The "core" community = loud minority

Comments

  • JRMBelgiumTwitch
    720 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    TH3_R1PP3R wrote: »
    TH3_R1PP3R wrote: »
    Core = hardcore players for the most part. They have always been a small but vocal group. Honestly, do any of you guys that are complaining about the ttk so loudly play vanilla in other bf titles. Splitting the community between hardcore players and vanilla players is nothing new.

    I'd say core players are not hardcore players, but veterans and BF fans that spend hundreds of hours in each title.

    They're the players that keep the game running for years.

    Casuals will play a few hours a week and probably drop the game as soon as something else they like comes along.

    I disagree, most guys that i have seen on this forum , and have interacted with, that have alot of hours in several bf titles could care less about the ttk changes, or like me, like the changes overall. I'd like to take a poll of guys complaining about it. I'm betting 70% or more are hardcore mains in other bf titles. The current ttk is similar imo to bf4 and to be honest I'm fine with that.

    Well i consider myself a core player, but i hate hardcore. I could live with TTK 2.0, it actually benefits my style of play.

    What rustles my jimmies is I adapted and was perfectly fine with TTK 1.0, every aspect of the game seemed to be fine tuned around this TTK. That's all been thrown under the bus now and weapon balance is totally screwed. DICE also claimed that this change was implemented to help new players, but it actually does the opposite. Lastly it doesn't address the real issue which is TTD, not TTK. Fix TTD and all the insta-death complaints will vanish.

    Exactly, so if their focussing on things like TTK to try and minimise the effects of the TTD bug, doesn't that mean they don't know how to fix the TTD?
    The 'death' bug could be here to stay.

    Well, actually, the TTD is not Always correct in BF1 either. It's not as bad as in BF V. But there are many times that you get killed when already behind cover or when it feels like you get killed instantly, while being shot by a gun that is not able to do just that. So yeah, it could be that they are clueless in how to fix it.
  • SharpeXB
    209 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    SharpeXB wrote: »
    There’s nothing wrong with being a casual. But why would a dev try to cater to people who will only play this game for a few hours? Game developers simply must listen to their fan base otherwise who would they appeal to? At least the “vocal minority” is vocal. How can the univocal majority communicate what it wants?

    Again. 100000 people that play 2-3 hours a week vs 10000 that play 2-3 hours a day. You still end up with more playtime with the first group. And since casuals don't have time to unlock every item, the chance of they buying cosmetics to skip the challenges is bigger.
    Casuals don’t play 2-3 hours a week. They play 2-3 hours total. Something like 50% of people who buy any game will only play it for about 5 hours.
    As a game designer, would you design a game to only be played for 5 hours? Would you want the input from players with 5 hours in the game or 500?
    The core people were giving input to DICE all through development.

  • TropicPoison
    2243 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    McPlebster wrote: »
    Already gave it a try and it feels horrible. So many weapons are out of question now, ZH-29(3 shot kill = useless), slower firing smg, lmg, ar's don't bother to touch them since they can't compete the slightest. Casual gamers didn't support the game enough dude. They bought the game at discounted price and didn't buy premium, so your statement is pretty week!

    Why do people play games like Pubg, CS, CoD etc? They are hard to master and people generally like to be challenged. Its in human nature! If BFV turns into a noobfest with 1 min TTK count me out, thats for sure. Glad I didnt buy the game but used Origin access

    You didn't even really buy the game you rented it pretty much and you're still going to complain? Come back when you've dropped 60-80 dollars on it, or even 30 since this game is still selling like crap...
  • JRMBelgiumTwitch
    720 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    SharpeXB wrote: »
    SharpeXB wrote: »
    There’s nothing wrong with being a casual. But why would a dev try to cater to people who will only play this game for a few hours? Game developers simply must listen to their fan base otherwise who would they appeal to? At least the “vocal minority” is vocal. How can the univocal majority communicate what it wants?

    Again. 100000 people that play 2-3 hours a week vs 10000 that play 2-3 hours a day. You still end up with more playtime with the first group. And since casuals don't have time to unlock every item, the chance of they buying cosmetics to skip the challenges is bigger.
    Casuals don’t play 2-3 hours a week. They play 2-3 hours total. Something like 50% of people who buy any game will only play it for about 5 hours.
    As a game designer, would you design a game to only be played for 5 hours? Would you want the input from players with 5 hours in the game or 500?
    The core people were giving input to DICE all through development.

    You don't buy a multiplayer game like Battlefield to play it 5 hours. If people quit after 5 hours it's because it's unfinished and bugged or simply no fun. So everyone who plays 2hours a week is not considered a casual gamer?
  • Splatone
    18 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    The progression system in this game is aweful. Max rank in a week! You get all the perks for a weapon after how many kills? Weapon Level 4 is less than a hundred. It took 500 or 1000 kills in bf4 to get all the perks and unlocks. The tough assignments should have been for the perks not the skin bullsh1t.

    BATTTLEFIELD IS TRYING TO BE FORTNIGHT WHEN IT JUST NEEDS TO BE BATTLEFIELD.

