Weekly BF

Heh.... When will this community be happy?

Comments

  • smokintom214
    1794 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    I'd be willing to bet cold, hard cash that if anyone, anyone at all on this forum, had thier favorite BF game re-released in the same exact state it was in when it originally launched, there would still be incessant complaints about its state and all its issues. Regardless of whether it's BF2, BC2, BF3, or especially BF4.

    I'd be willing to bet that the community has become so blatantly divided that if said game was re-released, it would be taken in a completely different direction, post-launch development wise, than it was originally.

    There's nothing that will make gamers in general happy nowadays. They've gone from loving video games just because they exist and are miracles of technological online entertainment, to acting like the gaming industry owes us everything, like we're entitled to whatever game we want, and act as if a game has ever actually existed that is free of issues.

    It seems online gaming and self-entitled toxic vitriol go hand-in-hand nowadays. The issue isn't the game, BF5 is made just like any other game, it has objectively less issues than even more highly regarded BF games did at launch. The issue is the over-expectation of the fanbase, the shifting of BF to a higher, completely made up standard that no other game achieves. The issue is people expecting this game to be bug free when they couldn't list a single damn game as an example of a game without issues. The issue is consumers not understanding a damn thing about how games are actually designed and act as if fixing something is easy and dice devs are miracle workers who should be able to fix any issue, regardless of complexity, in a matter of weeks, despite not knowing themselves how the issue would even go about being solved, legitimately, in the first place. The issue is people wanting or expecting new maps every single month, holding BF5 to an expected standard of free dlc that no other game in the industry holds up to, regardless of the fact that BF1 had paid dlc and didn't get its first map pack until 6 months after launch. The issue is that people got tons of assets removed from this game before it even publicly launched based on the asinine notion that BF5 should be historically accurate, regardless of the fact NO other BF title has been historically accurate, and despite the fact some of those things WERE period correct and used in ww2.

    The issue is gamers went from consumers that freely choose to support developers by buying thier work, to acting like they're the royalty of gaming, they're responsible for the existence of gaming, and thus should expect to get whatever they want handed to them on a silver platter - regardless of how illogical or ridiculous thier expectations or desires are.

    When did gaming go from being a free market where devs who love games created products for the world to play and enjoy, to being a market wholistically dictated by what customers want, even after a game has already released? When did gaming go from getting what you purchased and researching beforehand to make sure you want it before you buy it, to buying the game anyway and demanding the developers change whatever you dislike?

    Honestly, I think the smartest thing said in the history of the gaming industry was said in regards to this game, by Patrick Soderlund himself. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you don't want it, don't buy it.

    What happened to the days of not buying a game you dislike or that you believe has too many issues at launch for you to enjoy? Why has it now shifted to buying a game you dislike anyway just to callously and incessantly complain to try and get it molded into whatever you want?

    When did this entirely subjective, vastly varying expectation start dictating the type of game a developer makes? When did gamers become so demanding and holding things to a completely unrealistic and illogical standard met by no other games out there?

    That's the reason this community, or any other gaming community really will never be happy. They can't accept gaming and video games the way they are and always have been, and will willfully put blinders on in terms of the past to insist that newer games be held to this entirely made up, subjective, unrealistic standard. They'll ignore that BFs direct competition has an equal amount of issues and backlash in thier community just to proclaim BF5 is a broken heap of garbage. They'll call a perfectly playable game "unplayable trash" because of things like failing to vault through a window or failing to track assignments. They'll praise bf4, the game with objectively the worst launch in the history of BF and one of the worst in AAA gaming in general, while insisting BF5 launched in a pathetic broken state.

    I honestly wish I could share what I truly think of this community, but the turning of this forum into Sesame Street via EA prevents me from doing so without being banned, regardless of whether it's the truth or not.

    EA, Bethesda, Activision, etc, they're all getting hammered, and it has to do with bad games, and bad business practice. It's not the gamers "self entitlement", or any consumer for that matter to want more value for their money. Heroic effort though. You get an A for that lol.

    But no, the games and business practice just stink as compared to years ago when they all had to compete, where now they make so much money, they show no care or concern. That's meeting it's end. They got too big for their britches, thought they can do anything they want, and are paying for it. Plain and simple.

