In the end how do you rate BF1?

Comments

  • MachoFantast1c0
    1088 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    People who use the word cancerous to describe a game need to get a grip on reality.

    9/10, had a blast playing this game for oever year
    I give it a six

    Nerfing the slide, adding more high rof weapons and buffing the bomber, downgrading the framerate performance every patch and inconsistent server performance, coupled along with a lacking or absent midround balancer makes this game cancerous to play.

    However on some days or some servers, you can still have fun and it's still alot polished than most fps offerings out there.

    So 6/10.

    47 days played on a game you call cancerous...imagine if you actually liked it.. LOL :smile:

    Im not a big fan of using cancer to describe a game, but to each his own.

    I give it a 9/10, had a blast playing this game for over a year. its my second favorite BF right behind BF3. Cant wait to spend another year playing BFV.

    I don't see BFv having those issues. Hopefully, dice will learn.

    I'm convinced that client and server performance will be even worse, and balance will be as inconsistent as ever. And I will play the **** out of it.

  • bran1986
    4015 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    People who use the word cancerous to describe a game need to get a grip on reality.

    9/10, had a blast playing this game for oever year
    I give it a six

    Nerfing the slide, adding more high rof weapons and buffing the bomber, downgrading the framerate performance every patch and inconsistent server performance, coupled along with a lacking or absent midround balancer makes this game cancerous to play.

    However on some days or some servers, you can still have fun and it's still alot polished than most fps offerings out there.

    So 6/10.

    47 days played on a game you call cancerous...imagine if you actually liked it.. LOL :smile:

    Im not a big fan of using cancer to describe a game, but to each his own.

    I give it a 9/10, had a blast playing this game for over a year. its my second favorite BF right behind BF3. Cant wait to spend another year playing BFV.

    I don't see BFv having those issues. Hopefully, dice will learn.

    I'm convinced that client and server performance will be even worse, and balance will be as inconsistent as ever. And I will play the **** out of it.

    And you will make people cry :wink:
  • von_Campenstein
    5379 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited July 9
    People who use the word cancerous to describe a game need to get a grip on reality.

    9/10, had a blast playing this game for oever year
    I give it a six

    Nerfing the slide, adding more high rof weapons and buffing the bomber, downgrading the framerate performance every patch and inconsistent server performance, coupled along with a lacking or absent midround balancer makes this game cancerous to play.

    However on some days or some servers, you can still have fun and it's still alot polished than most fps offerings out there.

    So 6/10.

    47 days played on a game you call cancerous...imagine if you actually liked it.. LOL :smile:

    Im not a big fan of using cancer to describe a game, but to each his own.

    I give it a 9/10, had a blast playing this game for over a year. its my second favorite BF right behind BF3. Cant wait to spend another year playing BFV.

    I don't see BFv having those issues. Hopefully, dice will learn.

    I'm convinced that client and server performance will be even worse, and balance will be as inconsistent as ever. And I will play the **** out of it.

    I've come to the same conclusion but fail to find the drive to power through. DICE lack of addressing these things at all lead me to think this, surely they must be aware of it being an issue.
  • Loqtrall
    11051 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    I'd give it an 8/10. It was better at launch and definitely has issues. If it's gunplay felt better I'd be inclined give it more praise. Unfortunately I like games where my shots go where I'm aiming my weapon. Server/lag problems, 150+ ping players, and crap netcode don't help that at all.
  • MikeManiac61
    716 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    7/10, 5/10 after the TTK patch.



    All though I had plenty of hours in this game, the long wait for DLC, the lack of communication (especially when the TTK 2.0 was launched), my shots going a different direction regardless who I'm pointing at, Suppression sometimes feels like at times it doesn't do squat (definitely when suppressing snipers).
  • Old_man_Peli
    833 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    People who use the word cancerous to describe a game need to get a grip on reality.

    9/10, had a blast playing this game for oever year
    I give it a six

    Nerfing the slide, adding more high rof weapons and buffing the bomber, downgrading the framerate performance every patch and inconsistent server performance, coupled along with a lacking or absent midround balancer makes this game cancerous to play.

    However on some days or some servers, you can still have fun and it's still alot polished than most fps offerings out there.

    So 6/10.

    47 days played on a game you call cancerous...imagine if you actually liked it.. LOL :smile:

    Im not a big fan of using cancer to describe a game, but to each his own.

    I give it a 9/10, had a blast playing this game for over a year. its my second favorite BF right behind BF3. Cant wait to spend another year playing BFV.

