Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Dennisz125 said:

 

That video description made me cringe, let's all pretend Battlefield ever was about historical accuracy and realism lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got a mod idea for the game already: ww2 Bad Company: The Return of The Filthy 13.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After BF4 I stopped buying BF games, I'm sticking with SQUAD &  Post Scriptum!

 

 

"Oh Look BF1 re O.o skinned into BF5 with new sounds"

                EA can keep there garbage :P

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

This old man started with BF1942 which led to Desert Combat and Forgotten Hope. I didn't like anything after BF2,

Edited by CC-Marley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go again, First Blood part 5.  Ill reserve judgement til I play the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like shit. Glad we have Post Scriptum and Hell Let Loose!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, banOkay said:

That video description made me cringe, let's all pretend Battlefield ever was about historical accuracy and realism lol

 

This makes Call of duty ww2 and BF1 look like realisitc representation of thier respective wars in comparison to BF 5.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

There's a difference between realism and authenticity. While old CoD and Battlefield games were never realistic, they always kept the setting and aesthetics grounded in reality. Of course both series have thrown that out the window for pandering purposes, but pretending like there's not a distinction is silly.

Edited by google "chemtrails"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, google "chemtrails" said:

There's a difference between realism and authenticity. While old CoD and Battlefield games were never realistic, they always kept the setting and aesthetics grounded in reality. Of course both series have thrown that out the window for pandering purposes, but pretending like there's not a distinction is silly.

Sure, but authenticity doesn't add anything to Battlefield. I understand it matters in a realistic game because people want immersion and silly looking models break that. However, in a highly unrealistic arcade shooter there will be no immersion anyway, authenticity or not. So why does it matter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, banOkay said:

Sure, but authenticity doesn't add anything to Battlefield. I understand it matters in a realistic game because people want immersion and silly looking models break that. However, in a highly unrealistic arcade shooter there will be no immersion anyway, authenticity or not. So why does it matter?

why bother setting it in WW2 at all? What's the point? People would like to have the assets in a game reflect the setting, having cartoon characters running around ruins it for many. There WAS immersion in games like Battlefield Vietnam and WaW, even if it wasn't full on hyper realism. If there was a guy with a lightsaber on the cover of 1942, it wouldn't make any sense. It's a cynical move by the devs. I guess they think having a bionic woman on the cover of their ww2 game will appeal to a larger audience. I don't buy these AAA titles anymore so my opinion might not count for much, but do we really need every game to look like Fortnite now?

Edited by google "chemtrails"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, google "chemtrails" said:

why bother setting it in WW2 at all? What's the point? People would like to have the assets in a game reflect the setting, having cartoon characters running around ruins it for many. There WAS immersion in games like Battlefield Vietnam and WaW, even if it wasn't full on hyper realism. If there was a guy with a lightsaber on the cover of 1942, it wouldn't make any sense. It's a cynical move by the devs. I guess they think having a bionic woman on the cover of their ww2 game will appeal to a larger audience. I don't buy these AAA games anymore so my opinion might not count for much, but do we really need every game to look like Fortnite now?

BF:V came out 14 years ago, times have changed. Battlefield is not immersive, no matter how authentic the setting could be. EA has tried milking more money out of their games for years. DLCs are too much work and split the community, nobody cares about BF1 weapon skins because you hardly ever notice them, BF2 p2w loot crates were a complete failure. EA sees games like Fortnite and PUBG doing well, they decide to drop premium + DLCs and ramp up the customization options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2018 at 2:57 PM, PR.IT Aragorn89 said:

-No Season Pass

I remember something years ago about DICE saying “We don’t ever want to charge for our maps and insisted to EA that this attitude was crucial when it came to keeping our community happy and playing together”.

Watch how long that lasts.

 

How people support terrible games like any new AAA titles and give them more money to half-assed put together a rehash of last year's model is beyond me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, banOkay said:

BF:V came out 14 years ago, times have changed. Battlefield is not immersive, no matter how authentic the setting could be. EA has tried milking more money out of their games for years. DLCs are too much work and split the community, nobody cares about BF1 weapon skins because you hardly ever notice them, BF2 p2w loot crates were a complete failure. EA sees games like Fortnite and PUBG doing well, they decide to drop premium + DLCs and ramp up the customization options.

