Weekly BF

Worst Battelfield Ever?

«1
Cactus757
47 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
I've played every BF since BC1 and BF1 on Xbox. I was frustrated with the launch of BF4 but went on to have over 200 MVPs. This game is much worse off. I think it may kill the series unless another studio takes over. But then EA would just poison them too. It's time to move on from anything from EA. It's guaranteed to be unfinished and over hyped garbage.

Comments

  • hawkseye17
    577 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I do think that BFV is very low on the list. My list is from BF3 to BFV

    Best
    -BF1
    -BF4
    -BF3
    -BFV or BFH
    Worst
  • Meingott90
    38 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield Member
    I really dont understand, how hard was it to just make a remake of 1942.

    they lost sight of the basics and let a bunch of leftys make the major design decisions.

    Who the hell made the decision not to include the soviet union and the japanese? At this point only a paid expansion pack including those major factions would be enough to save this game, and even then the damage will have already been done. With sales numbers like these it will definitely impact any DLC in the future, and theyll just cut whatever BS they had planned and make the situation even worse.

    They could have reskinned all the old 1942 maps and been more successful. No one cares about these no name battles.

    The immersion sucks, the maps are forgettable, and none of it inspires WW2 like those famous battles could have.
  • Piotrek1983pm
    344 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    ok, I agree, there is no much feel for ww2 maps are not great but I get really so much fun fron playing it, I love it!
  • Aircool_212
    764 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    It's not as bad as Star Wars: Battlefront II, but that's not saying much.

    SW:BF II was designed ground up to support loot boxes. It's no surprise that there's three power levels in the game (basic troops, elite troops and heroes), and that each class has three upgrade slots each with a power level of 1-4. Before the loot box controversy, you had to grind and grind and grind, and even when you got enough XP to unlock the heroes, you still had to rely on random loot boxes to give you upgrades.

    The fundamental design of the game was to spend your 'score points' in a match to spawn as one of the elite troops or heroes. Elite troops were more powerful than normal troops and heroes were just instagib nonsense. Of course, the more kills you get, the more points you earn, and the more powerful your character class, the faster you'll score. Therefore, having fully upgraded troops allows you to score faster which allows you to spawn as an elite trooper (which are limited in number). In turn, having a fully upgraded elite trooper allows you to score even faster, which then in turn allows you to spawn as a hero (which are of course, unique), and having a fully upgraded hero makes you invincible to anything except a highly focused attack.

    Obviously, this makes the gameplay a sack of smelly crack for most people, as one or two players quickly spawn as heroes and then dominate the game, their score increasing exponentially. The developers realised that this made for a rubbish, dull, lifeless and unsatisfying game, plus the loot box controversy forced them to change the game design.

    The ultimate proof that the game design was utterly flawed and driven by spreadsheets rather than inspired game design, the developers HAD to introduce scoring points for getting killed, just so the average players that were getting constantly slaughtered by heroes could gain enough score to spawn as an elite trooper or even one of the lesser heroes.

    BOTTOM LINE - SW:BF II was so fundamentally flawed that you had to be rewarded for dying, just so you could make any progress in the game.

    What I would like to know is, what was the fundamental design philosophy behind BFV that made it so dull, lifeless and frustrating to play? You've got to make a good game to make money, but designing a game to make money rarely results in a good game.
  • StormSaxon
    670 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Nope.
    For Me it goes
    BF3
    BC2
    BF1
    BFH
    BF4.

    BF5... right now I put between BF1 and BFH. But I see it has potential... to end up being up there maybe 2nd or 3rd.
    I can’t comment on the games I never played.

    It would have to take a lot to be as crap as BF4. This release looks proffesional compared to the Bf4 mess.
  • crabman169
    12845 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Meingott90 wrote: »
    I really dont understand, how hard was it to just make a remake of 1942.

    they lost sight of the basics and let a bunch of leftys make the major design decisions.

    Who the hell made the decision not to include the soviet union and the japanese? At this point only a paid expansion pack including those major factions would be enough to save this game, and even then the damage will have already been done. With sales numbers like these it will definitely impact any DLC in the future, and theyll just cut whatever BS they had planned and make the situation even worse.

    They could have reskinned all the old 1942 maps and been more successful. No one cares about these no name battles.

    The immersion sucks, the maps are forgettable, and none of it inspires WW2 like those famous battles could have.