    Dice could be doing this on purpose at attempts to break away from EAs ownership of 62%. It makes Abit of sense considering, dice at the time needed a helping hand at boosting sales of bf2 but got stuck in a contract deal they wish they never were apart of, and this last fiasco with Star wars battlefront 2 may have pushed the last button.
  • Loqtrall
    12020 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Stahlmach wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    I'd be willing to bet cold, hard cash that if anyone, anyone at all on this forum, had thier favorite BF game re-released in the same exact state it was in when it originally launched, there would still be incessant complaints about its state and all its issues. Regardless of whether it's BF2, BC2, BF3, or especially BF4.

    I'd be willing to bet that the community has become so blatantly divided that if said game was re-released, it would be taken in a completely different direction, post-launch development wise, than it was originally.

    There's nothing that will make gamers in general happy nowadays. They've gone from loving video games just because they exist and are miracles of technological online entertainment, to acting like the gaming industry owes us everything, like we're entitled to whatever game we want, and act as if a game has ever actually existed that is free of issues.

    It seems online gaming and self-entitled toxic vitriol go hand-in-hand nowadays. The issue isn't the game, BF5 is made just like any other game, it has objectively less issues than even more highly regarded BF games did at launch. The issue is the over-expectation of the fanbase, the shifting of BF to a higher, completely made up standard that no other game achieves. The issue is people expecting this game to be bug free when they couldn't list a single damn game as an example of a game without issues. The issue is consumers not understanding a damn thing about how games are actually designed and act as if fixing something is easy and dice devs are miracle workers who should be able to fix any issue, regardless of complexity, in a matter of weeks, despite not knowing themselves how the issue would even go about being solved, legitimately, in the first place. The issue is people wanting or expecting new maps every single month, holding BF5 to an expected standard of free dlc that no other game in the industry holds up to, regardless of the fact that BF1 had paid dlc and didn't get its first map pack until 6 months after launch. The issue is that people got tons of assets removed from this game before it even publicly launched based on the asinine notion that BF5 should be historically accurate, regardless of the fact NO other BF title has been historically accurate, and despite the fact some of those things WERE period correct and used in ww2.

    The issue is gamers went from consumers that freely choose to support developers by buying thier work, to acting like they're the royalty of gaming, they're responsible for the existence of gaming, and thus should expect to get whatever they want handed to them on a silver platter - regardless of how illogical or ridiculous thier expectations or desires are.

    When did gaming go from being a free market where devs who love games created products for the world to play and enjoy, to being a market wholistically dictated by what customers want, even after a game has already released? When did gaming go from getting what you purchased and researching beforehand to make sure you want it before you buy it, to buying the game anyway and demanding the developers change whatever you dislike?

    Honestly, I think the smartest thing said in the history of the gaming industry was said in regards to this game, by Patrick Soderlund himself. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you don't want it, don't buy it.

    What happened to the days of not buying a game you dislike or that you believe has too many issues at launch for you to enjoy? Why has it now shifted to buying a game you dislike anyway just to callously and incessantly complain to try and get it molded into whatever you want?

    When did this entirely subjective, vastly varying expectation start dictating the type of game a developer makes? When did gamers become so demanding and holding things to a completely unrealistic and illogical standard met by no other games out there?

    That's the reason this community, or any other gaming community really will never be happy. They can't accept gaming and video games the way they are and always have been, and will willfully put blinders on in terms of the past to insist that newer games be held to this entirely made up, subjective, unrealistic standard. They'll ignore that BFs direct competition has an equal amount of issues and backlash in thier community just to proclaim BF5 is a broken heap of garbage. They'll call a perfectly playable game "unplayable trash" because of things like failing to vault through a window or failing to track assignments. They'll praise bf4, the game with objectively the worst launch in the history of BF and one of the worst in AAA gaming in general, while insisting BF5 launched in a pathetic broken state.

    I honestly wish I could share what I truly think of this community, but the turning of this forum into Sesame Street via EA prevents me from doing so without being banned, regardless of whether it's the truth or not.

    Simple. When the Video game industry became the biggest media industry on this Planet and Games were not made any longer by the same people who played them but by analysts supported by a well funded Marketing.
    And everyone of them told us ( and still does ) it that he has the best gaming experience every coming with their next game. While most of them are just trash.
    So dont act surprised when you as Publishers and Developers cried Wolf so often that the Villagers get cranky.

