Jump to content

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, Dennisz125 said:

This game was marketed as an "authentic" game.

I guess someone somewhere gets to decide what the word 'authentic' means and you get no say....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Dennisz125 said:

This game was marketed as an "authentic" game.

Really, where was that? That would be a big change from all other Battlefield games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dennisz125 said:

This game was marketed as an "authentic" game.

Funny, I could have sworn the executive producer for DICE and Battlefield stated...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Dennisz125 said:

This game was marketed as an "authentic" game.

yeah, show me how exactly BFV was marketed as 'authentic' lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Dennisz125 said:

This game was marketed as an "authentic" game.

Battlefield has never been authentic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Guan_Yu007 said:

Battlefield has never been authentic.

What is the proper definition of 'authentic' and what is your definition?  Authentic could just mean that a game has elements that represent as much as possible in a game world everything that was in that time and period it seeks to represent, but does not add to it elements that were not in said period of representation.  Right? So, if you judge BF1942 by this logic then it was an authentic game?

Edited by XRobinson

Share this post


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

What is the proper definition of 'authentic' and what is your definition?  Authentic could just mean that a game has elements that represent as much as possible in a game world everything that was in that time and period it seeks to represent, but does not add to it elements that were not in said period of representation.  Right? So, if you judge BF1942 by this logic then it was an authentic game?

So basically you want to move the goal post so that 1942 passes it but V doesn't. 1942 had entire armies using weapons not used by that faction at all and completely wrong weapons for classes. If you move the authenticity goal this low then V passes it too - there's nothing in the game that wasn't there in the time period.

 

I wish people just stopped being upset about this, we're getting another Alpha test next week.

 image.thumb.png.76e82e2adb1f711d71238c05b3de6e6e.png

Edited by banOkay

Share this post


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

So basically you want to move the goal post so that 1942 passes it but V doesn't. 1942 had entire armies using weapons not used by that faction at all and completely wrong weapons for classes. If you move the authenticity goal this low then V passes it too - there's nothing in the game that wasn't there in the time period.

 

I wish people just stopped being upset about this, we're getting another Alpha test next week.

 image.thumb.png.76e82e2adb1f711d71238c05b3de6e6e.png

I'm not so sure that is correct to say entire factions using weapons not used by that faction. Give example?

 

On Wiki:

Weapons in Battlefield: 1942 are class-locked and faction-locked. The equipment for a class is known as a kit, and there is no way to change individual weapons in the kit . A kit is dropped upon death, and other players can pick up their kit. There are five classes in total:

    Assault: Uses LMGs and automatic rifles.
    Engineer: Uses battle rifles (mostly bolt-action, some semi automatic rifles).
    Anti-Tank: Uses an anti-tank launcher.
    Medic: Uses submachine guns.
    Scout: Uses sniper rifles (all bolt action, and all come with scopes).

Between the factions, many of the weapons are also statistically identical. Some weapons for some reason feature left-handed bolts.

http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Battlefield:_1942

 

But you proved my point there is different views in what 'authentic' is and means to different people.

Edited by XRobinson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, XRobinson said:

I'm not so sure that is correct to say entire factions using weapons not used by that faction. Give example?

image.thumb.png.e3bebeb580b79fc8619e3b07d18cdc25.png

Share this post


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

image.thumb.png.e3bebeb580b79fc8619e3b07d18cdc25.png

Where did you get this from?  Is this for the game bf1942?  I seem to remember that when you played Russian on the Russian maps the Russians had their own mgs, and guns that only Russians had; that one Russian gun with the round bullet magazine holder on the Stalingrad map Machine_gun_DP_MON.jpg as wells as tanks and light armor vehicles, the even spoke Russian.  The German weapons were different from the Allies weapons ect...on the Battle of Briton map the Allies had all the aircraft of the British Allies and Germans had theirs.  All the factions had their own weapons on the maps modeled after those battles that took place there.

 

haha....did you even play bf1942?

Edited by XRobinson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, XRobinson said:

Where did you get this from?  Is this for the game bf1942?  I seem to remember that when you played Russian on the Russian maps the Russians had their own mgs, and guns that only Russians had; that one Russian gun with the round bullet magazine holder on the Stalingrad map 

Some of the kits had appropriate guns, but literally from the link you posted yourself above:

 

"The M1911 (just referred as "Colt") is the standard sidearm for all Allied forces. Its portrayal is highly inaccurate, shown as a double-action handgun, and firing from an eight round magazine."

"The Lee-Enfield No.4 MK I is the standard weapon for the US Army, British and Russian Engineer classes. A bayonet version is available in the expansion pack Battlefield 1942: The Road to Rome for the Allied Engineer classes. The US Army should be using the M1 Garand or M1 Carbine and the Russians should be using a Mosin-Nagant carbine."

"The Lee Enfield No.4 Mk.I(T) is the standard weapon for all Allied Scouts. This is highly incorrect, as it should only be available to British and Commonwealth soldiers; it also has a capacity of five rounds, half that of the real rifle. The American Scouts should instead be armed with scoped Springfield M1903 rifles and the Russian scouts should be armed with scoped Mosin-Nagant M91/30 rifles."

"The extremely rare Type 5, which never saw service, somehow replaces the equally incorrect Karabiner 98k as the standard weapon for the Japanese Engineer class. While it has the correct 10-round magazine capacity, it also has the very incorrect detachable magazine when it should be non-detachable and loaded with two 5-round Arisaka stripper clips."

"The M1918 Browning Automatic Rifle is the standard weapon for American, British, and Free French Assault classes. The Brits should be using the Bren as their main LMG and the French could use the FM 24/29 as they considered it superior to the BAR."

"The Panzerschreck is the standard weapon for all Axis Anti-Tank classes. While it's moderately logical for the Germans and Italians to use these weapons in the numbers they do (a better choice would be the Panzerfaust), things take a turn for the surreal when Japanese soldiers wield them during the Battle of Wake Island."

 

My last post about this, Battlefield never had authenticity. Look at any of the reviews too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

XRobinson i can appreciate your viewpoint and respect it, but this is a losing battle. put under a microscope, anybody could argue none of the BF games come across as 'authentic,' but that's ultimately the real issue. it depends on what power magnification you choose to use. who sets the standard for what 'authentic' is in this context? it's okay to have opposing viewpoints. i know people are gonna get defensive over the internet for literally nothing but that's how it is. some people are gonna like BFV, other's aren't and the world will just continue on spinning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Looks like a nice trailer, but then i remember how BF3 lived up to the hype those trailers created. :)

Just saying that people should get hyped about actual gameplay footage and maybe betas or demos, not trailers.

 

EDIT: I used to like BF3, up untill like a few months after release, i took me a bit to realise how lacking the gameplay was compared to BF2 back in the day.. (Map design, flag positions, useless unlocks instead of solid gameplay to keep the audiance playing)

Edited by Guan_Yu007

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/24/2018 at 4:45 AM, XRobinson said:

Just read an article on the game play, seems they got spies in this forum, because I see a lot of ideas mentioned here in the article.  Plus I knew it, back to WW2.  But I won't say told you so. :)

Actually even BF1 did seem to have some of the features we trying to push down to each ones throats here in late 2014 early -15.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/24/2018 at 4:57 AM, LaughingJack said:

totally agree Dennisz. does BF itself even know what it wants to be? this trailer cements in my mind how much of a joke BF has become.

 

May I correct you vanilla BATTLEFIELD HAVE BEEN ALWAYS A JOKE, period. 

 

Only really amazing game I do know from the DICE is the Pinball Illusions, it had amazing PC bleeper sounds....

Edited by WARti0k0ne -BG-

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

×