Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Battlefield V

Options
1…434445464749»

Comments

  • Options
    #1442
    Homelander
    Registered Users Posts: 4,364 ✭✭✭Homelander


    The later maps for BFV are amazing. I'm back again playing a good bit of the Pacific maps, which are A1, and Provence is a classic as well.

    Most of the original maps that shipped with the game are resoundingly average, several of them are even poor. There's a few I don't mind as much, but generally speaking I try stick with Pacific/Provence/Panzerstorm as much as possible....maps that have a real Battlefield feel to them.

    I'd say Dice got a fair rap on the knuckles over the game in general. Seems to have only sold about half what BF1 did. Sold decently all the same, but they had been banking on it selling a hell of a lot more.

    BF1 is hands down the better game though. Excellent maps, amazing design, it's even visually stronger than BFV.


  • Options
    #1443
    SharpCoder
    Registered Users Posts: 359 ✭✭SharpCoder


    Both BF1 and BFV were terrible in my eyes, BF4 had a shaky launch and the chore of fixing it was given to DICE LA and they really produced starting the community project and the CTE program that really helped BF4 in the end.

    Hopefully they will move away from this world war 1,2 setting and just continue were bad company 2 left off, russia invading america.


  • Options
    #1444
    Homelander
    Registered Users Posts: 4,364 ✭✭✭Homelander


    I think it's fair enough if you didn't like BF1, but it's far from a terrible game. Excellent maps, great design, good balance, took brave steps. Sold by the bucket load, great critical reception.

    BFV by comparison was a mess, chaotic identity, poor maps, weak design, etc. Sold way less copies, and critically less well received.


  • Options
    #1445
    Akrasia
    Registered Users Posts: 22,242 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Homelander wrote: »
    The later maps for BFV are amazing. I'm back again playing a good bit of the Pacific maps, which are A1, and Provence is a classic as well.

    Most of the original maps that shipped with the game are resoundingly average, several of them are even poor. There's a few I don't mind as much, but generally speaking I try stick with Pacific/Provence/Panzerstorm as much as possible....maps that have a real Battlefield feel to them.

    I'd say Dice got a fair rap on the knuckles over the game in general. Seems to have only sold about half what BF1 did. Sold decently all the same, but they had been banking on it selling a hell of a lot more.

    BF1 is hands down the better game though. Excellent maps, amazing design, it's even visually stronger than BFV.

    As someone who works for a software company, It's pretty obvious that DICE were given some unreasonable deadines to release a game that was nowhere near complete. Games with lots of feaures 'Coming soon' that of course get sent to the back of the development queue when the inevitable gameplay breaking bugs are discovered (inevitable when a game is released because it's 'good enough' rather than finished

    DICE seem to think they can release a rockstar level level game with the development schedule of a call of duty game

    BF1 could easily have lasted another year if that is what it took to get BFV up to scratch, but the board room was all about keeping the promises they made to their investors instead of delivering a stable and high quality product to the existing userbase.

    I feel really sorry for the game designers, developers and testers, all of whom probably had a really good game in development until the rug was pulled from underneath them by a corporate decision that slipping deadlines was worse than delivering a half arsed product.


  • Options
    #1446
    SharpCoder
    Registered Users Posts: 359 ✭✭SharpCoder


    Akrasia wrote: »
    As someone who works for a software company, It's pretty obvious that DICE were given some unreasonable deadines to release a game that was nowhere near complete. Games with lots of feaures 'Coming soon' that of course get sent to the back of the development queue when the inevitable gameplay breaking bugs are discovered (inevitable when a game is released because it's 'good enough' rather than finished

    DICE seem to think they can release a rockstar level level game with the development schedule of a call of duty game

    BF1 could easily have lasted another year if that is what it took to get BFV up to scratch, but the board room was all about keeping the promises they made to their investors instead of delivering a stable and high quality product to the existing userbase.

    I feel really sorry for the game designers, developers and testers, all of whom probably had a really good game in development until the rug was pulled from underneath them by a corporate decision that slipping deadlines was worse than delivering a half arsed product.

    Yeah but even software companies can work with release cycles, multiple channels etc, release frequently or do as activision does, have multiple studios work on cod games simultaneously so it looks like they're done quick but not really, like treyarch is making a cod game during infinity wards cod game lifespan, and vice versa. Dice had the chance to do this with the formation of DICE LA, like they went quiet after fixing BF4, and now we hear vance zampella has taken over the studio whie already running respawn.