    And again about that last part. People praise BF 3&4 because the gameplay and concept under these bugs was solid and well thought. While with BF V it seems that they had no idea at all what they really want.
    Well except more women as Soldiers of course.....

    Really? What, do you think dev studios like dice have completely shifted employees since being bought by EA? The same people that crafted those BF games you love are still making the games today. There are countless devs at DICE who have been there for well over a decade, even who developed BF games before EA bought them.

    Some publishing head saying that thier game will be next level in terms of gaming experience does not somehow negate the fact that you aren't required to purchase said game BLINDLY. It doesn't negate the fact you can research beforehand. What you said doesn't truly retort any of the points I made. Publishers have nothing to do with what I said, nor how they present thier games. Believe it or not, I hasn't changed much at all in the past 10+ years - the expectation of gamers has. Out of the blue, out of nowhere, despite reality.

    Lastly, I don't know what the hell you're talking about in terms of BF3 and BF4 being a better base platform. BF5 is highly regarded as a BF game with great core gameplay and immense potential in spite of its bugs and issues.

    If you people are willing to give that heaping dumpster fire that was bf4 at launch a chance and then sing its praises to high heavens AFTER IT WENT THROUGH 2 YEARS OF FIXES, but not willing to do the same for BF5, honestly imo dice should just ignore you and your feedback.

    If it's the core of the game, BF5 as a whole, that you dislike - then again the "don't like it don't buy it" thing comes up again.

    Again, I ask, when did video games all of a sudden become products that need to appeal to the desires of everyone? How can a game possibly please every person when what someone wants from a game varies greatly from person to person in a playerbase of millions of players?

    Some people need to accept that every BF game isn't going to be what they want, regardless of how long they've been playing BF.

    I've been playing BF since 2002, everyone around here knows that I'm a vastly huge supporter of the franchise.

    But I absolutely, abhorrently, vehemently despite Hardline. It's objectively the BF game I put the least amount of time in, and I didn't enjoy a single minute of playing it.

    You know what I did? I researched it first, didn't think I'd like it, so I bought a physical copy, ended up hating it, and returned it.

    What I didn't do was spend 1 1/2 years incessantly lambasting the devs at Visceral to change the game to what I wanted it to be. I didn't like the game, so I returned it instead of playing it.
  • warslag
    1536 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Stahlmach wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    I'd be willing to bet cold, hard cash that if anyone, anyone at all on this forum, had thier favorite BF game re-released in the same exact state it was in when it originally launched, there would still be incessant complaints about its state and all its issues. Regardless of whether it's BF2, BC2, BF3, or especially BF4.

    I'd be willing to bet that the community has become so blatantly divided that if said game was re-released, it would be taken in a completely different direction, post-launch development wise, than it was originally.

    There's nothing that will make gamers in general happy nowadays. They've gone from loving video games just because they exist and are miracles of technological online entertainment, to acting like the gaming industry owes us everything, like we're entitled to whatever game we want, and act as if a game has ever actually existed that is free of issues.

    It seems online gaming and self-entitled toxic vitriol go hand-in-hand nowadays. The issue isn't the game, BF5 is made just like any other game, it has objectively less issues than even more highly regarded BF games did at launch. The issue is the over-expectation of the fanbase, the shifting of BF to a higher, completely made up standard that no other game achieves. The issue is people expecting this game to be bug free when they couldn't list a single damn game as an example of a game without issues. The issue is consumers not understanding a damn thing about how games are actually designed and act as if fixing something is easy and dice devs are miracle workers who should be able to fix any issue, regardless of complexity, in a matter of weeks, despite not knowing themselves how the issue would even go about being solved, legitimately, in the first place. The issue is people wanting or expecting new maps every single month, holding BF5 to an expected standard of free dlc that no other game in the industry holds up to, regardless of the fact that BF1 had paid dlc and didn't get its first map pack until 6 months after launch. The issue is that people got tons of assets removed from this game before it even publicly launched based on the asinine notion that BF5 should be historically accurate, regardless of the fact NO other BF title has been historically accurate, and despite the fact some of those things WERE period correct and used in ww2.

