Weekly Debrief

The Battlefield V Pulse

Ameriken05
413 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
I am still trying to wrap my head around this game - what it is, what it will be. I want to continue coming on this forum and highlighting some of the things I'm seeing as an avid BF and WW2 fan - pointing out what I think is working so far and what remain huge concerns:

THE GOOD:
1. Squad and gunplay has never been better as far as I'm concerned. There's an increased cohesiveness not only with your squad, but with the entire team (for the most part) - usually regardless whether you are playing with friends or randos. The gun mechanics are heavy and satisfying, with what seems to be increased engagement distances (due to map design), making for some incredibly satisfying firefights and tactical situations.
2. Map variety is great so far - a good mix of large open, urban, and close quarters maps that keep the map rotation fresh and needing constant tactical adjustment.
3. UI is vastly improved over past titles, particularly within the Company and managing classes, weapons, customization, etc.
4. Squad reinforcements are a great asset, but hoping to see many more options (maybe map dependent) in future to really open up the tactical toolbox of a squad.
5. Vehicle variety is out to a great start, but again hoping we see these options expand (again, maybe map dependent) as vehicles really did define WW2.

CONCERNS:
1. Grand Operations is completely underwhelming, think about going back to what worked in BF1 and just adding a little WW2 flare to it (i.e. airborne, final stand) - it was the tangible progress with battalions/sectors/maps that made Operations feel so big. And in lieu of opening cinematics why wasn't actual WW2 footage from the battles used for context/setup?
2. Tides of War content remains unclear - I think most of the community would really like to see a more complete roadmap so we can remain faithful this game will be as big as advertised. Overture revealed these updates might not be as advertised - specifically a single mode map, an incomplete/marginally useful training range, and only a handful of new skins. I'm now skeptical of the next chapter, and the chapters after that. Will we get more complete content, and/or will there be other "mini-updates" between the main chapter pushes?
3. Training Range - it is clear this was an ambitious idea, and it is a welcomed return of a useful BF tool. However currently the training range is only marginally useful - this is mainly due to fact that we cannot utilize our guns/vehicles from the main game to get some true practice in. I don't think we need the full arsenal of weapons, but just be able to access the weapons/vehicles we have in our company and switch/modify as we would be able to in a multiplayer match - not too dissimilar to how it worked in BF4 (though it would be nice to have full access to both axis/allies vehicles as they could all be setup differently). And yes, would be nice to have a bit larger of a vehicle firing range.
4. Skins - My personal outrage during marketing for BFV was what appeared to be outrageously silly cosmetic character customization. Though it looks like this has for the most part been toned down for launch I remain concerned that it will start to rear its ugly head again. Crazy/cool customization of "legitimate" axis/allied uniform items is one thing, but going beyond that will not only ruin the feel/immersion of the game, but will also make it nearly impossible to tell who is who. Also concerned at the sloppy U.S. paratrooper skins that arrived for British use in Overture - why U.S. uniforms for Brits? And will we ever be able to customize tank/pilot characters? Will the armory ever fully open up to all available skins for purchase?
5. Battles - DICE keeps touting the "unknown" places of WW2. Okay so we go to some locations from 1940 (I probably would have done that as a DLC, but whatever) - does this mean the game is going to avoid the most famous battles? Will Tides of War go through the entire war? Again, goes back to a long term roadmap so we can at least prepare ourselves to be hugely disappointed or get really excited for what's coming.


Ameriken05
aka [CBRA] SturmSabreSix

Comments

  • oXGeminiXo
    355 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I agree with point 1 of the good and honestly have acrually made friends on this game to squad with and squads do make a difference. But i have even found that if you are not using a mic and playing with random that it seems to be that selfish play style but if you keep up showing the team you are willing to rush into hell to revive and you are supplying them them it seems half to 2/3 of the randoms have actually started to rush into doom to do the same for me. It was never like this of bf1 and I never heard anyone actually use a mic or even talk. I feel like this has an impact on this game that I really like and while the issues can be frustrating my overall experience is really pleased that I got the game. I dont agree with UI design because it is one of the more obvious buggy and glitchy things that you cant get around. I hope they work on it and make it more battle friendly and I hope they can put a black border on lettering because that would make such a huge impact visually. Even when watching YouTube I find it even hard to see if they even shot anyone most time and it has that same effect in game and can really lead to alot more eye doctors getting rich due to excessive eye strain trying to see if you got any points from gunfight. I think dice is doing a great job and can only hope that they continue to work on this game because I feel like starting small and growing the game will make the experience feel more community involved. I want to see this game become succesful.
  • moosehunter1969
    1108 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Totally agree with your “goods” but you clearly haven’t read the rules of this forum which are to hate on everything regardless of the fact a lot of people like the features.
    Because apparently it plays like COD, the weapons are overpowered or underpowered (often the same ones) the maps are either too large or too small and are trash and the UI is apparently the worst thing in the world ever and the whole game needs to die.

  • trip1ex
    4776 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited December 2018
    I'm going to go contrarian to everything I read and say gunplay is actually worse than ever for a BF game. Squad play is also more annoying than ever.

    Last I really think the maps are the least compelling set of maps in any BF launch ever.