    The reason I buy battlefield games is because it's not fortnight or call of duty. Someone who's been buying battlefield games for almost 20 years.
  • YouPayToCampLOL
    82 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    SharpeXB wrote: »
    SharpeXB wrote: »
    There’s nothing wrong with being a casual. But why would a dev try to cater to people who will only play this game for a few hours? Game developers simply must listen to their fan base otherwise who would they appeal to? At least the “vocal minority” is vocal. How can the univocal majority communicate what it wants?

    Again. 100000 people that play 2-3 hours a week vs 10000 that play 2-3 hours a day. You still end up with more playtime with the first group. And since casuals don't have time to unlock every item, the chance of they buying cosmetics to skip the challenges is bigger.
    Casuals don’t play 2-3 hours a week. They play 2-3 hours total. Something like 50% of people who buy any game will only play it for about 5 hours.
    As a game designer, would you design a game to only be played for 5 hours? Would you want the input from players with 5 hours in the game or 500?
    The core people were giving input to DICE all through development.

    You don't buy a multiplayer game like Battlefield to play it 5 hours. If people quit after 5 hours it's because it's unfinished and bugged or simply no fun. So everyone who plays 2hours a week is not considered a casual gamer?

    Bugged and unfinished..So basically BFV.
  • robmcewen
    2883 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    If they changed the TTK to get people who left the game back in, they changed the wrong thing. The instant TTD and bugs that other people have listed in the thread, for me are a far bigger problem for me. The TTK seemed alright to me.

    And before anyone calls me a filthy casual, your wrong I take BF very seriously, I’m the most core player there is. When I play, I wear a suit and tie in a big sky scraper and I have two personal assistants. One to bring me my monster energy drink and flaming hot monster munch and another assistant who sends death threats to who ever breaks my kill streak for me.
  • munkt0r
    3037 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I'M NOT LOUD!

    but I am a minority.
  • Trokey66
    7942 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    munkt0r wrote: »
    I'M NOT LOUD!

    but I am a minority.

    No, you're 'special' mate, there is a difference!
  • Dral13
    350 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Honestly getting stuck on tiny pieces of terrain makes me rage more than the TTD. Both are bigger issues than the ttk.
  • CnConrad
    1050 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member

    BF1 was a succes because it attracted the casual gamer. Just have a look at google trends:
    https://g.co/trends/TW8eT

    That is ****... BF1 was a success because it was a refreshing change of pace. Not because it was a revelation to casual players.

    Regardless though, the weapons now are considerably worse than BF1's.

    Slr's bolt actions and smg's really stand out as far inferior. How can you defend a change by referencing a game that has superior damage as a reason for them to Nerf the damage???
  • herodes87
    1215 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    TH3_R1PP3R wrote: »
    TH3_R1PP3R wrote: »
    Core = hardcore players for the most part. They have always been a small but vocal group. Honestly, do any of you guys that are complaining about the ttk so loudly play vanilla in other bf titles. Splitting the community between hardcore players and vanilla players is nothing new.

    I'd say core players are not hardcore players, but veterans and BF fans that spend hundreds of hours in each title.

    They're the players that keep the game running for years.

    Casuals will play a few hours a week and probably drop the game as soon as something else they like comes along.

    I disagree, most guys that i have seen on this forum , and have interacted with, that have alot of hours in several bf titles could care less about the ttk changes, or like me, like the changes overall. I'd like to take a poll of guys complaining about it. I'm betting 70% or more are hardcore mains in other bf titles. The current ttk is similar imo to bf4 and to be honest I'm fine with that.

    Well i consider myself a core player, but i hate hardcore. I could live with TTK 2.0, it actually benefits my style of play.

    What rustles my jimmies is I adapted and was perfectly fine with TTK 1.0, every aspect of the game seemed to be fine tuned around this TTK. That's all been thrown under the bus now and weapon balance is totally screwed. DICE also claimed that this change was implemented to help new players, but it actually does the opposite. Lastly it doesn't address the real issue which is TTD, not TTK. Fix TTD and all the insta-death complaints will vanish.

    Exactly, so if their focussing on things like TTK to try and minimise the effects of the TTD bug, doesn't that mean they don't know how to fix the TTD?
    The 'death' bug could be here to stay.

    That would kill the Game fast. Getting one shoot killed from every gun is Something most people will Not swallow.
  • Dral13
    350 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    CnConrad wrote: »

    BF1 was a succes because it attracted the casual gamer. Just have a look at google trends:
    https://g.co/trends/TW8eT

    That is ****... BF1 was a success because it was a refreshing change of pace. Not because it was a revelation to casual players.

    Regardless though, the weapons now are considerably worse than BF1's.

    Slr's bolt actions and smg's really stand out as far inferior. How can you defend a change by referencing a game that has superior damage as a reason for them to Nerf the damage???

    Agree with most of what you said but bolt actions are straight up better than old ttk...
  • JRMBelgiumTwitch
    720 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited December 2018

    Bugged and unfinished..So basically BFV.

