hope 128players rumours are fake for BF6 - they must focus to make the game same as bf3 and bf4

«1
alucardgr
409 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
128 players will make the game to be less <<personal>> will make players without teammates feel that they dont do difference in game.
even 48 players for me was better than 128.
They had to completelly focus to make the game same as bf3 and bf4 and  dont do more experiments.

Comments

  • AmosBurton_GER
    1002 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 9
    I also have strong doubts about this. They seem to focus on this ambitious goal which will bring more problems instead of focusing on fixing and not repeating the many wrong decisions they made in BFV.
  • Plucky6922
    563 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    When you say the same as BF3 and BF4, do you mean horrible suppression affect with Blue Tint, or broken and unplayable for almost one year on launch?
  • BASSMEANT_RAW
    42 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield Member
    This is back to the old school!!! This is clans!! This is like what mag was with good team work and tactical gameplay. The solo player mentality and gameplay is what makes this whole scene garbage. EVERYTHING from bf5 was arcade nonsense built for solo players. 

    64 players a side is 2 clans vs 2 clans

    That is gonna be some of the best gameplay console has seen in decades.
  • Shy_pipo_ape
    307 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I am glad DICE is innovating but if they forget unit cohesion mechanics, comms, chain of command, community functionalities etc. then gameplay will be less about proper squad play and more about unorganised mess of individuals playing for themselves first and foremost.
  • lennyvonlenny
    11 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Dice need to have a look back at what made the Battlefield series so popular and set it apart from other games instead of this experimental nonsense!
    Bfv has been the worst bf since modern combat for me.
    Why no manual spotting?
    The maps were big but felt constricted into choke points.
    Bfv felt like if Battlefield call of duty and battlefront all rolled into one game that has identity issues! a money grabbing mess!
  • BASSMEANT_RAW
    42 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield Member
    bf2mc was the last true bf.

    spotting shouldnt be in the game. sliding, melee, vehicle cap. all shouldn't be there.

    finally we get real sized maps with real player counts. not this operation metro crap.
  • Mikex2112
    1039 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    For the love of god!!!
    EA/Dice should NEVER EVER take advice from this community...They tried with BF3/BF4 and those 2 games are casual trash
  • Majest1cM00s3
    8 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield Member
    It's hard not to be somewhat skeptical about such a big change. It's very possible that DICE integrates it very well and it ENHANCES the Battlefield experience. It is also very possible that it is done very wrong and DEGRADES the battlefield experience.

    I think this can be a good change if map sizes increase with player counts and there is a reason for players not to get together into a meaningless grind.

    I imagine in my mind something that can make it feel really neat. Label Team 1 as X and Team 2 as Y and X1, X2, etc are any number of squads targeting a certain objective where multiple objectives are present. X1 and X2 have two different forced spawn points (maybe not, just an example). X1 is attacking objective A and X2 is attacking objective B; A and B are separated by a considerable distance. X1 captures A and this unlocks 2 more objectives C and D to capture, even though X2 has not taken B. X1 receives two blackhawk helicopters which enables them to attack C and D, or to travel the considerable distance and reinforce the squads attempting to take B. 

    Or imagine a map for Rush or Conquest Assault where the attacking team doesn't spawn on the ground, but instead can spawn in 1 of 8 fighter jets or inside 1 or 2 C-130 planes. The Fighter Jets must fly escort for the C-130's to get them over a drop zone where infantry that spawned in the cargo planes jump and parachute into any number of objectives to attack them.

    However flawed the above scenarios are, my only point is that more players CAN enhance the experience while still making it feel very strongly like Battlefield with new scenarios and opportunities. The opposite is also true, and that is where I really hope that if DICE  increases the player count by a lot that they can create a purely Battlefield experience that will work with it!
  • MarauderFox
    130 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    More =/= Better
    Good luck designing and balancing a map, the vehicle spawns, gadgets and vehicle weapons around 128 players whilst also considering <128 player servers (because some servers will have lower population caps or just won't get filled)
    Every post in support of 128 players has been "omg be so cool" and completely ignore all the challenges it brings, challenges that DICE has fumbled with BF4, 1 and V
  • BASSMEANT_RAW
    42 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield Member
    edited February 13
    its gonna boil down to a simple thing:

    the folks that played MAG will love this.
    the clans will LOVE this. solo players better get their game up

    i can see now why dude said what he said on twitter about the playerbase not liking it. 

    the last 5 iterations of the game haven't been for the original playerbase. they were for the crossover cod kids. all this nonesense with vehicle caps and chokepoint maps and this weird sliding garbage, no medium range engagement. the focus has been on bells and whistle for so long that todays "players" don't understand: this is not battlefield. hasn't been since maybe bc2 at best.

    the teams, the mic users, the folks that play seriously will have a fun time in the 128 rooms.

    the casuals and solos will eventually filter down to the 32 rooms.

    a lot of randoms will create clans to be able to roll. the real old skool clans will have the internal communication down already, built up from playstation 2 days. they can take an L and keep rolling together. todays gamers in a clan will take a single loss, blame each other, call everyone toxic and bail on the clan. 

    with modern jets, you are gonna need huge maps to accomdate their speed. with platoons you are going to really need to balance the game because a clan will take and hold an objectivee in a vice grip and the casuals will quit out when they see a b c are held and d, which happens to be the meat grinder flag, is intentionally left open for them to take.