    Sorry but I do care about these "no name battles".

    Gee people talk about EA/dice being disrespectful to those that served; this comment right here is more disrespectful then anything they could ever do.

    How dare Dice decide to go a different route with a ww2 game; how dare they don't make the same old yank powerwankfest. How dare they didn't make the same old cliche WW2 shooter we had for a decade.

    Time to face the reality that that's the direction that Dice went for and I appauld them for it; im quite sure I wouldn't never bothered with bfv if it was just another cliche WW2 shooter; I still have fatiuge from the last decade of ww2 shooters. But bfv is a breathe of fresh air into the genere and setting whilst still being WW2.

    Soviet Union is coming and so is Japan; if you haven't noticed Dice is going for a chronological release for bfv so we are progressing through the war from 1940.

    If you want 1942 so much why not just go and play it?

    The immersion is grest; maps are great and it's ww2. See? I can have a subjective opinion too; it's a two sided coin.
  • StormSaxon
    670 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    No name battles.
    What a crass low brow remark.
  • Lemmywinks19
    188 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    BF1 is by far the worst for me. Its barely on the list honestly. Even Hardline is awesome compared to BF1 based on the fact that Hardline had proper BF gunplay. BF1 was just a complete departure from the series and went maximum casual gunplay. That put it at the bottom very quickly where it will stay.
  • hawkseye17
    577 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    BF1 is by far the worst for me. Its barely on the list honestly. Even Hardline is awesome compared to BF1 based on the fact that Hardline had proper BF gunplay. BF1 was just a complete departure from the series and went maximum casual gunplay. That put it at the bottom very quickly where it will stay.

    I found BF1 to be the only Battlefield game where I could get some sense of immersion.
  • Lemmywinks19
    188 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    hawkseye17 wrote: »
    BF1 is by far the worst for me. Its barely on the list honestly. Even Hardline is awesome compared to BF1 based on the fact that Hardline had proper BF gunplay. BF1 was just a complete departure from the series and went maximum casual gunplay. That put it at the bottom very quickly where it will stay.

    I found BF1 to be the only Battlefield game where I could get some sense of immersion.

    That was all out the window when you line up a shot and your shots go everywhere but where you are aiming. Thats just sloppy and not needed in any game. Its a scary thought when Fortnite actually had better gunplay than BF1.... Think about that for a second.... That shows how messed up BF1 was.
  • xXPvZMaster420Xx
    104 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    Cactus757 wrote: »
    I've played every BF since BC1 and BF1 on Xbox. I was frustrated with the launch of BF4 but went on to have over 200 MVPs. This game is much worse off. I think it may kill the series unless another studio takes over. But then EA would just poison them too. It's time to move on from anything from EA. It's guaranteed to be unfinished and over hyped garbage.

    Nope
  • herodes87
    1286 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    hawkseye17 wrote: »
    BF1 is by far the worst for me. Its barely on the list honestly. Even Hardline is awesome compared to BF1 based on the fact that Hardline had proper BF gunplay. BF1 was just a complete departure from the series and went maximum casual gunplay. That put it at the bottom very quickly where it will stay.

    I found BF1 to be the only Battlefield game where I could get some sense of immersion.

    That was all out the window when you line up a shot and your shots go everywhere but where you are aiming. Thats just sloppy and not needed in any game. Its a scary thought when Fortnite actually had better gunplay than BF1.... Think about that for a second.... That shows how messed up BF1 was.

    Maybe learn to aim? My shoots Always landed. BFV is a noobish Casual Shooter that Takes No effort to kill.
  • LeeMcMurphy
    1 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    It isn't my favorite, but I don't know if I am just clinging to how excited I was for the genre in general. The game is good, however.
  • Lemmywinks19
    188 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    herodes87 wrote: »
    hawkseye17 wrote: »
    BF1 is by far the worst for me. Its barely on the list honestly. Even Hardline is awesome compared to BF1 based on the fact that Hardline had proper BF gunplay. BF1 was just a complete departure from the series and went maximum casual gunplay. That put it at the bottom very quickly where it will stay.

    I found BF1 to be the only Battlefield game where I could get some sense of immersion.

    That was all out the window when you line up a shot and your shots go everywhere but where you are aiming. Thats just sloppy and not needed in any game. Its a scary thought when Fortnite actually had better gunplay than BF1.... Think about that for a second.... That shows how messed up BF1 was.