    The issue is gamers went from consumers that freely choose to support developers by buying thier work, to acting like they're the royalty of gaming, they're responsible for the existence of gaming, and thus should expect to get whatever they want handed to them on a silver platter - regardless of how illogical or ridiculous thier expectations or desires are.

    When did gaming go from being a free market where devs who love games created products for the world to play and enjoy, to being a market wholistically dictated by what customers want, even after a game has already released? When did gaming go from getting what you purchased and researching beforehand to make sure you want it before you buy it, to buying the game anyway and demanding the developers change whatever you dislike?

    Honestly, I think the smartest thing said in the history of the gaming industry was said in regards to this game, by Patrick Soderlund himself. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you don't want it, don't buy it.

    What happened to the days of not buying a game you dislike or that you believe has too many issues at launch for you to enjoy? Why has it now shifted to buying a game you dislike anyway just to callously and incessantly complain to try and get it molded into whatever you want?

    When did this entirely subjective, vastly varying expectation start dictating the type of game a developer makes? When did gamers become so demanding and holding things to a completely unrealistic and illogical standard met by no other games out there?

    That's the reason this community, or any other gaming community really will never be happy. They can't accept gaming and video games the way they are and always have been, and will willfully put blinders on in terms of the past to insist that newer games be held to this entirely made up, subjective, unrealistic standard. They'll ignore that BFs direct competition has an equal amount of issues and backlash in thier community just to proclaim BF5 is a broken heap of garbage. They'll call a perfectly playable game "unplayable trash" because of things like failing to vault through a window or failing to track assignments. They'll praise bf4, the game with objectively the worst launch in the history of BF and one of the worst in AAA gaming in general, while insisting BF5 launched in a pathetic broken state.

    I honestly wish I could share what I truly think of this community, but the turning of this forum into Sesame Street via EA prevents me from doing so without being banned, regardless of whether it's the truth or not.

    Simple. When the Video game industry became the biggest media industry on this Planet and Games were not made any longer by the same people who played them but by analysts supported by a well funded Marketing.
    And everyone of them told us ( and still does ) it that he has the best gaming experience every coming with their next game. While most of them are just trash.
    So dont act surprised when you as Publishers and Developers cried Wolf so often that the Villagers get cranky.

    And again about that last part. People praise BF 3&4 because the gameplay and concept under these bugs was solid and well thought. While with BF V it seems that they had no idea at all what they really want.
    Well except more women as Soldiers of course.....

    Really? What, do you think dev studios like dice have completely shifted employees since being bought by EA? The same people that crafted those BF games you love are still making the games today. There are countless devs at DICE who have been there for well over a decade, even who developed BF games before EA bought them.

    Some publishing head saying that thier game will be next level in terms of gaming experience does not somehow negate the fact that you aren't required to purchase said game BLINDLY. It doesn't negate the fact you can research beforehand. What you said doesn't truly retort any of the points I made. Publishers have nothing to do with what I said, nor how they present thier games. Believe it or not, I hasn't changed much at all in the past 10+ years - the expectation of gamers has. Out of the blue, out of nowhere, despite reality.

    Lastly, I don't know what the hell you're talking about in terms of BF3 and BF4 being a better base platform. BF5 is highly regarded as a BF game with great core gameplay and immense potential in spite of its bugs and issues.

    If you people are willing to give that heaping dumpster fire that was bf4 at launch a chance and then sing its praises to high heavens AFTER IT WENT THROUGH 2 YEARS OF FIXES, but not willing to do the same for BF5, honestly imo dice should just ignore you and your feedback.

    If it's the core of the game, BF5 as a whole, that you dislike - then again the "don't like it don't buy it" thing comes up again.

    Again, I ask, when did video games all of a sudden become products that need to appeal to the desires of everyone? How can a game possibly please every person when what someone wants from a game varies greatly from person to person in a playerbase of millions of players?

    Some people need to accept that every BF game isn't going to be what they want, regardless of how long they've been playing BF.

    I've been playing BF since 2002, everyone around here knows that I'm a vastly huge supporter of the franchise.

    But I absolutely, abhorrently, vehemently despite Hardline. It's objectively the BF game I put the least amount of time in, and I didn't enjoy a single minute of playing it.

    You know what I did? I researched it first, didn't think I'd like it, so I bought a physical copy, ended up hating it, and returned it.

