"BFV is lacking content"

Comments

  • BFB-LeCharybdis
    745 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    They could release 10 new maps tomorrow, there would still be NetCode problems, visibility issues, class imbalance, maps that don't suit the meta and weapons of the game etc. 
    As well as all the new bugs and glitches that new content invariably seems to add to the rest of the game (anyone else getting the game freezing moment at the beginning or end of gun fights? For me it's started after FireStorm launched).

    Quality over quantity is required for V at this point.
  • CutoverBean8
    8 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield Member
    If they had put maps inspired by iconic battles that we all know, no one would be complaining about the lack of content right now. Or have the one factions for wich map, like past battlefields but it looks like it's going to be everyone together and mixed up in this game. Russians, Americans, English all the same. I don't complain of the gameplay because it's fun but the rest is to cry.
  • Stahlmach
    1156 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Stahlmach said:
    Stahlmach said:
    bran1986 said:
    Nice try DICE :disappointed:

    What do you mean "DICE"?

    I think he believes the OP is a sock puppet.
    They do and it's discouraging. I don't work with or for DICE. I do work in the industry. I am working towards a CS masters degree. I do understand how stupidly difficult software, especially with literally millions of possibilities and thousands of things that can go wrong can be. I'm tired of seeing NOTHING on the forums except for stupid criticism of DICE and pointless hate of their product that's misdirected. From users DIRECTLY insulting developers by calling them "lazy" or even insulting them out right, it's behavior that should not be tolerated.
    .
    There's a solid difference between criticism of a product and insult of it's creator.

    Oh i can and will critize the Creator when he wants my money and isnt willing to learn anything from his previous and current mistakes. And no for that i dont have to be part of that Industry.
    But what i know from my working experience and that of my company with the Software industry is that " normal " Software companies dont see the Quality Assurance department as some nuisance that should be done by amateurs or by a minimum staff.
    And yes of course the Gaming Costumer is different. Or hopefully he was. Because in no other industry and product would parts of the Costumer defend such an unfinished product and even trying to convince other costumers that they should be thankful for that.
    To say it doesn't weaken your argument is really untrue. If I was buying a lawnmower from you, you wouldn't expect me to just make fun of and insult you right??

    I wouldnt sell you a broken Lawnmover because not only want i sell Quality but i want you to keep as a Costumer. Which would for sure lower the possibility of being mocked by you or other costumers.
    If you're so upset about the content of this game, don't buy another.

    You see this is the important point. As i mentioned often in other Threads, i bought this game - together with my friends - because we thought we could have the same fun we had with the previous Battlefield titles.
    And unlike with the majority of our Gaming purchases we didnt wait a certain time until major problems were fixed. Because it was a rare ocassion that all four of us had spare time at the release date.
    We regretted that since than and one thing is clear: EA/Dice wont see us purchasing another one of their Games for a very long time. So they lost four Costumers at once and possibly a few others because we told at the work and towards other people not to purchase this game at any costs.. And unlike others i dont repeat my Mistakes very often or forget everything just because a new shiny Trailer shows up.
    Now Ubisoft profits from Dice incompetence because we all bought The Division 2 and are very happy with it.



  • Stahlmach
    1156 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member

    You see this is the important point. As i mentioned often in other Threads, i bought this game - together with my friends - because we thought we could have the same fun we had with the previous Battlefield titles.
    And unlike with the majority of our Gaming purchases we didnt wait a certain time until major problems were fixed. Because it was a rare ocassion that all four of us had spare time at the release date.
    We regretted that since than and one thing is clear: EA/Dice wont see us purchasing another one of their Games for a very long time. So they lost four Costumers at once and possibly a few others because we told at the work and towards other people not to purchase this game at any costs.. And unlike others i dont repeat my Mistakes very often or forget everything just because a new shiny Trailer shows up.
    Now Ubisoft profits from Dice incompetence because we all bought The Division 2 and are very happy with it.


  • aRrAyStArTaT0
    786 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    HuwJarz said:
    Isn't it disingenuous to compare game modes and vehicles to maps?

