Straw Poll - If EA/DICE were to concentrate on improving just ONE aspect of BF V what should it be?

2»

Comments

  • TheXBOXFan
    118 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited May 2019
    I would say for me it would be, revert to the old suppression system from Battlefield 1. It was a great way to counter campers and snipers, two things Battlefield V is full of.

    If not that, it would be to revert to the old health system, where you heal to full overtime. This change would also come along with reverting to the old revive system, when the syringe was a equipment.


    If I had to choose one over the other it would be the health system reverts. I feel like these changes were made in Battlefield V to slow the game down. People having limited health creates more camping, along with having to rely on medic's to give you health packs and running to a med box every time you run out of packs.
  • DingoKillr
    4108 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    There is so many little things that need fixing. But if I had 1 it is nerf Assault dynamite grenades, sniper SAR, CQB AR and hip fire Rocket Launchers.

    No bullet impact on first hit is annoying and what seems a buffer that advantage high pings is stupid. I can still have a OK game with those but with assaults bullocks it just makes me stay away.
  • M_Rat13
    1501 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    ackers75 said:
    Netcode
    Netcode
    Netcode
    You can have new maps all day long,but all you get then is new maps with garbage netcode!

    NETCODE.

    Ruining the game so hard lately.
    Name a more iconic duo than fast TTK + terrible Netcode..

    The Martini Henry Infantry and BF1's old auto aim. I'm sad to say I abused that like crazy when it was around.
  • Ferdinand_J_Foch
    3417 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    wiazabi said:
    Drop FrostBite engine, they and any company that touch it seems to be cursed with releasing unfinished buggy products.
    And replace it with what?  The Source engine is clearly at the end of its useful lifespan, that is visible at times in Apex Legends.  Is EA supposed to pay one of its competitors to use their engine?  Lots of PUBG players wish that game used Frostbite rather than Unreal, so who is right about which engine is better?  Developing an updated Frostbite or even a whole new engine would be a long and expensive process, it isn't something they can knock out in a few months.  BF4 used Frostbite and as demonstrated in that game, extensive testing and patching could produce a game which ran very well indeed.  So maybe what EA/DICE needs to do is actually test their games thoroughly before launch rather than letting customers do it.  They should also bring back the CTE so patches can be tested before installation, it helped in BF4.  Maybe the problem isn't the engine, it's how it is used.
    They would essentially have to move away from 'one game every two years' approach, and move to a 'one game every three years' approach instead. I have a feeling that this model will not please EA, which wants as much revenue as possible as quickly as possible. They probably won't be willing to wait that long for every BF game; how a company like EA had the patience to wait nearly six years for Anthem, I'll never know.

    They'd also need to have DICE LA  involve themselves in the project. Basically, DICE SE spends two years on development, and then DICE LA performs extensive bug-fixing for one year straight. DICE LA might even be able to add some additional content for the game during their time with it.

    If they do this, they might not even need a comprehensive CTE approach ... they'd only really need that for DLC testing, which is sort-of what happened with BF1, now that I think about it. 

    I don't know if this is feasible or not, but I believe this is better than releasing a shoddy mess, and then spend the next year fixing it amidst a torrent of hate from your consumers. 

    BF4 'worked out', but how many times will people tolerate that game's approach? How many times will people be willing to buy total rubbish for $60-110, only to wait a year before they get the game that they expected at launch? There has to be a point where even the most die-hard BF fans will say "The next BF game is coming out soon ... I'll wait at least six months before buying it".

    The game developer mentality of 'release the game early and fix it later' is extremely prevalent right now. It's gotten much easier to update a game, so pretty much everyone rushes their releases nowadays. 
  • bigiain
    352 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    It's actually hard to work out where to start. More maps seems like the obvious fix from a console point of view.

    Networking, matchmaking, team balance, vehicle balance, UI - there's a lot really needs done.
  • clouseau2112
    210 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I think we'd all like to see more maps!

    The cheating thing is PC, and I'm xbox, so not concerned there.

    Truthfully I've never seen so many whiners on any one forum.

    Guess I'm just lucky, or? Buff this, or need that...or that update ruined this class or that class. I have an excellent wired connection. I fire up my console, play west coast servers w/ my buddies and RARELY do I have any issues with gameplay. I just don't understand all the complaining.

    Again....not having more maps is literally my only gripe
  • parkingbrake
    3202 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Delta245 said:
    Network, netcode
    Yes, this.  The network performance actually seems to be degrading, a lot of players were mentioning it last night.  It also doesn't help when players from other continents bring their lag to other regions, the impact of that is visible in game and it isn't good.
  • PrairieGeek
    365 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Delta245 said:
    Network, netcode
    Yes, this.  The network performance actually seems to be degrading, a lot of players were mentioning it last night.  It also doesn't help when players from other continents bring their lag to other regions, the impact of that is visible in game and it isn't good.

    Biggest problem by far. They need to add servers not take them away. Also go back to 32man rounds would help
  • parkingbrake
    3202 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    M_Rat13 said:
    M_Rat13 wrote: »
    parkingbrake said:

    TamKingski said:
    My suggestion for Dice would be to change their arrogant better than thou attitude towards its customers and keeping their own personal politics and agendas out of our video games.

    Its bad enough puting up with all the rubbish in the real world  from people looking for social brownie points or forcing their politics and agendas onto you and giving you a label in a bid to socially shame you into accepting that agenda if you dont accept or agree with those opinions/bias.
    we certainly dont need/want it forced into our products that are supposedly to be fun and help us forget about all the nonsense in the real world.

    So despite the existence of things like poor network performance, or the weak anti-cheat, or the lack of fresh content, or (so far) no rented servers, the thing that makes you grind your teeth is female characters?  Yikes.





    While I'm not against female characters, the way they were handled were a joke. First, they made cyborg ninja ladies with outlandish facepaint, then, they went too far the other way and made men with b**bs. Plus the fact the screams they have (and to be fair the men also have just not as bad) sound like a spoilt child having a temper tantrum.

    All I wanted was real women that really fought in WW2 and sounded like they were tough enough for the job, but apparently that's too hard lol.

    I agree. Main reason I did not buy the game wasn't because the historical inaccuracies, it was how DICE/EA reacted to those who had concerns about it. Fix the company and surely the game would improve.

    I say get the people who did BF1 to do the next game. Regardless of your opinion on gameplay, no one can deny it was released a polished and mostly finished product.
    Part of the problem at DICE seems to be that a lot of the veteran devs are gone, and since in some cases they were the ones with experience using Frostbite, the devs there today are struggling to figure out how that engine works (something confirmed by another studio which says Frostbite is poorly documented so it's a guessing game using it).  So they can't just get the designers of previous games to do BF6, those folks have moved on.  What they could do is give them more time before release, and get some good project managers in place--preferably from outside the current team because it looks like DICE needs adult supervision.  That there was nobody to point out that a big text box in the middle of the screen to announce the game is half over which blocks a player's vison wasn't a good idea suggests DICE needs some practical management rather than folks who don't know how to say, No, you messed up, fix it
  • grrlpurple
    843 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Servers, netcode and ping limits as one package addressing the single biggest issue.
Sign In or Register to comment.