IMPORTANT: The Real problem with Battlefield V's gameplay design
4 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
This game has a serious design flaw that needs to be corrected. The way i see it Battlefield V is swimming in between Classic and New school battlefield and the way it's being done simply doesn't make sense and that is exactly what's wrong with Battlefield V. It cant be both at once.
The flaw i'm talking about that is these 2 things mixed together:
Kill Time
&
Weapon Accuracy
These 2 things don't mix very well and it is the root of the problem. One of these 2 has to be taken out out of the equation. Taking out one of them would also define what type of game BFV wants to be, Classic or New School.
So, lets ask ourselves this question, why are we complaining about the time to kill? why is it that people make such a big fuss about dying too quickly in-game?
Now, think about this, Do you remember complaining or anyone complaining about the time to kill in Battlefield Bad Company 2, which was the last Classic battlefield? In bad company 2 you died very quickly, and yet nobody complained, or even noticed, remember? There is a reason for it, and it's because of the weapon accuracy in older Battlefields wasn't laser accurate, meaning your time alive in-game was longer while also being a difficult game. Battlefield V on the other hand, isn't difficult, it's Artificial Difficulty, it's annoying and not Fun. I'm all for a challenging game, but challenge has to be balanced to be fun, not artificial.
People notice the time to kill in Battlefield V because weapons are way to accurate and it's annoying considering the fast time to kill as i said, Assault Riffles OUTCLASSING Snipers in Range, that is something that doesn't make sense in a Battlefield Game. You as a person using a Assault Riffle, should only dominate in mid-range, never in long range. Battlefield always had classes to play as with its own weapon types, and those weapon types should function to what they are accordingly, they should never be laser accurate, they should only be accurate at their respective ranges and even then should still not be that accurate in terms of recoil, there needs to be skill and mastering of the weapon, or else people will stick to 1 class *cough* medic in bf3-4 *cough* assault in bf1 *cough*
There is something about Classic Battlefield that is missing in New Battlefield, which is mastering weapons. Nowadays all you need is to point, and shot till it dies on full auto. Remember when you had to mind about bullet drop? Does anyone? among other things. That is the reason why in BC2 people didn't notice the time to kill, because you weren't being shot by like 2-3 different dudes on the other side of the map with perfect accuracy which is only made worse because of the time to kill, and all weapons specialized in something and not equal in all ranges with slight difference, creating a tactical scenario where what class you choose to play, is what you were going to be, you had a role in the Battlefield on what your class is about, on gadgets and on gun fights.
New School Battlefield and Battlefield V may have bullet velocity and bullet drop, but do you even notice it that much? You don't, you don't even bother with that. Only snipers did in BF3 to BF4, and it was drastically changed in BF1 which is why Snipers were so annoying on that game, they were too accurate and they were a pest. Ironic how one o BF1's biggest complains became BFV as a whole.
TL;DR in other words
You can't have super accurate weapons and a fast time to kill at the same time. You can only have 1.
Having both creates a Artificial Difficulty scenario where the game just because annoying to play. It becomes
more like call of duty, where if you aim and shoot first, you win, removing any real depth to the gun fights. And it's
the reason why people are complaining about the time to kill
So, THE question becomes
What game does Battlefield V want to be? does it want to be Old school or New School? removing one of these 2 will define the game for what it is, DICE i hope you're reading this thread, and to the community, tell me
what do you prefer.
The New School Battlefield Route:
Removing Fast Time to Kill, but keeping Laser-like Accuracy
Meaning, it becomes more like what you've known since BF3 to BF1. A arcade military action game, over the top, not as tactical.
It's self explanatory, low time to kill meaning you have more freedom and go nuts
OR
The Old School Battlefield Route:
Removing Laser-like Accuracy, but keeping Fast Time to Kill
Meaning, going back to Old School. From the days of Battlefield 1942, till Battlefield Bad Company 2,
A military game, that is tactical. You weren't a superhero going rambo with a M16A3..Or AEK971...Or Automatico.