    I will concede that weapon wise there isn't much to complain about as they have a degree of parity. However, a tank doth not equal a map. Not only is it something only a small percentage of the players will be able to access at any time (if allowed at all), the variety you get from it is fairly limited.

    I mean, if you factor in all the game modes you could get per map then maps blow it out of the water completely.

    It's identical in scale. Sure, you can say a map has more detail and more area, but this entire "BF1 had more content" stuff is incorrect and I wanted to call it out. We are getting 2 more maps in the coming month or two (Mercury + 1 other). When BFV started with 1 less map at launch than BF1 and got a map within a month of launch and people still demand "More maps" yet still say that we aren't "splitting up the community" or something, it's entirely hypocritical.
    .
    A map is a map. A gun is a gun. A vehicle is a vehicle. The point of this post was to show that the content is there. Just because it's not the exact content the community wants (maps) doesn't mean it's not there. It takes nearly 3 or so months for anything to get approved. New maps are coming, but since the lack of maps feedback really picked up in early January, They're right on track to release another this month (April - 3 months after January) and in June like their original roadmap promised.
    What load of rubbish.

    The tide of opinion is well against OP here and arguing the a tank is the same as a map in terms of content is laughable. 

    With BF1, not only did we have a decent game (that didn't have people leaving in droves) we also had a set of good maps that people liked playing. We then got Giants Shadow pretty late. People WERE complaining about a lack of maps in BF1 at the same point in the cycle, BUT there was a key difference:

    We KNEW that we were going together 2 new Night Maps (Prise and Nivelle) AND we KNEW that we would be getting an additional 15 maps of top of that. We KNEW meaningful content was coming. I can't remember the exact order, but we KNEW that we were going to have fresh and sizeable new experiences.

    What promises are we getting now? - the odd map here and there.  I doubt player number are spiking because DICE created a new Sniper rifle. 

    Maps are MEANINGFUL content that players respond to. They rekindle the game. Furthermore, the beauty of a proper DLC release of 3-4 maps launched at the same time is that a DLC server can support a set if new maps to make the game feel really fresh and like a new game. Drip feeding a single map into an existing rotation does not feel fresh. I doubt very much that player numbers were spiking when Panzerstorm was released. (But of course will will never know, as DICE hide the atrocious player numbers)

    I like hearing from the guys in these forums that think the earth is still flat in the face of evidence that this game is really disliked by its player base compared with previous titles. I'm really pleased you like it, but don't bother trying to sell doo doo sandwiches to us. We can smell the doo doo a mile away. 
    I literally said they're not the same. Content is there. Or did you miss that like you did with all my other points?
  • maggotforl133
    194 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Can’t really count rush as added content since they ended it’s run for the time being.
  • HuwJarz
    3868 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    HuwJarz said:
    Isn't it disingenuous to compare game modes and vehicles to maps?

    I will concede that weapon wise there isn't much to complain about as they have a degree of parity. However, a tank doth not equal a map. Not only is it something only a small percentage of the players will be able to access at any time (if allowed at all), the variety you get from it is fairly limited.

    I mean, if you factor in all the game modes you could get per map then maps blow it out of the water completely.

    It's identical in scale. Sure, you can say a map has more detail and more area, but this entire "BF1 had more content" stuff is incorrect and I wanted to call it out. We are getting 2 more maps in the coming month or two (Mercury + 1 other). When BFV started with 1 less map at launch than BF1 and got a map within a month of launch and people still demand "More maps" yet still say that we aren't "splitting up the community" or something, it's entirely hypocritical.
    .
    A map is a map. A gun is a gun. A vehicle is a vehicle. The point of this post was to show that the content is there. Just because it's not the exact content the community wants (maps) doesn't mean it's not there. It takes nearly 3 or so months for anything to get approved. New maps are coming, but since the lack of maps feedback really picked up in early January, They're right on track to release another this month (April - 3 months after January) and in June like their original roadmap promised.
    What load of rubbish.

    The tide of opinion is well against OP here and arguing the a tank is the same as a map in terms of content is laughable. 