All of these are terrible practices that only reaffirm my point about them being cynical, money grubbing devs/publishers. (Also I was thinking of BC2 Vietnam when I mentioned it)

Edited by google "chemtrails"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading the description of Grand Operations, how it works in this article: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gaming/features/battlefield-5-preview-release-date-gameplay-details-everything/

 

This is the kind of idea I was suggesting for a mode in Squad and here it is showing up in BF.  The match takes days in game world and each day is a different map and Objectives and depending how you do on day one: map one effects how the battle over days unfolds and who wins, and who manages assets the best with limited resources.  Interesting how this idea for fps games is being implemented.  Will this show up in HLL and Bloody Seventh and Squad?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has made me realize we must move away from supporting AAA developers like this and stand under companies with not as much money or resources but so much more integrity and passion for their product. HLL and PS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/25/2018 at 8:35 PM, XRobinson said:

I got a mod idea for the game already: ww2 Bad Company: The Return of The Filthy 13.  

There was a leak a few months ago stating the next Battlefield game was in WW2. But the Battlefield game after that will return to the Bad Company series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, JMoo said:

There was a leak a few months ago stating the next Battlefield game was in WW2. But the Battlefield game after that will return to the Bad Company series.

BadCompany in WW2 setting or other setting?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/27/2018 at 5:41 AM, banOkay said:

Sure, but authenticity doesn't add anything to Battlefield. I understand it matters in a realistic game because people want immersion and silly looking models break that. However, in a highly unrealistic arcade shooter there will be no immersion anyway, authenticity or not. So why does it matter?

I agree, it's not like EA/Dice are trying to market a title as an authentic WW II milsim, and then stuffing it with unrealistic arcade mechanics and game play ** cough Post Scriptum cough **

 

Battlefield is and has been a run-n-gun type romp of vastly more dynamic game play, that could be played with teamwork/coordination in community scrim/match settings or lone wolfing in pubs.  It's intended to be fun and engaging, not steeped in authentic or realistic immersion.  I think it's silly for anyone to expect those in Battlefield.

 

I've skipped everything from EA/Dice after BF4.  So I'm waiting to see what state it's in on release, and then will likely pick it up after anything potentially game breaking has been fixed.  With the new mechanics they're introducing, the game sounds like it could be a blast to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel pity for anyone who can't immerse themselves in an unrealistic experience. That would mean you have no imagination whatsoever. 

I have a feeling that it's not truth, and instead is some sort of internet toughguy-ism. We're playing video games. Lighten up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The BF series is and has been  highly entertaining, but communities are dead in  BF1 and will be in BF V.
No real dedi servers and admin tools , can't rent your server for your community. Whats the point. R and G like headless chickens.
It had its charms.  Now its more  chaos and confusion and rarely team  and PTFO. Not worth $CDN 80.00 plus  bucks for me. I wish them well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The crossover point is when video games become indistinguishable from reality....it becomes reality an addition to what it is now but more.... example the holodeck in Star Trek; you enter it and it is real as going outside the door of your house or from outside into your house....so, have the computer AI make a historical representation of the year 1942 and tell your AI it must be authentic, no cell phones, modern tech, women in roles they didn't do, fantasy stuff....and that is what video games are made of; the real experience of 1942 not a make believe world of fantasy non real representation of war in a period where everything in it is as false as a penguin walking on the Moon without a spacesuit. Oh please tell us the year when the crossover point happens!

Edited by XRobinson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dunno. the improved movement and grand operations have intrigued me. idc about female characters in the game, i understand everyones issue with 'forced diversity' or whatever but its frankly getting exhausting hearing everyone bitch at each other on both sides of that debate. its a video game, if you look there for historical accuracy and to learn about history, weve got bigger issues at hand. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/24/2018 at 2:08 PM, IRONXBAY said:

i dunno. the improved movement and grand operations have intrigued me. idc about female characters in the game, i understand everyones issue with 'forced diversity' or whatever but its frankly getting exhausting hearing everyone bitch at each other on both sides of that debate. its a video game, if you look there for historical accuracy and to learn about history, weve got bigger issues at hand. 

This game was marketed as an "authentic" game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×