Battlefield V

141_Oscar_Mike wrote: »

https://twitter.com/BFBulletin/status/999598190755278848

Nice.

Just need that Battle Royale reveal now and all will be well with the world.

As for those taking issue with the authenticity or realism in Battlefield V, I present Exhibit A:

https://twitter.com/NickCapozzoli/status/775034129175818240

Big fan of the series and the trailer left me massively disappointed. But then it's just a reveal trailer, I know myself its down to the multiplayer footage and then the beta test.

I've pre-ordered every BF that I can remember, so this won't be any different. New features sound cool, the change to bullet dynamics is welcome, and the "feel" of the array of content that will be available and customisation sounds great. Removal of premium pass obviously a good shout.

I thought the BF1 push of female soldiers and characters along with black soldiers and the likes felt peculiar and like a decision based reaction to issues that had surfaced in the buildup to that game for the developers and company to promote their point of view and inclusion. And that was cool.

I do think the concept art and visuals thus far, and it's not just the female characters or different races/ethnicity on show, but its starting to feel like its not taking itself serious. Battlefield has always been the choice for me over COD because it takes itself serious, its realistic and true to form. I did cringe at some of the stuff in the reveal trailer, but then I'm not going to get overly fussed about it.

Gameplay, balance, competitiveness and enjoyment. Those are the key to BF and always have been.

I was hoping this iteration would go back to the modern theatres of combat and weaponry, but when I heard it was going to be WW2 I was pretty excited, thinking back to the great multiplayer games I played in that setting, BF1942 being one of the main ones.

A girl....in a war....with a prosthetic arm....totally ruining the realism the series is known for...........










People accept a giant prehistoric shark that went extinct years ago popping up, but lose their marbles over a player being able to select a female character in a video game. but totally not sexism...........

Grumpypants wrote: »

A girl....in a war....with a prosthetic arm....totally ruining the realism the series is known for...........










People accept a giant prehistoric shark that went extinct years ago popping up, but lose their marbles over a player being able to select a female character in a video game. but totally not sexism...........

An easter egg that requires a long chain of activation that only a tiny percent of the player base ever got to see. Way to hyperbole.

Calling it sexist is just stupid. Now run along to Kotaku or Polygon or wherever else you pick this crap up from. Maybe it's not what people expected or wanted for a WW2 game? The same as people who don't like the last jedi aren't bloody sexist.

The trailer sucks. Hopefully the game is better. Dropping paid dlcs is a big plus in my book. It splits the player base up too much and I don't want to drop €150 for every new BF.

Judging by replies this far and just general reaction it seems there isn’t really a way to outline or describe a valid issue or concern without being labeled sexist or racist so will just let it be.

In terms of reference to the character with a bionic arm. It looks just a normal prosthetic limb to me that is fine. Fact it’s there in the first place yeah it’s clearly obscure. The characters are fictional as per the reveal info, and are supposed to be British paratroopers but are actually a mix of allied forces.

Look that’s all fine. They want to make their own story and characters that’s totally ok. I can’t say I’ve ever played a single player campaign in BF so likely won’t even impact me.

I’m just hoping for authenticity in the weapons and vehicles and hopefully a bit more freedom in terms of choice.

I didn’t like in BF1 how assault, a generic soldier class for years, was forced into only having cqb style machine guns and shotguns. Was nonsense. Thought BF1 destroyed the assault class

If I pick assault in this , I should be able to have a selection between various types and categories of weapons. If I play as an American soldier and somehow can’t have access to either a Thompson or m1 garand, that’s going to be pretty rubbish.

The campaigns in all of these multi player focused fps games are awful. I don't play them either. It's usually bad writing/story, bad acting with bad lip syncing, terrible ai and Michael Bay directed action sequences. No thanks.

BF was and is all about the multiplayer. If they get that right combined with the removal of the usual gouging 5 paid DLC's then it will be first BF I buy since BF3 despite my initial reservations based on that trailer.

super_furry wrote: »

That's pretty much where I stand. If they can do something to change the "spawn, run for two minutes to a firefight, get sniped, respawn," gameplay loop then I don't really care about much else.

That's what they're doing with the scarce ammo mechanic. Snipers get a clip of 2 before they have to go get more.

There is a risk that this turns the game into a running around like headless chicken sim though. But hopefully it encourages squad play

I'll take that business model any day over the old 1. Overwatch has the perfect business model for games imo.