    With BF1, not only did we have a decent game (that didn't have people leaving in droves) we also had a set of good maps that people liked playing. We then got Giants Shadow pretty late. People WERE complaining about a lack of maps in BF1 at the same point in the cycle, BUT there was a key difference:

    We KNEW that we were going together 2 new Night Maps (Prise and Nivelle) AND we KNEW that we would be getting an additional 15 maps of top of that. We KNEW meaningful content was coming. I can't remember the exact order, but we KNEW that we were going to have fresh and sizeable new experiences.

    What promises are we getting now? - the odd map here and there.  I doubt player number are spiking because DICE created a new Sniper rifle. 

    Maps are MEANINGFUL content that players respond to. They rekindle the game. Furthermore, the beauty of a proper DLC release of 3-4 maps launched at the same time is that a DLC server can support a set if new maps to make the game feel really fresh and like a new game. Drip feeding a single map into an existing rotation does not feel fresh. I doubt very much that player numbers were spiking when Panzerstorm was released. (But of course will will never know, as DICE hide the atrocious player numbers)

    I like hearing from the guys in these forums that think the earth is still flat in the face of evidence that this game is really disliked by its player base compared with previous titles. I'm really pleased you like it, but don't bother trying to sell doo doo sandwiches to us. We can smell the doo doo a mile away. 
    I literally said they're not the same. Content is there. Or did you miss that like you did with all my other points?
    Your point is the there is plenty of content.  Its right there in the title. 

    My point is that there is some pretty poor content (Combined Arms anyone?) a poor game, and that your analogy with BF is very misplaced.  At least in BF1 we knew decent content was coming in batches that were meaningful rather than possible drip feeding of what has proven to be poor content. 

    What's your specific issues with the points I made? 
  • HuwJarz
    3868 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    VincentNZ said:


    Yeah I can dismiss it on a personal level, I said as much. If you enjoy Coop or the SP this is very fine. It is pretty clear though that you are a very small portion of the playerbase, and that the quality of this content is not optimal. You could then further argue that any resource that went into these features, had a direct impact on the "core features" of BF.
    Now the last years have made it clear that the playerbase of core BF is not really big either, therefore I can second the development of Firestorm, since the market is so darn huge even with the big players that every tiny slice of the pie is bigger than the whole "BF core"-cake. Matter of fact any player that buys BFV for Firestorm indirectly helps me, since it supports the main game as well.
    The rest, and that includes SP, Coop, and the stupid competitive mode, is an utter waste from a fiscal and creative POV. Even if the result had been decent, the market is simply not big enough to support that branch and it drains the others.
    Say the comp mode achieves a decent result and it draws half the population of it's direct competitor R6S, then we are looking at 35k players. And that is assuming they not only create a gamemode that is good, but also the overlaying structure that is needed to sustain it, like community features, a ladder, tournaments and general means of player retention. If this is not the case, then it will only drain people from the other game features and that is bad for the game and the franchise.
    The whole development of BFV is a desaster, even if we assume the best case, that the vision simply was too big. Half the game's core features came long after the release, or are not implemented (vehicle customization, dragging), half-**** (shop, deeper soldier customization), or have been made with minimum effort (Coop).
    At this stage it is clear that the game would have been better off, had they focused on something instead of trying to create: "Battlefield V: Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Royale Siege of Battlefront Legendsnite" The game does not know what it wants to be, but tries anyway.

    What? You mean that splitting the community is a bad idea? But we got rid of splitting the community by getting rid of premium, so that problem is now fixed. 

    Nice post
  • LOLGotYerTags
    12608 postsMember, Moderator, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Moderator
    Friendly reminder people,  Let's keep this on topic and without the snarky remarks towards one another.

    o/
  • aRrAyStArTaT0
    786 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    And thread derailed. Great.
  • StarscreamUK
    7247 postsMember, Moderator, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Moderator
    ____________________________

    Thats the line drawn, if this ridiculous schoolyard cackling of a user continues, then you have only yourselves to blame for the consequences.

    Keep this on topic and not a continous tirade against a user.  If you don't like his opinions, fine, but that doesnt give you free reign to call names, make accusations etc.