Whatever class you choose to play, is what you are and whatever weapon you had, you specialized in specific ranges,
and you had to master your weapon's Recoil, bullet drop, bullet velocity not just aiming on point,
so you weren't gonna dropping people like flies despite the low time to kill any time soon unless you had some admirable skill.
The flaw i'm talking about that is these 2 things mixed together:
Kill Time
&
Weapon Accuracy
These 2 things don't mix very well and it is the root of the problem. One of these 2 has to be taken out out of the equation. Taking out one of them would also define what type of game BFV wants to be, Classic or New School.
So, lets ask ourselves this question, why are we complaining about the time to kill? why is it that people make such a big fuss about dying too quickly in-game?
Now, think about this, Do you remember complaining or anyone complaining about the time to kill in Battlefield Bad Company 2, which was the last Classic battlefield? In bad company 2 you died very quickly, and yet nobody complained, or even noticed, remember? There is a reason for it, and it's because of the weapon accuracy in older Battlefields wasn't laser accurate, meaning your time alive in-game was longer while also being a difficult game. Battlefield V on the other hand, isn't difficult, it's Artificial Difficulty, it's annoying and not Fun. I'm all for a challenging game, but challenge has to be balanced to be fun, not artificial.
People notice the time to kill in Battlefield V because weapons are way to accurate and it's annoying considering the fast time to kill as i said, Assault Riffles OUTCLASSING Snipers in Range, that is something that doesn't make sense in a Battlefield Game. You as a person using a Assault Riffle, should only dominate in mid-range, never in long range. Battlefield always had classes to play as with its own weapon types, and those weapon types should function to what they are accordingly, they should never be laser accurate, they should only be accurate at their respective ranges and even then should still not be that accurate in terms of recoil, there needs to be skill and mastering of the weapon, or else people will stick to 1 class *cough* medic in bf3-4 *cough* assault in bf1 *cough*
There is something about Classic Battlefield that is missing in New Battlefield, which is mastering weapons. Nowadays all you need is to point, and shot till it dies on full auto. Remember when you had to mind about bullet drop? Does anyone? among other things. That is the reason why in BC2 people didn't notice the time to kill, because you weren't being shot by like 2-3 different dudes on the other side of the map with perfect accuracy which is only made worse because of the time to kill, and all weapons specialized in something and not equal in all ranges with slight difference, creating a tactical scenario where what class you choose to play, is what you were going to be, you had a role in the Battlefield on what your class is about, on gadgets and on gun fights.
New School Battlefield and Battlefield V may have bullet velocity and bullet drop, but do you even notice it that much? You don't, you don't even bother with that. Only snipers did in BF3 to BF4, and it was drastically changed in BF1 which is why Snipers were so annoying on that game, they were too accurate and they were a pest. Ironic how one o BF1's biggest complains became BFV as a whole.
TL;DR in other words
You can't have super accurate weapons and a fast time to kill at the same time. You can only have 1.
Having both creates a Artificial Difficulty scenario where the game just because annoying to play. It becomes
more like call of duty, where if you aim and shoot first, you win, removing any real depth to the gun fights. And it's
the reason why people are complaining about the time to kill
So, THE question becomes
What game does Battlefield V want to be? does it want to be Old school or New School? removing one of these 2 will define the game for what it is, DICE i hope you're reading this thread, and to the community, tell me
what do you prefer.
The New School Battlefield Route:
Removing Fast Time to Kill, but keeping Laser-like Accuracy
Meaning, it becomes more like what you've known since BF3 to BF1. A arcade military action game, over the top, not as tactical.
It's self explanatory, low time to kill meaning you have more freedom and go nuts
OR
The Old School Battlefield Route:
Removing Laser-like Accuracy, but keeping Fast Time to Kill
Meaning, going back to Old School. From the days of Battlefield 1942, till Battlefield Bad Company 2,
A military game, that is tactical. You weren't a superhero going rambo with a M16A3..Or AEK971...Or Automatico.