    What I didn't do was spend 1 1/2 years incessantly lambasting the devs at Visceral to change the game to what I wanted it to be. I didn't like the game, so I returned it instead of playing it.

    I don't know where to start with all that. But basically, if you're one of the 'happy' Battlefield players then it's not coming across in that post.
  • obisearch
    774 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    They won't ever be happy. I just posted the same sentiment in the stickied update discussion thread. This community is literally divided when it comes to every conceivable facet of the game.

    We have dozens upon dozens of people incessantly making requests for changes, and when some of those changes are implemented we then get dozens and dozens of people saying the changes are bad or that THEY never asked for such changes.

    At this point I'm honestly surprised DICE hasn't stopped this nonsensical "change the game based on what the community is crying about" way of going about things. They can't implement a single requested change without there being some extent of backlash.

    Exactly my take on this community. Which is a shame because genuine groves get overlooked due to the sea of salt.
  • xBCxSEALxTEAMx6
    1441 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    I'd be willing to bet cold, hard cash that if anyone, anyone at all on this forum, had thier favorite BF game re-released in the same exact state it was in when it originally launched, there would still be incessant complaints about its state and all its issues. Regardless of whether it's BF2, BC2, BF3, or especially BF4.

    I'd be willing to bet that the community has become so blatantly divided that if said game was re-released, it would be taken in a completely different direction, post-launch development wise, than it was originally.

    There's nothing that will make gamers in general happy nowadays. They've gone from loving video games just because they exist and are miracles of technological online entertainment, to acting like the gaming industry owes us everything, like we're entitled to whatever game we want, and act as if a game has ever actually existed that is free of issues.

    It seems online gaming and self-entitled toxic vitriol go hand-in-hand nowadays. The issue isn't the game, BF5 is made just like any other game, it has objectively less issues than even more highly regarded BF games did at launch. The issue is the over-expectation of the fanbase, the shifting of BF to a higher, completely made up standard that no other game achieves. The issue is people expecting this game to be bug free when they couldn't list a single damn game as an example of a game without issues. The issue is consumers not understanding a damn thing about how games are actually designed and act as if fixing something is easy and dice devs are miracle workers who should be able to fix any issue, regardless of complexity, in a matter of weeks, despite not knowing themselves how the issue would even go about being solved, legitimately, in the first place. The issue is people wanting or expecting new maps every single month, holding BF5 to an expected standard of free dlc that no other game in the industry holds up to, regardless of the fact that BF1 had paid dlc and didn't get its first map pack until 6 months after launch. The issue is that people got tons of assets removed from this game before it even publicly launched based on the asinine notion that BF5 should be historically accurate, regardless of the fact NO other BF title has been historically accurate, and despite the fact some of those things WERE period correct and used in ww2.

    The issue is gamers went from consumers that freely choose to support developers by buying thier work, to acting like they're the royalty of gaming, they're responsible for the existence of gaming, and thus should expect to get whatever they want handed to them on a silver platter - regardless of how illogical or ridiculous thier expectations or desires are.

    When did gaming go from being a free market where devs who love games created products for the world to play and enjoy, to being a market wholistically dictated by what customers want, even after a game has already released? When did gaming go from getting what you purchased and researching beforehand to make sure you want it before you buy it, to buying the game anyway and demanding the developers change whatever you dislike?

    Honestly, I think the smartest thing said in the history of the gaming industry was said in regards to this game, by Patrick Soderlund himself. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you don't want it, don't buy it.

    What happened to the days of not buying a game you dislike or that you believe has too many issues at launch for you to enjoy? Why has it now shifted to buying a game you dislike anyway just to callously and incessantly complain to try and get it molded into whatever you want?

    When did this entirely subjective, vastly varying expectation start dictating the type of game a developer makes? When did gamers become so demanding and holding things to a completely unrealistic and illogical standard met by no other games out there?

    That's the reason this community, or any other gaming community really will never be happy. They can't accept gaming and video games the way they are and always have been, and will willfully put blinders on in terms of the past to insist that newer games be held to this entirely made up, subjective, unrealistic standard. They'll ignore that BFs direct competition has an equal amount of issues and backlash in thier community just to proclaim BF5 is a broken heap of garbage. They'll call a perfectly playable game "unplayable trash" because of things like failing to vault through a window or failing to track assignments. They'll praise bf4, the game with objectively the worst launch in the history of BF and one of the worst in AAA gaming in general, while insisting BF5 launched in a pathetic broken state.