    BF1 did well off the back of other great Battlefield titles, but punters weren't so quick to get caught that way with BFV and the numbers speak for themselves. We have been asking for it to go back to modern or at least a return to bad company and dice keep saying they're confused why we even liked bad company? How can a company have become so disconnected with it's fanbase.

    Some people reckon the next port of call for Battlefield is a Vietnam outing, would you buy it? Whats your ideal Battlefield 6 outing?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1447
    fergus1001
    Registered Users Posts: 2,625 ✭✭✭fergus1001


    SharpCoder wrote:
    Some people reckon the next port of call for Battlefield is a Vietnam outing, would you buy it? Whats your ideal Battlefield 6 outing?


    battlefield 3 remastered


  • Options
    #1448
    Homelander
    Registered Users Posts: 4,364 ✭✭✭Homelander


    SharpCoder wrote: »

    BF1 did well off the back of other great Battlefield titles, but punters weren't so quick to get caught that way with BFV and the numbers speak for themselves.

    BF1 sold incredibly well because it was a great game. Players liked it, critics liked it. Fair enough, as I said already, if you didn't like it, there are people out there who didn't like BF4 or BF3 either.

    Personally I didn't like BF3 and barely played it, I don't think it's bad I just didn't gel with it after BF2.

    But BF1 absolutely wasn't a bad game, it was the total opposite and no-one got 'caught out'.

    As far as I am aware it's the best selling of all the Battlefield titles. BFV sold poorly by comparison because it just wasn't that great a game, players and critics were in broad agreement even though many still 'liked' it.


  • Options
    #1449
    Blazer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,418 ✭✭✭✭Blazer


    As a long time Battlefield user BF1 and V sucked.
    Visually they looked beautiful but absolutely mindbogglingly boring.

    We need a return to Bad Company 2/BF2/BF3 style play.
    Commander and squad integrations , make use of squad leaders again..no more of spawning on any bloody joe soap.
    Forget Single player campaigns and put that time towards multiplayer.
    Gadgets and accessories are ridiculous at this stage...simply it down and spread the promotions out.


  • Options
    #1450
    SharpCoder
    Registered Users Posts: 359 ✭✭SharpCoder


    The progression and unlocking and even as bad as the battlepacks were in even BF4, they were far better than the crap that came in BF1 and BFV.

    BFV was a better game than BF1, in many aspects but just wasn't enough to get me coming back to it.

    The squad play was great in prior titles and the flow of games was just more chaos and enjoying.

    The CQC battle down the alleys of the market map, the jumping off the peak in damavand, was just epic and fun.

    Medics were made redundant in the newer titles, they took in a poor mans battle royale and fort like building system that was just tedious and was mostly ignored.

    Gone was the fun aspect of the game, partnering up with battlefield friends, the crazy levelutions and Dino and megladon stuff, or even the grind that was required to get the bow, the witty banter of bad company characters, the destruction, the fantastic mortar use and gilly suits actually on snipers.

    I could go on about i'll just leave it at that.


  • Options
    #1451
    Akrasia
    Registered Users Posts: 22,242 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    SharpCoder wrote: »
    Yeah but even software companies can work with release cycles, multiple channels etc, release frequently or do as activision does, have multiple studios work on cod games simultaneously so it looks like they're done quick but not really, like treyarch is making a cod game during infinity wards cod game lifespan, and vice versa. Dice had the chance to do this with the formation of DICE LA, like they went quiet after fixing BF4, and now we hear vance zampella has taken over the studio whie already running respawn.

    BF1 did well off the back of other great Battlefield titles, but punters weren't so quick to get caught that way with BFV and the numbers speak for themselves. We have been asking for it to go back to modern or at least a return to bad company and dice keep saying they're confused why we even liked bad company? How can a company have become so disconnected with it's fanbase.

    Some people reckon the next port of call for Battlefield is a Vietnam outing, would you buy it? Whats your ideal Battlefield 6 outing?

