number of weapons so that each feels unique and balance them fairly.

I also liked the gun play in BC2, it could be a bit clunky but the longer TTK makes more sense - especially when you're known for horrendously bad netcode (at least high tick servers help fix this).
If you have to add a head shot marker because people feel cheated there's something fundamentally wrong.

Death is cheap in BF4, there is too much emphasis on kdr instead of team play, and the map design only reinforces this behaviour. Too many time I died because of some randomer rather than an another player I was engaging. As above maps have no flow, no clear front(s), just chaos.

So I would like to see big changes in a new Battlefield, but I'm not getting my hopes up. I no longer have much time to play between work and family so I'm probably the completely wrong person to be moaning for change. (I do still have a blast with BC2 occasionally)

Anyway that's my grumpy 2c. I'll be staying away from any new game until it's dirt cheap, BF4, Hardline and Battlefront paint a direction I've no interest in following.

Dcully · 15-04-2016 1:09pm

Mostly agree with you but I hated the blue hue BF3 had, it was sickening infact.

Apart from the **** netcode when released [now very good] my biggest issue with the game and DICE in general is they seem to have forgotten how to make good maps, literally a handful id class as good maps among how many ? 25 + maps in BF4?

Ctrl Alt Delete · 15-04-2016 1:12pm

Rather than quote your post and fill up the thread 5uspect Im just going to 110% agree with what you said.

I've been a BF player since 1942 (racking up thousands of hours across all the different games) but BF4 is the first of them in the series that I stopped playing around the 3-400hr mark due to its horrible mechanics and whats generally referred to as "netcode" and I have barely played it in the last 12 months at all.

Given that the game was released at the end of 2013 and still today on the the Battlelog forums you have massive threads moaning about hit reg, out of region players (more of a console problem) and general lag and framerate issues says all you need to know about what Battlefield 5 will become.

Am done with the Battlefield series

MajesticDonkey · 15-04-2016 4:26pm

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

Given that the game was released at the end of 2013 and still today on the the Battlelog forums you have massive threads moaning about hit reg, out of region players (more of a console problem) and general lag and framerate issues says all you need to know about what Battlefield 5 will become.

For the record, I don't have any of those issues at all, and neither do most of the people I play with. The Battlelog forums are not too far of 4chan. People like to whine.

Ctrl Alt Delete · 15-04-2016 4:57pm

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

For the record, I don't have any of those issues at all, and neither do most of the people I play with. The Battlelog forums are not too far of 4chan. People like to whine.

You know funny thing was I didn't either until patch number 4 or 5.

If you have never gotten insta killed then your lucky. I got tireless enjoyment out of going from full health to dead instantly.

My connection sure ain't the problem I've 240mb down and all the ports open.

But if you have never seen it then you may be the problem (I kid

)

5uspect · 15-04-2016 5:48pm

It felt like I died of perpetual insta kill in BF4, I would be ploughing rounds into folks without effect and get clipped by a handgun across the map; less so with the current build mind.

I've a decent connection too (and my ping is always below 40ms) but for reasons I've tried to remedy I'm stuck using wifi for the final hop.
I don't seem to experience packet loss and in general I've a solid connection. But I'm not an edge case. Not everyone can have a fully wired connection to low latency servers. Why then are DICE insisting on chaotic and frenetic gun play as one of the few means to play the game? Short TTK and plenty of environmental cover just leads to camping where nobody wants to expose themselves by actually capping a point.

I'm the first to admit that I'm not a good player. I'm a filthy casual who probably can't aim for ****. But when I played previous games I could make myself useful and make an impact on the round. I was an antitank demon in previous games with sneaky land mines and well placed RPGs while in BF4 approaching a tank for those specific sweet spots always resulted in a OHK insta death from the gunner with his IR sights. Instead I resorted to sticking upto 5 RPGs into armour so at least I had some chance.

I can see BF5 continuing on full steam ahead with these same mechanics following the path they've been taking so far. I just can't.

