Tone in BFV

«1
MusicienElegant
14 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
I wanted to create a place to discuss the overall tone of BFV in today's gaming community, especially since Modern Warfare is just around the corner.

Please remember that this is meant to be a respectful and mature discussion.

What do you think of the lighthearted tone that BFV has set for the WWII setting?

I personally am intrigued by the harsh realism that occurred during WWII. I think including elements of that darkness would have added so much depth to the game as a whole. The concentration camps, the tortured families, and the pain and suffering that soldiers had to endure could have seriously worked in DICE's favor. Of course there's the opposite side of the situation where the community could bash on that realism, so I think it ultimately depends on many other factors that I don't have the time to list. That realism could have hit home with me as a BF player.

I think that the lighthearted tone that they've taken is almost a disgusting mockery of WWII.

That's just my honest opinion though. What do you think?

Comments

  • bigiain
    267 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    The tone isn't too far away from BF1943, which people really weren't concerned about at the time as I remember. There's less conformity to the visuals because of the cosmetics though and they push things a little further. I'd guess the increase in fidelity has made players less forgiving about visuals as well. They really should have heeded the reaction to the last Brothers In Arms game.

    I'd agree about the forgotten battles element being completely undermined by the wrong factions and vehicles as well.
  • full951
    2456 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I want it all
  • fragnstein
    465 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Battlefield players dont want small 5v5 or 8v8.  
  • GhostsOfWar119
    105 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    "What do you think of the lighthearted tone that BFV has set for the WWII setting"- It's a joke plain and simple!
  • tempo_rarity
    1036 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I'm thinking . . . that we're one of many tiny soldiers in a gigantic worldwide war .
    We're not exactly sure why that hill is so important , just that we 'need' to take it .
    Horrors enough that we get "lighthearted" to death even attempting to attempt it .
  • mcRen98
    349 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    bigiain said:
    The tone isn't too far away from BF1943, which people really weren't concerned about at the time as I remember. There's less conformity to the visuals because of the cosmetics though and they push things a little further. I'd guess the increase in fidelity has made players less forgiving about visuals as well. They really should have heeded the reaction to the last Brothers In Arms game.

    I'd agree about the forgotten battles element being completely undermined by the wrong factions and vehicles as well.
    I think while Battlefield 1943 was rather colourful in its palette for its time, I think the fact it was marketed as a mostly Pacific Themed game that contained asymmetric combat and somewhat believable soldiers made it a little more forgiving. 

    And in fairness Brothers in Arms: Furious 4 was rightfully panned mostly for the fact that instead of continuing Baker's story into the heart of Bastogne after 3 years of waiting. They just said screw it and made an Inglorious B**tard squad based shooter. I think for Battlefield V, Dice were so split up in what they wanted to do. The map makers didn't want to make more well known ww2 locations as maps (despite locations from Operation Battleaxe and Iwo Jima appearing), the vehicle and weapon designers wanted to be as authentic to the weapons of ww2 as possible while including some experimental or unorthodox (for a ww2 game) weapons like the Sturmtiger, the V-1 and the Turner Smle. Then for cosmetics they were so out of touch with what the British would have looked like while having one simple goal to make the Germans as menacing as possible. This all combined with a rushed Tides of War that was instead being used to finish the game rather than add to it and you now have a tonal shift from an all out war fps game set in ww2 to a ww2 themed game that contains battle royale, has some bastardised version of Operations, last minute co-op, small squad conquest maps and almost had 5v5 as a competitive gamemode.
  • OskooI_007
    711 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I'm still trying to wrap my head around the mermaids.
  • zenn_nme
    800 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited August 23
    I wonder if it has got something to do with that WW1 had a pretty fixed front, it wasn't uncommon to be stationed at the same battle for months.
    Causing the front to be much more stirred up. While WW2 was a more dynamic front, lots of movement and continuesly shifting lines.
    .
    Also some Normandy Vets told me; that if you didn't know it was War at the time, you wouldn't have noticed by the looks of it.
    Only the sounds of guns going off betrayed the looks of the beautiful serene nature in that hot summer. The only decay they seen was when they moved to other villages,
    which were shot to pieces when trying to capture it or bomb to rubble & dust beforehand.
  • MusicienElegant
    14 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited August 23
    jroggs wrote: »
    "Tone" is kind of a nebulous term.

    Even though they butchered the subject material in the single player, I think the tone was... okay. I sang along a little with "It's a Long Way to Tipperary." I got a touch misty when Deme watched his brother die. I felt some despair along with the German tankers. Nothing really grabbed me, though, and the parade of bugs didn't help.

    With multiplayer, I think it's mostly unfair to try to assess "tone," because other players generally aren't too cooperative with that flavor of experience. But still, when I think back to BF1, especially the French expansion...



    I am feeling it. Feeling it. This feels like World War 1 brutality and chaos. Sliding in mud, surrounded by rifle fire and explosions, desperately trying to keep a failing offensive moving, fighting bravely against impossible odds, dying for nothing. Absolutely sensational. I think about the blind skirmishes in the gas, the sight of an airship crashing into the ground, or the lone whistle followed by a roar from as attackers charge the next sector, and it gives me chills.

    I don't get that feeling in BFV. Everything feels... sterile. Clinical. You're here. The bad guys are over there. Go after them and do your best. It's fun. But it feels like a video game more than it feels like war.

    No, no, I definitely agree. Tone being such a foggy term in a game that's full of opinions leaves a lot to be determined.

    I personally think the war stories remind me of the media and politics today. The negative forums online and the censorship. The lack of authenticity. The warped perspective.