    EA farmed out development of the Firestorm Battle royal to Criterion but the fact that it wasn't launched until way after the main title went live and had plenty of bugs and gameplay issues at launch indicates to me that the management team had really unrealistic timeframes for how long it takes to get a good quality game released

    COD titles manage to follow the annual release cycle by cutting corners massively on graphics, attention to detail and map design, things that Dice tend to pride themselves on. the BFV release screams at me that DICE were trying to get the details perfect but then got caught out on their release date which pissed off the Board who gave them an extension to fix the game breaking bugs and release it when it was 'good enough' rather than actually ready to release

    Valve and Rockstar are two perfect examples of studios with a long term outlook where they are happy to keep a game in development for months or years longer than expected if that is what is required to complete the vision of the game designers. With EA and Dice, the vision was obviously sacrificed over and over again in order to just get it done and out the door

    This is a false economy which I hope EA are starting to realise by giving DICE more time and resources to get BF6 finished propery

    I'm actually perfectly fine if they release a remastered BF3 as a stopgap to appease their board with a revenue stream to keep the investors ticking over until the main release.
    I would like them to upgrade the physics as well as the graphics while they're working on it, but the map design and gameplay and modes are already there so it should be possible to develop using contractors while allowing the core team to focus on building the totally new game


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1452
    Akrasia
    Registered Users Posts: 22,242 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Homelander wrote: »
    BF1 sold incredibly well because it was a great game. Players liked it, critics liked it. Fair enough, as I said already, if you didn't like it, there are people out there who didn't like BF4 or BF3 either.

    Personally I didn't like BF3 and barely played it, I don't think it's bad I just didn't gel with it after BF2.

    But BF1 absolutely wasn't a bad game, it was the total opposite and no-one got 'caught out'.

    As far as I am aware it's the best selling of all the Battlefield titles. BFV sold poorly by comparison because it just wasn't that great a game, players and critics were in broad agreement even though many still 'liked' it.

    BF1 was an incredibly atmospheric game that will be ranked as one of the most underrated FPS games of this decade

    As a total package, I paid full price for the full premium package and feel I got plenty of value for my money. In contrast with BFV i got it at a discount the week after the game was launched without premium, and I stll feel a little bit short changed

    Not financially, but in terms of broken promises and unrealised potental.


  • Options
    #1453
    Akrasia
    Registered Users Posts: 22,242 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Blazer wrote: »
    As a long time Battlefield user BF1 and V sucked.
    Visually they looked beautiful but absolutely mindbogglingly boring.

    We need a return to Bad Company 2/BF2/BF3 style play.
    Commander and squad integrations , make use of squad leaders again..no more of spawning on any bloody joe soap.
    Forget Single player campaigns and put that time towards multiplayer.
    Gadgets and accessories are ridiculous at this stage...simply it down and spread the promotions out.

    I think they need to bring back hardcore mode and for this mode to include only spawning on squad leaders

    I used to only play hardcore mode on BF3 or BF4. Was always a much more intense experience without having to constantly monitor red dots on a map


  • Options
    #1454
    DrSpongeBobz
    Registered Users Posts: 256 ✭✭DrSpongeBobz


    Need larger player base like MAG with 128 players on each side for the next Battlefield.64 player modes feel a bit small scale nowadays and the Dice devs and gotten worse at creating maps for conquest/breakthrough anyways.Let them do something new.


  • Options
    #1455
    MadYaker
    Registered Users Posts: 12,158 ✭✭✭✭MadYaker


    Still plenty of populated BF4 servers on PC.


  • Options
    #1456
    dreamers75
    Registered Users Posts: 20,558 ✭✭✭✭dreamers75


    8eM278r.jpg

    I play on these most nights, very good servers.


  • Options
    #1457
    omerin
    Registered Users Posts: 1,460 ✭✭✭omerin


    Went back to play V again after a long absence and while the game has improved, the amount of hacking is scandalous, seems to me that 1 in 3 games I log into has one and sometimes more. Mostly coming from you know where, Dice seem to have given up.
    I've reported one at the beginning, never heard anything back (not sure if that's the procedure?) They boasted during the game that they had been reported multiple times ......