€60 for the Standard Edition €80 for the Deluxe on pre-order on origin .

Pugzilla wrote: »

Game won't be out until October, so don't see how this is a problem?

First person shooters are much better with a mouse and keyboard.

I always hated flying vehicles with a mouse and keyboard in battlefield games though.

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

I would say a deadshot sniper with a semi-bionic prosthetic arm during the second war world is a pretty good indication that they're embracing a whole new direction in that regard in fairness.

Battlefield has always put fun before realism. In fact, Battlefield has never really been a 'realistic' game, just aesthetically so.

For example the gameplay in BF1 is not remotely 'realistic' in the context of WW1, but the skins, vehicles, battlefields and weapons are all pretty accurate/faithful.

A female solider with a bionic arm during WW2 is just really pushing it a bit much for a lot of people and it's not hard to accept it's a valid criticism of the reveal.

At this point I suppose we don't really know - the game may end up being overwhelmingly a pretty standard Battlefield game visually - but it's just a bad start for a lot of people to focus on these new visual departures and more whacky concepts instead of focusing on what's changed from a gameplay perspective.

The reveal trailer for BF1 was incredible - I remember the second I saw it knew I would be buying it on day one. After watching the reveal for BF:V I was just left feeling confused and unsure of what I'd even just watched.

The reveal was OTT, but I'd say they were just trying to cram in as much craziness into the clip as they could. In BF1 and BF4 there are gold plated vehicle skins but I have hardly ever actually seen them on the battlefield.

If the really crazy stuff like robot hands are very rare or very expensive then you'll hardly ever see them and they'll not affect your experience of the game.

And there'll almost certainly be a back to basics or realistic mode that turns off these skins completely.

Grumpypants wrote: »

But sure let's not get upset about "reality" being stretched in a game where you can magically heal from multiple bullet wounds by hiding behind a rock

Gameplay concessions versus aesthetic consistency. You can be fine with little concessions to make the game fun and still not like anachronistic or stupidly wacky things in your game. Sometimes one trumps the other. I skipped BF1 because I didn't like all the automatic weapons in the WWI setting.

Will there be dance emotes?

Evade wrote: »

I'm on PS4 and we don't have any of those more realistic games as far as I know.

https://store.playstation.com/en-ie/product/EP1662-CUSA03395_00-VERDUNPS40000000

The Specialist wrote: »

He might want to do a case study of how the Ghostbusters reboot panned out when its director tried a similar approach - genuine concerns were downplayed as the detractors just being sexists or women haters. We all remember what a box office smash that was as a result. Dice would do well putting a muzzle on him and his virtue signalling - do the talking with trailers and gameplay.

Feig, and all involved were coming from some previous success leading up to it. Whereas Dice have had a number of issue over the last few years, with BF1 player counts dying and Battlefront lootboxs.

Calhoun wrote: »

This is the big concern i have, BF1 died on its feet very fast. Myself and the mates that play it were big into operations and for EU servers past 11PM it became increasingly unlikely you would find anything worth playing on.

When you look at it objectively, there are what i would think a small hard core bunch of clowns who are completely against woman being in a game like this. Then there is everyone else voicing objection to it, its not the fact that there is a woman in it (the had woman in the russian expansion and there are many example of female combatants in WW2) but because the focus seemingly from the original launch trailer is on social justice and being on the "right side" of history. We have even had the same tired old crap of calling the player base, sexist and racist (LA dev who deleted his tweet about how people only want a white skin option for the game).

You have to wonder if that is the primary focus of the game (to make a political statement) then what are the missing in the actual core game mechanics.

At the end of the day though money talks, people can bitch and moan all the like but if they have a really big objection and they still purchase they are idiots.

Personally i am waiting and seeing, i went all in on the last one and bought the most expensive pack at launch (over 100 euro) and while i got a certain return on it the game for a long time was very buggy and there was no longevity to it.

Firstly for the cosmetics, Dice aren't going to back down as this is all they've got for additional monetization. People spend €10 on a skin or dance for Fortnite, and without lootboxes they're going to be selling them directly so they're going to be charging a decent amount for them.

The female characters in BF1 was class based, as you said the Russian had their sniper being a woman as well as sikh and black soldiers for certain class. You could easily do the same for V, and when appearance is set it helps for class identification.