    It just doesn't seem like a war to me.

    The tone in BF1 was a step in the right direction for me. I personally enjoy the gunplay in BFV more, but the drama seems, as you said, clynical. And war isn't clean. At least, the definition that I've been taught of what war is.

    Now, taking yet another look at the franchise, and then at Modern Warfare around the corner, someone somewhere in EA or DICE has really messed up. They're unlucky enough that a few people in their rivalry company has the guts to directly challenge them, combat large scale battles, and go after that dark, nebulous tone of modern war.

    I think this downfall could help EA/DICE realize that they cannot treat the gaming community this way and if they misstep or don't provide the content we're looking for, someone else will.

    Now that's definitely sad, because I want to see the company thrive. I don't exactly want the studio to die out. But I think EA is finally due for a nasty consequence.
  • Foxassassin
    83 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    bigiain said:
    The tone isn't too far away from BF1943, which people really weren't concerned about at the time as I remember. There's less conformity to the visuals because of the cosmetics though and they push things a little further. I'd guess the increase in fidelity has made players less forgiving about visuals as well. They really should have heeded the reaction to the last Brothers In Arms game.

    I'd agree about the forgotten battles element being completely undermined by the wrong factions and vehicles as well.
    Everyone seems to forget about Bf1942's secret weapons of WW2. I bet if they added a jetpack now,hell'd break loose
  • barnesalmighty2
    1477 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I'd happily sacrifice the ability to be revived for the ability to shoot off heads and limbs. That would instantly make it feel more WW2.
  • Vespervin
    1307 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Call of Duty: World at War nailed it in my opinion. I wish Battlefield V looked and felt more like that game, and played more like Battlefield 3.

    With that said I still enjoy playing this game from time to time, but I put nowhere near the amount of hours into it like I did with Battlefield 3 and Battlefield 4.
  • NN_Buzz12
    102 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    BFV doesn’t have any connection to WW2 other than what you read. They needed a theme for marketing to get the masses talking. Look at the skins - historical?

    If you’re one of those folks that say “it’s a game” my answer is don’t claim a affiliation to WW2 if the game is a perversive fairytale of history.

    Total money grab by releasing their version of rainbows and unicorns. Are you amused? I’m not.

    The open sandbox for hackers ended all my motivation to play this game.
  • MusicienElegant
    14 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited August 24
    NN_Buzz12 wrote: »
    BFV doesn’t have any connection to WW2 other than what you read. They needed a theme for marketing to get the masses talking. Look at the skins - historical?

    If you’re one of those folks that say “it’s a game” my answer is don’t claim a affiliation to WW2 if the game is a perversive fairytale of history.

    Total money grab by releasing their version of rainbows and unicorns. Are you amused? I’m not.

    The open sandbox for hackers ended all my motivation to play this game.

    No, I agree. It likely was a marketing tactic to appeal to the community. That's not surprising.

    On one hand it is a game, but on another it's not. It just depends on how we're looking at it.

    Aside from that, it being a game doesn't justify the several buggy elements in it. What's interesting is that when gamers preorder this content they are supporting companies to continue to not have finished products for us.

    I think we should hold on to our money until we know that gaming companies have a solid product.

    Modern Warfare looks very good in my opinion, but there could be lackluster content when it is released, or worse yet, buggy content. Due to that unreliability, I won't be preordering.
  • MarauderFox
    56 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    DICE dropped the ball on BFVs tone/atmosphere because the game doesn't immerse you into the role
    Singleplayer doesn't work because it's difficult to portray the reality or form a connection in a short chapter especially when you take creative-liberties to prioritise modern message over realities of war via barely known stories.


    BF3 did it well; every aspect of gameplay had the input vs. feedback to make actions feel satisfying; and everything was accompanied by sounds fx and gfx to immerse those feeling without the overall game feeling like a chaotic mess despite how brutal the map would be devastated.
    BF3s singleplayer was 2 stories side-by-side; you get to know the believable characters so their loss has impact after playing with them and it gave contrast between big fish on the world stage and vs. the experiences of soldiers who have to keep fighting after their friends are just killed
  • Godmodegta
    287 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    jroggs said:
    "Tone" is kind of a nebulous term.

    Even though they butchered the subject material in the single player, I think the tone was... okay. I sang along a little with "It's a Long Way to Tipperary." I got a touch misty when Deme watched his brother die. I felt some despair along with the German tankers. Nothing really grabbed me, though, and the parade of bugs didn't help.

    With multiplayer, I think it's mostly unfair to try to assess "tone," because other players generally aren't too cooperative with that flavor of experience. But still, when I think back to BF1, especially the French expansion...



    I am feeling it. Feeling it. This feels like World War 1 brutality and chaos. Sliding in mud, surrounded by rifle fire and explosions, desperately trying to keep a failing offensive moving, fighting bravely against impossible odds, dying for nothing. Absolutely sensational. I think about the blind skirmishes in the gas, the sight of an airship crashing into the ground, or the lone whistle followed by a roar from as attackers charge the next sector, and it gives me chills.

    I don't get that feeling in BFV. Everything feels... sterile. Clinical. You're here. The bad guys are over there. Go after them and do your best. It's fun. But it feels like a video game more than it feels like war.

    Now that good video, that show what BF1 is , the chaos,  explosive everywhere, I get the D-day feeling but not so grim, truly make you feel like your center of the war. BF5  has pretty  large map , where game become , find a spot, and you and enemy will pick off etcher from distant  till one side clear objected, BFV tone quiet picking off enemy in my opinion  and ambushing your enemy.
Sign In or Register to comment.