    I don't see BFv having those issues. Hopefully, dice will learn.

    I'm convinced that client and server performance will be even worse, and balance will be as inconsistent as ever. And I will play the **** out of it.

    If those same issues, come into play, I'm not buying the game. I don't have it preordered. I was going to get it shortly after release. Unless someone gifts it to me, I don't know if I'll buy it at launch. Just played a session where my ping was spiking up to 200ping on an east coast server. Jumped server to server, all the servers were having the same issue. Not tolerating that next game. BF4 had the netcode launch issues, BF1 got bad netcode with the ITTOT release and its never really been fixed since. Stuff like that can't be in an AAA title.
  • trip1ex
    3427 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    edited July 10
    Conquest is a bore in BF1. Too much dead time. Too much Zerg.

    And instead of fixing that they came out with ttk 2.0. Even a simple fix like ending matches early when the score gets out of hand would have gone a long ways to increasing my enjoyment as I don't see a pt in playing out matches that are all but over. I take breaks instead. I guess I should see the positive side of that lol.

    Didn't care for any of the other modes.
  • Kongo030
    93 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    8/10 due to the lack of a progression system and split of the playerbase. The weapon unlocks and service assignments were sometimes too time consuming.
  • von_Campenstein
    5379 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    trip1ex wrote: »
    Conquest is a bore in BF1. Too much dead time. Too much Zerg.

    And instead of fixing that they came out with ttk 2.0. Even a simple fix like ending matches early when the score gets out of hand would have gone a long ways to increasing my enjoyment as I don't see a pt in playing out matches that are all but over. I take breaks instead. I guess I should see the positive side of that lol.

    Didn't care for any of the other modes.

    They could've just reverted back to majority of flags only for points, making comebacks more plausible and players less resigned once the team falls behind. Instead we got Conquest Assault...
  • trip1ex
    3427 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    edited July 10
    trip1ex wrote: »
    Conquest is a bore in BF1. Too much dead time. Too much Zerg.

    And instead of fixing that they came out with ttk 2.0. Even a simple fix like ending matches early when the score gets out of hand would have gone a long ways to increasing my enjoyment as I don't see a pt in playing out matches that are all but over. I take breaks instead. I guess I should see the positive side of that lol.

    Didn't care for any of the other modes.

    They could've just reverted back to majority of flags only for points, making comebacks more plausible and players less resigned once the team falls behind. Instead we got Conquest Assault...

    They tested it on Amiens. It didn't feel right to me. And probably required more work with the Behemoths and everything.

    I like Conquest ASsault. That is what most maps in BF42 and BF2 were. Although with squad spawning and the way tickets work in Bf1, it isn't quite as fun in BF1.

    For one, if you get all flags, it's still too easy for the enemy to respawn on other squad members and cap a flag and keep the game from ending. TAkes some of the fun(tension) out of CQA. BF42 had no squad spawning and BF2 had SL-only spawning.

    Also the way CQA works doesn't feel quite right cause of the way tickets work. Back in the day, the defenders could only be bled if the attackers got all the flags. In BF1 CQA, you bleed the other side (gain more tickets than the other side)if you hold more flags. Thus in BF1, CQA is closer to just being regular BF1 Conquest.

  • Hortey
    181 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    7/10

    It's good, they did a lot of great things moving away from the hud/minimap centric playstyle that was rising. Mostly I just get bored because the guns are forgetable, the gameplay doesn't feel like bf1 but a reskin of other battlefield games.

    The issues I have with the game are:
    1. No real vehicle moments presented themselves. Once in a while a heavy tank cruises through a wall or over a trench and bombing runs make for some cool moments... but most often its a big infantry meat grinder in the obvious choke points.
    2. Too much fully automatic fire. If i had had my way, infantry style bolt actions would have been all kit weapons, smg's would have been tanker class only, and LMG's would have been a deployable (unusable unless bipoded). More gas rushes with bayonetes and switching to melee when overrun would have been really cool.
  • CostanzaStan
    171 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    I've put in almost 500 hours so it better be a 10/10 for me.
  • PsychoKraken
    3 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited July 10
    I loved it and still do! The map design was amazing and well though, the classes felt useful and balanced (for the most part) and the story (campaign) was spot on! I would rate it 9/10 in every category apart from 2. I would have loved way less automatic weapons and vehicles and way more bolt action weapons and i would have loved a few more customisation options for the weapons.
    Other than that they did great.
  • NLBartmaN
    1692 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    I must say that the server and freezing problems since the last patch are lowering my rating for the game ...