Ctrl Alt Delete · 15-04-2016 5:52pm

Again 100% agree and while I hate to say it DICE have been evolving their games into Call of Duty type games to go after the massive user base of that.

Well I always had a suspicious idea that's what they were doing but Hardline confirmed it for me IMHO

MajesticDonkey · 15-04-2016 8:49pm

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

But if you have never seen it then you may be the problem (I kid )

You misinterpreted what I said

I used to have those issues constantly. I took about a 9 month break, and came back to BF4 a few months back. I would say I see the problems you mentioned 70-80% less frequently that I did previously.

TerrorFirmer · 19-04-2016 2:57pm

I also agree, I find a lot of the complaints I hear about BF4 are simply ones that I very rarely encountered. To me it was a fantastic game - not without issues - but I preferred it to Battlefield 3, which just never really grabbed me even though I wanted to like it after being such a massive fan of BF2.

I don't really like COD since the first Black Ops but Hardline really is absolutely nothing like that franchise. I didn't play as much Hardline as I did BF4 but it was a blast to play with some stellar maps and some of the new game modes were also phenomenal - forget the name of it but the one where you're doing laps in the cars was ace. Felt more like a Battlefield mod to me than a COD-wannabe in fairness if I had to level a slight critique at it.

Battlefield 5 broadly building on Battlefield 4 would be welcome in my camp, anyway. To me Battlefront was far more leaning towards a COD crowd.

Maximus Alexander · 19-04-2016 3:08pm

A modern version of BF1942 would be the mutt's nuts. I don't think any of the subsequent BF games have been as much fun as that was.

dreamers75 · 29-04-2016 11:12am

Fake, not fake...

Spear · 29-04-2016 11:18am

Eastern Front? As in back to WW2? That would be very welcome.

Edit: that was doing the rounds a few weeks ago, it's not new. Though not necessarily wrong either.

TerrorFirmer · 29-04-2016 1:53pm

If these images are to be believed, then it's not WW2, but modern-day.

US vs "Russian/Pan Asian coalition" - nothing new there. Don't mind but when I first heard "Eastern Front" I assumed it was WW2.

Maybe another developer will make a WW2 title for the series in the same way that Treyarch did with Call of Duty 3/World at War, or Visceral did with Hardline.

Either way it's incredibly long overdue.

Spear · 29-04-2016 2:24pm

Some of those DLC names seem odd to me, and contradictory, if not mutually exclusive. Some of them are modern day locations, and there's mention of a Titan in there. It could still fit a 2142 sequel, but the Eastern Front name has always been associated with WW2.

limitedIQ · 29-04-2016 3:39pm

haha they don't want German and Superiority in the same sentence

Spear · 29-04-2016 4:22pm

The URL on that planning sheet is a real one at least. It redirects to an EA page for the event in question:

http://origin-prod-c-summer2016.leap.ea.com/

SpannerMonkey · 29-04-2016 5:37pm

IGN reckoning its to be set in WW1 . either way its set to be revealed next week
http://ie.ign.com/articles/2016/04/29/battlefield-5-will-be-revealed-next-week
either that or WW2 would be awesome . a nice change from modern shooters which are all pretty much the same and a tad boring at this stage . although Verdun is already quite a good WW1 game

paul_booth_fan · 30-04-2016 2:15pm

I'm hoping that That "Fallen Dragon" DLC list is just a template type thing, otherwise it already irritates me. 'Fan Favourite'.........seriously? Operation Locker??? At least the last time they pretended to listen to the community about what maps we wanted re-imagined. If they really want an infantry focused map, why not Propaganda?

Riesen_Meal · 30-04-2016 2:42pm

I wonder will it hit different time periods throughout the game?

As in - have a part set in 1942, Vietnam, the "Modern Era" one currently in BF3 and 4 and a 2142 future section?

It would be very difficult to pull off the whole game changing time periods but hey they could be trying for a "please everyone" approach...