    Indeed :)
  • BURGERKRIEG
    777 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    TH3_R1PP3R wrote: »
    Core = hardcore players for the most part. They have always been a small but vocal group. Honestly, do any of you guys that are complaining about the ttk so loudly play vanilla in other bf titles. Splitting the community between hardcore players and vanilla players is nothing new.

    I'd say core players are not hardcore players, but veterans and BF fans that spend hundreds of hours in each title.

    They're the players that keep the game running for years.

    Casuals will play a few hours a week and probably drop the game as soon as something else they like comes along.

    Bob even you where a casual once.

    If there is no new blood that comes in and sticks around then the series will die out.

    What the hell am I supposed to do then? Talk to my family all day? That’s crazy.
  • warslag
    1288 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Let's say there was an imaginary vote that was split almost 50/50 with each side wanting completely different things.

    In those circumstances if you try to please one side you upset the other.

    That seems to be what happens in Battlefield. People say it's casual versus hardcore gamers, PC versus console, veteran players versus new players, or old versus young, etc.

    But really Battlefield has come in various forms down the years and there are probably people with different views of what Battlefield is to them.

    EA DICE has tried some different tactics to please people such as hardcore and normal, different map sizes, game modes, single-player and multiplayer, etc.

    But I suppose what people are responding to is the fact that 50% of the game doesn't appeal to them. Instead of 50% does appeal to them. It makes sense to expect the entire game to appeal to you.

    Even when they make a little change to TTK it seems to polarise people again.
  • Trokey66
    7942 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    warslag wrote: »
    Let's say there was an imaginary vote that was split almost 50/50 with each side wanting completely different things.

    In those circumstances if you try to please one side you upset the other.

    That seems to be what happens in Battlefield. People say it's casual versus hardcore gamers, PC versus console, veteran players versus new players, or old versus young, etc.

    But really Battlefield has come in various forms down the years and there are probably people with different views of what Battlefield is to them.

    EA DICE has tried some different tactics to please people such as hardcore and normal, different map sizes, game modes, single-player and multiplayer, etc.

    But I suppose what people are responding to is the fact that 50% of the game doesn't appeal to them. Instead of 50% does appeal to them. It makes sense to expect the entire game to appeal to you.

    Even when they make a little change to TTK it seems to polarise people again.

    You are not wrong.

    I do however, think the no matter what DICE does with BFV from now on, the 'hate bandwagon' will vilify them for it even if there is no real issue.

    It is 'cool' to hate the game and there are to many players happy to oblige.
  • FINISHBURN
    46 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield Member
    EA has a habbit of treating their "core" fans in a very "special" way. Thats why people move over to Six Siege, Insurgency etc.
  • TehDukeOfNukem
    752 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    CnConrad wrote: »

    BF1 was a succes because it attracted the casual gamer. Just have a look at google trends:
    https://g.co/trends/TW8eT

    That is ****... BF1 was a success because it was a refreshing change of pace. Not because it was a revelation to casual players.

    Regardless though, the weapons now are considerably worse than BF1's.

    Slr's bolt actions and smg's really stand out as far inferior. How can you defend a change by referencing a game that has superior damage as a reason for them to Nerf the damage???
    CnConrad wrote: »

    BF1 was a succes because it attracted the casual gamer. Just have a look at google trends:
    https://g.co/trends/TW8eT

    That is ****... BF1 was a success because it was a refreshing change of pace. Not because it was a revelation to casual players.

    Regardless though, the weapons now are considerably worse than BF1's.

    Slr's bolt actions and smg's really stand out as far inferior. How can you defend a change by referencing a game that has superior damage as a reason for them to Nerf the damage???

    Yeah I think the best comparison is the monster RSC rifle from BF1 vs the junkpile of a peashooter in this game.

    I thought BF1 was generally a little too slow apart from a few guns (small mag SLRs), but BFV is now much slower.
  • JRMBelgiumTwitch
    720 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    warslag wrote: »
    Let's say there was an imaginary vote that was split almost 50/50 with each side wanting completely different things.

    In those circumstances if you try to please one side you upset the other.

    That seems to be what happens in Battlefield. People say it's casual versus hardcore gamers, PC versus console, veteran players versus new players, or old versus young, etc.

    But really Battlefield has come in various forms down the years and there are probably people with different views of what Battlefield is to them.

    EA DICE has tried some different tactics to please people such as hardcore and normal, different map sizes, game modes, single-player and multiplayer, etc.

    But I suppose what people are responding to is the fact that 50% of the game doesn't appeal to them. Instead of 50% does appeal to them. It makes sense to expect the entire game to appeal to you.

    Even when they make a little change to TTK it seems to polarise people again.

    You are not wrong.

    I do however, think the no matter what DICE does with BFV from now on, the 'hate bandwagon' will vilify them for it even if there is no real issue.

    It is 'cool' to hate the game and there are to many players happy to oblige.

    So true. The DICE marketing is to blame though. So many bad press communications and releasing an unfinished game on top of that.
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!