    Some of us have already played 128 V 128. a lotta you missed out on that.
    This is just Acquisition all over again. 

    G'luck
    Post edited by MorningTimeCloud on
  • sonnov7
    69 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Map designs that where smaller and had less pointless buildings was better maps don’t need to be bigger I guess less is better some times for example bigger distances between bases can work out ok but you need rat runs and choke points encourage gameplay to happen in those areas a bad example is panzerstrom complete open field big maps need to have cluster of bases in a certain area of the map take hamada for instance.
  • BASSMEANT_RAW
    42 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield Member
    the designs you're talking about only work because they have heavily nerfed the combined arms aspect of the game. Vehicles have taken a back seat to close quarters arcade gameplay for too long. With the right map design and vehicle balances and the right tools for each squad and platoon there won't be a "safe" spot on the map. In fact, if done correctly, the wasted or empty parts of the map will get used in ways todays gamers aren't used to. Small maps leave no room for meta gameplay.

    the last really legit sized map was Heavy Metal
  • Majest1cM00s3
    8 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield Member
    the designs you're talking about only work because they have heavily nerfed the combined arms aspect of the game. Vehicles have taken a back seat to close quarters arcade gameplay for too long. With the right map design and vehicle balances and the right tools for each squad and platoon there won't be a "safe" spot on the map. In fact, if done correctly, the wasted or empty parts of the map will get used in ways todays gamers aren't used to. Small maps leave no room for meta gameplay.

    the last really legit sized map was Heavy Metal
    Out of curiosity, what was it about Heavy Metal that made it so good for you? I'm not saying you're right or wrong, I enjoyed that map as well, I am just curious about what your take is on that.

    I think it would be neat to have a map that creates a similar experience to the "Charlie Don't Surf" campaign mission from CoD4 which utilized a large number of blackhawk helicopters to drop infantry into a shore town. I would love to see a multiplayer map that used a similar opening experience (for rush/breakthrough). That would also need balancing with such a high number of Blackhawks orbiting around the town with mini-guns, but the experience was pretty neat.
  • RRedux
    767 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    When thinking about how "well" earlier battlefield games handle latency, 128 player will probably be unplayable. Already now, thanks to the magic of network latency compensation, players get the satisfaction of being shot around corners, over hills, after you go into buildings etc.

    Imagine how much worse it will become with 128 players. 
  • sonnov7
    69 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 16
    @MarauderFox you don’t need every mode to have 128 players. Dice don’t have the time to make dedicated maps for certain game modes that’s why they try to make all maps fit around 4 different game modes it’s efficient but your not going to make the bests maps for designed specifically for certain game modes that way.
  • sonnov7
    69 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 16
    People talk a lot about bf3&4 they are good don’t get me wrong but I will include bf2 in your group discussion title. BFMC2 had the best maps in

    1. Backstab
    2. Deadly pass
    3. The nest
    4. Bridge to far

    all this maps are better then any bf3 or 4 map I know hands down. I
  • trip1ex
    5334 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    well it's definitely going to have more players.  

    not a fan of that on its own.  But excited to see what the new BF will be.

    IT sounds like they are at least going for something more grand and hopefully more interesting.  I thought BFV was  too small potatoes and rather unexciting especially the vanilla maps.  


  • BASSMEANT_RAW
    42 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield Member
    heavy metal was the legit scale maps needed to be. and it was neccessary to work together both vehicles and infantry or you got merced. also there was room for meta gameplay. we used to make op restrepo at a certain location and force focus on a small group that drew focus off the objectives. teams that fell for it lost.

    and i agree with dude above


    if you havent played BF2MC then you really aren't up to speed on what bf is supposed to be.

    that game was the best.
  • sonnov7
    69 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    @BASSMEANT_RAW i like that you have still kept RAW in your name

    Question does KiLLiMo_RAW still play he was a friend of mine on BFBC1
  • BASSMEANT_RAW
    42 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield Member
    The only cats i see regular are ones that came to RaW from LSGH. I'm kinda wondering if bf6 is actually a legit bf game, how many of the old timers are left, how many tags pop up.

Sign In or Register to comment.