  • Options
    #1458
    BlitzKrieg
    Registered Users Posts: 14,685 ✭✭✭✭BlitzKrieg


    omerin wrote: »
    Went back to play V again after a long absence and while the game has improved, the amount of hacking is scandalous, seems to me that 1 in 3 games I log into has one and sometimes more. Mostly coming from you know where, Dice seem to have given up.
    I've reported one at the beginning, never heard anything back (not sure if that's the procedure?) They boasted during the game that they had been reported multiple times ......

    Thats a shame. I've been tempted to go back to BFV a few times but I tried it via the EA subscription and I opted to not renew that over how poor the rest of the games on show with that service had gotten (not BFV itself, but Anthem etc really soured me on the service) so I need to convince myself to pick it up cheap if I'm gonna play it again. Hearing cheating is widespread puts me off making that 2nd purchase.


  • Options
    #1459
    DrSpongeBobz
    Registered Users Posts: 256 ✭✭DrSpongeBobz


    The hacking on pc is out of control.I see the same players and cheaters every day on pc.Played it for about two months over the summer and am over it again


  • Options
    #1460
    dreamers75
    Registered Users Posts: 20,558 ✭✭✭✭dreamers75


    DrSpongeBobz wrote: »
    The hacking on pc is out of control.I see the same players and cheaters every day on pc.Played it for about two months over the summer and am over it again

    The servers posted above have a very low tolerance for cheaters, very well admined.


  • Options
    #1461
    ewj1978
    Registered Users Posts: 1,931 ✭✭✭ewj1978


    Updated my monitor to a 27" 144hz 2k screen. turned back on BFV for the first time in ages and had a blast. Used to love playing the HC servers on previous games and I remembered reading that they'd enable it now on BFV.
    First server i tried was great. 64 player mayhem. excellent fun for a few hours. Unfortunately that server isn't active now and the others are ****e. Why have a HC server with maps and planes/tanks enabled?
    IMHO should just be infantry.
    Ah well still enjoying it. Getting over 70fps in massive firefights with everything on Ultra. Such a pretty game.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1462
    Homelander
    Registered Users Posts: 4,364 ✭✭✭Homelander


    I have to say as much as I thought BFV was the biggest disappointment out of probably any of the main games, I still play it a lot.

    Doesn't mean it wasn't disappointing, but it really is a solid game all the same as they go. Just checked Origin there, I have 206 hours in it.

    I play Recon, and I know people complain about the amount of snipers in the game, but from checking BFV stats apparently I am in the top 5% of players for Recon K/D, and top 9% for general K/D.

    I also have dog**** aim, but I think it goes to show that no matter what game you play*, no matter how bad your aim is, game sense and positioning are really so much more important than basic mechanical skill.

    Only ever play Breakthrough though. Once I got used to it, I find conquest a bit dull. Prefer when it's a 32v32 chaotic skirmish along the frontline.

    *obviously this would be far less true in games like CSGO or Valorant, but you know what I mean


  • Options
    #1463
    gimli2112
    Registered Users Posts: 13,407 ✭✭✭✭gimli2112


    was just talking to my brother yesterday about how we fought a tiger tank for a control point, winning the game for our team right at the death. had some great fun with this and played a good bit but then just stopped and never went back, same with BF1 but still got my money's worth imo.
    I lost my mind with BF4 and sunk tonnes of hours into it, never very good but god I loved it. BF4 was weird in that I don't think any game annoyed and thrilled me so much.


  • Options
    #1464
    ewj1978
    Registered Users Posts: 1,931 ✭✭✭ewj1978


    loaded her up for a break from COD.
    game felt slow and stodgy. Thought I'll get back to the hang of it. Was getting 145fps but it just still felt like I was running through treacle.
    Messed around with the FOV settings and bam. Lightening quick again. Had changed my screen( now a 144hz 2k) since the last time I'd played and it needed the FOV to max for it to run.

    Goddamn its such a beautiful game.
    Still hate the fact that planes take 30million hits to die.


  • Options
    #1465
    Shlippery
    Registered Users Posts: 2,255 ✭✭✭Shlippery


    Yea, i'm surprised how much COD has pulled me in after the end of support for BFV. Almost feel dirty.
    Can't wait to get back into the series. I've still fond memories from BF2 which kicked off my interest in PC Gaming back in the day!

    I enjoyed a lot about BFV, but it seems the game was cursed/tainted with bad luck/decisions from release til the end of its days, which is a shame as there was so much potential there.


Advertisement