Whatever class you choose to play, is what you are and whatever weapon you had, you specialized in specific ranges,
and you had to master your weapon's Recoil, bullet drop, bullet velocity not just aiming on point,
so you weren't gonna dropping people like flies despite the low time to kill any time soon unless you had some admirable skill.
2
Comments
Once they get the 1 frame deaths fixed the sky is the limit. Bf1 was a cheese fest. Just cuz someone started shooting first inaccurately then reigned it in suppressed the crap outta you. Now if you cant stay on target and i can you die. Awesome game.
As far as AR outclassing recons, I also disagree on this. The only times I've been able to take out a sniper at longer ranges is with the Gewehr. I'd like to see video footage of you doing so with the STG on full auto, because even if you manage the kill, you're going to be out of ammo real quick.
I was wondering if its not only the game but the input methods and hardware and technology changes over time. Mice back in the day weren't as good as today's mice. Back in BF42, I bet most were using rubberball mice. Also we used dial-up modems back then to play BF42. Did that add to the difficult of hitting a target. You had to lead more I believe. Maybe there was more delay. Also the screens we were playing on. How responsive were those? What was Windows mouse input like back 16 yrs ago.
Anyway it felt you could move without getting shot so easily back in the day.
Another change that I roughly recall DICE making is erroring on the side of the shooter. Making the experience of shooting better (in turn this means easier) by making you hit things on your screen if you aiming at them. This might sound like a big Doh. But since we are playing the game over the internets what you see on your screen is not actually where the enemy is. And DICE, based on what I've dirtily filthily skimmed over the years, is using some prediction methods to show you where enemies are. Result being it's easier to hit enemies. The experience as the shooter is better. But the experience on the other end is worse. And maybe this is contributing to that feeling too of it's too easy to kill and be killed.
I AGREE COMPLETELY WITH THIS STATEMENT.
Just yes
They want laser ARs with Zero recoil and 2 shoot kills. But If a Sniper Kills them one shoot they come to the Forum or Reddit and complain how OP they are and useless.
Just out of curiosity what is considered medium range to you and what is long range for an assault or sniper rifle?
I agree with you there should differences. But if this game is going for a more realistic approach then with most of the maps sizes it wouldn't make a difference. Army issued assault rifles are zeroed to 300m and most of us usually hit what we are shooting for at 300m easily because we are train to at that range with iron sights. Considering most of gunfights even with snipers in BFV tend to be under that range, out shooting a sniper can be done in a lot of situations. LMGs can also be shot with great accuracy if enough time and training with them at those ranges and further.
Even though the longest recorded sniper kill was at 2475 m, surprisingly most actual sniper kills tend to fall probably within 50-500m. With an ACOG on an M-4 you could still technically very easily out shoot a sniper if you saw him first at those ranges. Snipers IRL are experts far more proficient and accurate than the regular soldier that's why I said if you saw him first. Everything is always situational dependent and just because someone is specially trained does not make them invincible, everyone makes mistakes.
But this is a game and not real life so yea the weapons ranges need to be scaled backed to fit the average map sizes and differentiate the weapon strengths and weaknesses for the sake of game balance. Otherwise weapon choices become bland and boring with almost everyone running around just using one weapon all the time, which I've seen in other and past games. You can see some of that in this game also.
Personally most weapon mechanics in games are ridiculous to me, being prone should always be the most accurate, kneeling less accurate, and standing the most inaccurate especially while moving or hip firing which rarely rarely ever happens IRL. There really is not that much of a difference in most shooter games with stances and accuracy because it would slow them down too much and most people want everything super fast right now in your face action. So that's why we get these kinds of game. I realize and just accept this if I play these games. If I want more realistic I'll just go play ARMA games or Squad on PC.
You also need to realize that just because you picked the sniper class does not make you a real sniper or automatically gives you kills for the situation. It's a game and there will always be someone better. I've seen people that religiously use snipers only in games even though they are horrible at it. Looking at those people with Sniper in your gamertag. Why is it about 75% or more of them with sniper in their gamertag are horrible at sniping in games? Not saying you are one of those, never played with or against you, so I wouldn't know but it just made think of other gamers I've seen in the past.