  • LOLGotYerTags
    12608 postsMember, Moderator, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Moderator
    edited April 10
    Friendly reminder people,  Let's keep this on topic and without the snarky remarks towards one another.

    o/
    @TropicPoison
    Read the above and abide by it.

    Otherwise you will be Jailed.

    :edit:
    In fact,  this will be true for anybody who derails further.

    You have been warned and I strongly urge you take heed.
  • HuwJarz
    3868 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    And thread derailed. Great.

    My response to you is bang on topic. Why don't you address the points I made in my post, or are you just going to ignore them now? 
  • Marksman5147_ALT
    23 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield Member
    Yet the games still trash, dice still doesnt care about their players, Firestorms garbage looting/inventory/armor system somehow got approved? RSP wont happen, and the game has 1/4th the playerbase that BF4/BF1 had at the same time post launch (inb4 a mod deletes this comment for me exposing the super secret low player count Dice wont show you)
  • Trokey66
    8168 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Yet the games still trash, dice still doesnt care about their players, Firestorms garbage looting/inventory/armor system somehow got approved? RSP wont happen, and the game has 1/4th the playerbase that BF4/BF1 had at the same time post launch (inb4 a mod deletes this comment for me exposing the super secret low player count Dice wont show you)

    And your evidence for this is....?
  • VincentNZ
    2578 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Trokey66 said:
    Yet the games still trash, dice still doesnt care about their players, Firestorms garbage looting/inventory/armor system somehow got approved? RSP wont happen, and the game has 1/4th the playerbase that BF4/BF1 had at the same time post launch (inb4 a mod deletes this comment for me exposing the super secret low player count Dice wont show you)

    And your evidence for this is....?

    Naturally there can be no evidence, at best we can roughly estimate player numbers. It is fair to assume though, that BFV is not a very popular game in terms of player count. At least for a AAA-title. DICE/EA also does not need to publish any numbers, so no harm done here. Something I have watched in the last weeks is the server count for Europe since the inclusion of Firestorm and, as expected, the number of available servers increased at low traffic times. BR seems to have drawn some Firestorm players to the core game, or to make some players come back to the base game.
    What you can see in this threa though is the overwhelming negativity towards the game's state since release, which is not unvalidated at all. I have not seen anything like this before, especially since the game is okayish. There are a lot of things that people get really heated about and that is indeed mostly in DICE/EA's responsibility. Which is a shame really.
  • aRrAyStArTaT0
    786 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Yet the games still trash, dice still doesnt care about their players, Firestorms garbage looting/inventory/armor system somehow got approved? RSP wont happen, and the game has 1/4th the playerbase that BF4/BF1 had at the same time post launch (inb4 a mod deletes this comment for me exposing the super secret low player count Dice wont show you)
    I don't know what you mean that DICE doesn't care about their players. They're literally releasing content for FREE. Firestorm's loot system needs improvement, but how long have they even had to look at it? It takes a long time to make any changes to the game. It took 3 months to get a freaking easter egg from one of the LEAD designers in the game. Imagine how long that it would take to actually do something that makes significant changes. Average request to action takes 1-3 months. Not sure how much simpler it could possibly be.
    .
    In addition, RSP might happen. BF1 it happened about a year after release right? We are barely 6 months in and you're already giving up.
    .
    No moderation is going to delete your comment for "exposing" a "secret". There's no need to poke at that. It's not necessary.
    .
    I don't know what you're on about with the game being trash. I mean, I can understand it, but almost every change made has been by player request. What changes would you make?
  • aRrAyStArTaT0
    786 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    HuwJarz said:

    My response to you is bang on topic. Why don't you address the points I made in my post, or are you just going to ignore them now? 
    I was away doing life things (School and projects) for the past 24 hours. Sorry I couldn't answer right away. I'm not going to lie, I'm kind of tempted to ignore them because you're so upset that I didn't respond in 2 hours at 1am
    .
    Which points were you talking about? You've also said a lot in this thread and I want to make sure I respond to what you want me to.
Sign In or Register to comment.