    And as far as I know now, they won't change anything about the server issues for BF V ... they might even remove the Rental Server Program (RSP) ..

    How is it possible that an AAA game title company keeps on having problems every Patch and are not able to have a smooth online gaming experience ..

    They seriously need a better QA department ..
  • WetFishDB
    1497 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    8/10 for me.

    Likes:
    • Decent variety of game modes to suit most people (including me)
    • Pretty stunning visuals
    • Gun-play is mostly consistent (only the occasional bullet sponge etc)
    • Generally rewards ability (aim, positioning, tactics etc)
    • Lots of ways to play with friends (see who's playing, party, squads etc)
    • Lots of ways to communicate with non-friends (VoIP, Commo Rose etc)
    • Generally pretty well balanced maps

    Minor dislikes:
    • Too much spread (suppression)
    • TTK a little too quick for my liking post TTK2
    • Gas grenades going through walls and buildings and unclear radius
    • Imbalance between infantry and planes
    • Sweet spot mechanic
    • 3D spotting
    • Bugs (invisible players, guns clipping through cover)
    • Mortar (from behemoth, enemy supports, mortar trucks etc) and bombs from planes have no visuals showing the radius on the mini-map (unlike the infiltrator's attack). Makes it pretty hard to react given there often is no line of site to the perpetrator.
  • BlueCelticPagan
    9 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    When the game works without any bugs or technical issues i'd give it a 9/10. Unfortunately there have been so many bugs in this game there have been days it's been unplayable. At the moment the maps don't load making operations unplayable.


    Because of the bugs i'd score the game 6/10.

    If you buy something, it's meant to work as of the description given. Perhaps EA should add into the advertising that these games may not work as intended and technical issues will at times make the game unplayable.
  • huba81
    8 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    I give BF1 9/10. I've had a lot of fun with the game solo and with friends. My biggest concern with BF1 is the BUGS. When they they patch one bug, one or two new arrives. I'm really looking forward to BFV but please DICE make fixing bugs higher priority for gods sake.
  • DrakeCasanova
    551 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited July 10
    People who use the word cancerous to describe a game need to get a grip on reality.

    9/10, had a blast playing this game for oever year
    I give it a six

    Nerfing the slide, adding more high rof weapons and buffing the bomber, downgrading the framerate performance every patch and inconsistent server performance, coupled along with a lacking or absent midround balancer makes this game cancerous to play.

    However on some days or some servers, you can still have fun and it's still alot polished than most fps offerings out there.

    So 6/10.

    47 days played on a game you call cancerous...imagine if you actually liked it.. LOL :smile:

    Im not a big fan of using cancer to describe a game, but to each his own.

    I give it a 9/10, had a blast playing this game for over a year. its my second favorite BF right behind BF3. Cant wait to spend another year playing BFV.

    It's called being objective. I'm objective that this game had A lot of issues. I'm not going to sugar coat it, just because I enjoy playing it. I don't see BFv having those issues. Hopefully, dice will learn. Its still a fun game. 6/10 is fair, but those gameplay elements, the performance of the game are what drag it down to a six. Before that, It was probably around an 8 for me.

    Fair enough. To me saying the game has issues (which i agree it does) is in no way the same thing as saying its 'cancerous'. When you apply the cancer label to something that kind of implies that its really really bad ...you know, like cancer.

    But yes it has issues some of which have been there for a long time but its still a brilliantly fun game to play.

  • Old_man_Peli
    833 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    8/10 for me.

    Likes:
    • Decent variety of game modes to suit most people (including me)
    • Pretty stunning visuals
    • Gun-play is mostly consistent (only the occasional bullet sponge etc)
    • Generally rewards ability (aim, positioning, tactics etc)
    • Lots of ways to play with friends (see who's playing, party, squads etc)
    • Lots of ways to communicate with non-friends (VoIP, Commo Rose etc)
    • Generally pretty well balanced maps

    Minor dislikes:
    • Too much spread (suppression)
    • TTK a little too quick for my liking post TTK2
    • Gas grenades going through walls and buildings and unclear radius
    • Imbalance between infantry and planes
    • Sweet spot mechanic
    • 3D spotting
    • Bugs (invisible players, guns clipping through cover)
    • Mortar (from behemoth, enemy supports, mortar trucks etc) and bombs from planes have no visuals showing the radius on the mini-map (unlike the infiltrator's attack). Makes it pretty hard to react given there often is no line of site to the perpetrator.

    I think ttk is fine. It's just adding more high rof guns and buffing bipods that's the major issue
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!