    Maybe learn to aim? My shoots Always landed. BFV is a noobish Casual Shooter that Takes No effort to kill.

    Learn to aim....... So is there a secret to override the RNG gunplay that apparently most everyone missed? The game is a RNG fest and wasnt good cause of it, hence why they went back to BF3/4 style gunplay.
  • herodes87
    1286 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    As i said i Always Land my shoots in BF1. Never had an issue or what da hell death.

    Why they went Back? To favor the CoD Players of today. Please No recoil and spread. Don't forget to give me 1000 different scopes and Attachments. BFV is for me Just a random noob Shooter. Even Hardline had way better gunplay.
  • BabyMetal808
    51 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Fun survey. I'm an outlier on BFH.

    Best:
    BF3
    BFH
    BFV (we'll see where it is on the list after 1000 hours / 1.5 years.)
    BF42
    BFBC2
    BF4 (of which I played 1000+ hours and completed everything)
    BF1 (which I enjoyed a lot, even tho it's in the 7th place. I really enjoy all BF games.)



  • Chubzdoomer
    1397 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited December 2018
    It's the closest to "Classic Battlefield" that we've come since Battlefield 2142, so for me it's arguably the best Battlefield game in over a decade.

    I love the lack of 3D spotting, the resource management (both as infantry and in vehicles), the squad play, and many of the maps (they aren't perfect, but they're leagues better than BF1's Suez, Giant's Shadow, Fao Fortress, etc.).

    Battlefield 3 was pure trash and its maps that couldn't even properly support 64-players. It shocks me that so many of you hold it in high regard when it did virtually nothing well.
  • Meingott90
    38 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield Member
    crabman169 wrote: »
    Meingott90 wrote: »
    I really dont understand, how hard was it to just make a remake of 1942.

    they lost sight of the basics and let a bunch of leftys make the major design decisions.

    Who the hell made the decision not to include the soviet union and the japanese? At this point only a paid expansion pack including those major factions would be enough to save this game, and even then the damage will have already been done. With sales numbers like these it will definitely impact any DLC in the future, and theyll just cut whatever BS they had planned and make the situation even worse.

    They could have reskinned all the old 1942 maps and been more successful. No one cares about these no name battles.

    The immersion sucks, the maps are forgettable, and none of it inspires WW2 like those famous battles could have.

    Sorry but I do care about these "no name battles".

    Gee people talk about EA/dice being disrespectful to those that served; this comment right here is more disrespectful then anything they could ever do.

    How dare Dice decide to go a different route with a ww2 game; how dare they don't make the same old yank powerwankfest. How dare they didn't make the same old cliche WW2 shooter we had for a decade.

    Time to face the reality that that's the direction that Dice went for and I appauld them for it; im quite sure I wouldn't never bothered with bfv if it was just another cliche WW2 shooter; I still have fatiuge from the last decade of ww2 shooters. But bfv is a breathe of fresh air into the genere and setting whilst still being WW2.

    Soviet Union is coming and so is Japan; if you haven't noticed Dice is going for a chronological release for bfv so we are progressing through the war from 1940.

    If you want 1942 so much why not just go and play it?

    The immersion is grest; maps are great and it's ww2. See? I can have a subjective opinion too; it's a two sided coin.

    I never mentioned Americans, so IDK what you mean by "old yank powerwankfest" other than to be bigotted.

    Here are some facts for you

    They havent released any roadmap that has confirmed the soviet union or japanese. In fact, given their history with Battlefront 2, its pretty clear from the poor sales numbers that the soviets and japanese are not coming. They are just going to cut their losses or release it as a paid expansion. All of this could have been avoided had some level headed people been in charge of the direction. But instead we got a lefty swedish pile of garbage that is already flopping. As far as a chronological release, the japanese have been at war for years at this point in 1940, so why are they not there?

    The immersion isnt great. The uniforms are a joke and so is the fact that literally every tanker and pilot is a woman for some reason. Yea such a great immersive WW2 experience to hear women screaming at the top of their lungs every 10seconds.



  • IIMaZeKII
    2 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I stopped reading at "Xbox"' lol
  • xXPvZMaster420Xx
    104 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    IIMaZeKII wrote: »
    I stopped reading at "Xbox"' lol

    Pc snob? I play on pc too. And Xbox. And PS4
Sign In or Register to comment.