    Gunplay is the worst because there is the least amount of cat and mouse to the gunplay of any BF game. IT's "you're dead" gunplay. Thus more boring. It's shoot the enemy from across the map and they can't even see you gunplay. Some of us bought BF because it wasn't PUBG or CS etc.


    Squad play has its moments. But really what changes there? YOu can do a buddy revive now seems like is the only real difference. Otherwise you're healing and passing out ammo like before. Except the passing out of ammo and medbags is more tedious than before. The getting health and ammo from crates is more annoying than before. Reviving makes you look at that animation. And buddy revives are 4 seconds long animations. And ...it gets really old doing buddy revives. You pretty much give up on them except when you really know the coast is clear. But does it really matter then? They can just respawn on you a second later. It's not like anyone cares about the outcome of the round in this game. so it's only for stats. PLus if your team gets behind, they get capture flags at lightspeed so who cares except for stat ****. Sorry going off a little bit there. Also to me the squad thing lately is more about padding your stats than teamplay.


    The maps definitely feel like the worst set of maps ever for a BF game. For one thing of the 8 maps at launch, 4 are pretty heavy heavy or infantry only. rotterdam, grey rotterdam, white Fjell, tan Aerodrome. I can't think of a BF game that launched with 50% heavy infantry/infantry-only small maps. BF1 comes close I suppose but one of the downers of BF1 was the infantry heavy direction. Rotterdam admittedly very nice looking but suffers from areas where you get lost in the minutiae and suffers from bad lighting and some sightlines that are too conducive to no-see sniping/tap firing.

    And really you could throw Navrik in there too as infantry only/heavy. Anyone want to play that map really? Not I. Grey rotterdam is like Paschendale in that you might as well just go prone and wait for the deer to come and kill 'em. The get up and move to another deer stand. I did like the little ramp on the 2nd level in the Church. Aerodome is get shot from places where you can't see the enemy or use the tank to camp the hangar from afar and rack up kills of enemies you can't see. The wooden building fighting is ok. But it's an infantry all drab tan and black and hard to see enemies and so much crap all around. There's nothing really great about it.

    Then you're left with Arras, Twisted Steel and Hamada. Arras is arguably the best map. And the one that most feels like BF. A mix of open and houses and homes. Twisted Steel is fine but makes you think BFV stands for BF:Vietnam. Hamada, for a big map, is pretty small and narrow feeling and not that conducive to ground vehicles as you would think a big map would be. And the lighting on that map burns out your retinas.

    So in the end it feels like there isn't much that excites in the map department.
  • oXGeminiXo
    355 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    trip1ex wrote: »
    I'm going to go contrarian to everything I read and say gunplay is actually worse than ever for a BF game. Squad play is also more annoying than ever.

    Last I really think the maps are the least compelling set of maps in any BF launch ever.

    Gunplay is the worst because there is the least amount of cat and mouse to the gunplay of any BF game. IT's "you're dead" gunplay. Thus more boring. It's shoot the enemy from across the map and they can't even see you gunplay. Some of us bought BF because it wasn't PUBG or CS etc.


    Squad play has its moments. But really what changes there? YOu can do a buddy revive now seems like is the only real difference. Otherwise you're healing and passing out ammo like before. Except the passing out of ammo and medbags is more tedious than before. The getting health and ammo from crates is more annoying than before. Reviving makes you look at that animation. And buddy revives are 4 seconds long animations. And ...it gets really old doing buddy revives. You pretty much give up on them except when you really know the coast is clear. But does it really matter then? They can just respawn on you a second later. It's not like anyone cares about the outcome of the round in this game. so it's only for stats. PLus if your team gets behind, they get capture flags at lightspeed so who cares except for stat ****. Sorry going off a little bit there. Also to me the squad thing lately is more about padding your stats than teamplay.


    The maps definitely feel like the worst set of maps ever for a BF game. For one thing of the 8 maps at launch, 4 are pretty heavy heavy or infantry only. rotterdam, grey rotterdam, white Fjell, tan Aerodrome. I can't think of a BF game that launched with 50% heavy infantry/infantry-only small maps. BF1 comes close I suppose but one of the downers of BF1 was the infantry heavy direction. Rotterdam admittedly very nice but suffers from areas where you get lost in the minutiae and suffers from bad lighting and some sightlines that too conducive to no-see sniping/tap firing.

    And really you could throw Navrik in there too as infantry only/heavy.

    Then you're left with Arras, Twisted Steel and Hamada. Arras is arguably the best map. And the one that most feels like BF. Twisted steel is fine but makes you think BFV stands for BF:Vietnam. Hamada, for a big map, is pretty small and narrow feeling and not that conducive to ground vehicles as you would think a big map would be. And the lighting on that map burns out your retinas.

    So in the end it feels like there is only one real winner of a map - Arras. The rest are ok at best.

    So quick question....how is squad play used in padding stats? I mean if you play everyone in your squad plays together overall you should do better but that is the same in any online multiplayer game. I use to play cod with my nephews and friends and we would actually get to the point where we would find it too easy so we would start goofing around with different ways of playing. People working together will always have a advantage against lone wolfs
Sign In or Register to comment.