GottaGetGatt · 30-04-2016 6:17pm

World War 1 weapons are all mainly bolt action though so probably wont be set there.More so WW2

SpannerMonkey · 30-04-2016 6:42pm

GottaGetGatt wrote: »

World War 1 weapons are all mainly bolt action though so probably wont be set there.More so WW2

ya thought the same . ww2 would be class . there hasnt been a big budget ww2 FPS game in years

Noxin · 01-05-2016 2:25pm

Finally we get more info on the game. Long overdue but can't wait to find out what it will be.

MiskyBoyy · 02-05-2016 12:50am

Bring on the WW2

ktulu123 · 02-05-2016 4:34pm

Would welcome Bad Company 3, 2145 or a WW2 game. Hopefully they haven't just continued on in the same vein as BF4. 4 is a good game now, but took a long time to get there and we don't need another "modern warfare" set game.

BlitzKrieg · 03-05-2016 3:44pm

I've been spoilt by war thunder too much for a world war 2 game to really excite me and there are so many issues that just make me think it'll be a disappointment honestly.

I'd like to see a much more in depth flight model and tank model in any game of world war 2 that uses vehicles but I honestly dont expect it from Battlefield.

I mean I loved 1942 but going back to it the weapon dynamics of the tanks is so wrong and bland its a very offputting. I'd like to see the use of different types of ammo like apcr and heat in an updated world war 2 battlefield. But truthfully the amount of detail I'd like them to go into with the vehicles really means that vehicles and aircraft would need to become classes of their own with a huge variety of upgrades and model varients rather then random vehicles you jump into on the map.

But I know that goes against DICE's battlefield philosophy so I am not getting excited if it is world war 2.

The sci fi setting has suddenly become very crowded and the modern setting tired so I'd really hope they have something really interesting gameplay wise.

Though I did skip battlefield: hardline, it just never gelled the whole battlefield dynamic in a cop vs robber setting, it was just too *american* in its notion of way too over armed police for me (and this is a guy who had no problem playing american soldiers in all the war games.) So maybe my love for the series is simply in decline naturally.

Varik · 03-05-2016 5:31pm

After seeing the new COD trailer there's a part of me that thinks that BF and COD will be in sync for this, really would love another WW2 game.

Vehicles already had their own unlocks (limited compared to war thunder but a lot more than the earlier BF games had for even infantry) and at least 1 additional ammo type for most large calibre but they could really expand it.

SpannerMonkey · 03-05-2016 7:21pm

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

I've been spoilt by war thunder too much for a world war 2 game to really excite me and there are so many issues that just make me think it'll be a disappointment honestly.

I'd like to see a much more in depth flight model and tank model in any game of world war 2 that uses vehicles but I honestly dont expect it from Battlefield.

I mean I loved 1942 but going back to it the weapon dynamics of the tanks is so wrong and bland its a very offputting. I'd like to see the use of different types of ammo like apcr and heat in an updated world war 2 battlefield. But truthfully the amount of detail I'd like them to go into with the vehicles really means that vehicles and aircraft would need to become classes of their own with a huge variety of upgrades and model varients rather then random vehicles you jump into on the map.

But I know that goes against DICE's battlefield philosophy so I am not getting excited if it is world war 2.

The sci fi setting has suddenly become very crowded and the modern setting tired so I'd really hope they have something really interesting gameplay wise.

Though I did skip battlefield: hardline, it just never gelled the whole battlefield dynamic in a cop vs robber setting, it was just too *american* in its notion of way too over armed police for me (and this is a guy who had no problem playing american soldiers in all the war games.) So maybe my love for the series is simply in decline naturally.

not rally fair to compare a game that is purely vehicle based to a fps . war thunder is massively detailed and i absolutely love it . im max rank in it with pretty much every tank unlocked . but its not the same kind of game as battlefield . battlefield is more forgiving and fast paced it doesnt need the same level of detail to be a great game or to be fun .

having said that im in the same boat as you the last battlefield game i really loved was BF3 . BF4 was a shambles and it took so long to put right i never got back into it . and hardline while fun for a bit got boring very fast . they need to do something very different for BF5

Battlefield 1 general discussion

Comments