    I honestly wish I could share what I truly think of this community, but the turning of this forum into Sesame Street via EA prevents me from doing so without being banned, regardless of whether it's the truth or not.

    EA, Bethesda, Activision, etc, they're all getting hammered, and it has to do with bad games, and bad business practice. It's not the gamers "self entitlement", or any consumer for that matter to want more value for their money. Heroic effort though. You get an A for that lol.

    But no, the games and business practice just stink as compared to years ago when they all had to compete, where now they make so much money, they show no care or concern. That's meeting it's end. They got too big for their britches, thought they can do anything they want, and are paying for it. Plain and simple.

    Dice could be doing this on purpose at attempts to break away from EAs ownership of 62%. It makes Abit of sense considering, dice at the time needed a helping hand at boosting sales of bf2 but got stuck in a contract deal they wish they never were apart of, and this last fiasco with Star wars battlefront 2 may have pushed the last button.

    Well, that seems to be the new trend, that everyone is now pointing fingers, be it it's EA's, or it's DICEs fault etc. But idk if EA is the one that told DICE to go the political direction they did. Or focusing on these unknown battles not many care for. Or the ttk situation or ttd, or netcode, bugs and other factors. EA has the game on sale on Xbox, and be it half price mid Jan, but it's number 14 in most played games.

    And so, one could come to the conclusion, EA is having them buy it, but the game stinks and they don''t play it. And idk if a 2 year development cycle, as opposed to what they used to do annually, is going to have e say, they needed more time.

    How much more time than two years do you need, when they came out with much better games on an annual cycle?

    So no, i'm not going to get DICE off the hook, in that they just come out with games that are not very good, and may need to clean shop over there, hire a whole new team of Devs going into next gen, or it's going to be MOH all over again for this franchise.

    I mean these kids today, i think got it right. They don't like being lied too or bad quality on their tech. They don't like shady business practice, and at their ages where they're getting near 40, they have to buy these games. Not mom and dad of a decade or more ago, and they show it with their wallets.

    I saw that whole microtransactionary process, and at my age, i said that figures. But they went ape over it, and i guess rightfully so, and it cost. So, gamers are aging, times are changing, and so are companies practices having to change. I think that's all more the rationale of what's going on, more so than folks taking sides between EA and DICE.
  • BA2VGT
    179 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Gforce81 wrote: »
    After playing myself with the new patch, as always, I feel like the forum is making a mountain out of a molehill

    I would agree on stuff like the TTK patch, footsteps, kill cam...


    But that's all distraction. Forget balance items and questionable choices...there are literally hundreds of listed bugs in this game. Game crashes, endless loading screens, bugs in game, and tons of crap that has been in the frostbite engine for years.

    The game should not have launched in this state. BF1 was also unbalanced and had some questionable decisions made...but mid January after it's launch it was not still bugged out all to hell like this. In fact, it was one of the more stable lanuches especially compared to bf4.

    BfV makes the BF4 launch look smooth...and that isn't good.
  • Loqtrall
    12020 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    I'd be willing to bet cold, hard cash that if anyone, anyone at all on this forum, had thier favorite BF game re-released in the same exact state it was in when it originally launched, there would still be incessant complaints about its state and all its issues. Regardless of whether it's BF2, BC2, BF3, or especially BF4.

    I'd be willing to bet that the community has become so blatantly divided that if said game was re-released, it would be taken in a completely different direction, post-launch development wise, than it was originally.

    There's nothing that will make gamers in general happy nowadays. They've gone from loving video games just because they exist and are miracles of technological online entertainment, to acting like the gaming industry owes us everything, like we're entitled to whatever game we want, and act as if a game has ever actually existed that is free of issues.

    It seems online gaming and self-entitled toxic vitriol go hand-in-hand nowadays. The issue isn't the game, BF5 is made just like any other game, it has objectively less issues than even more highly regarded BF games did at launch. The issue is the over-expectation of the fanbase, the shifting of BF to a higher, completely made up standard that no other game achieves. The issue is people expecting this game to be bug free when they couldn't list a single damn game as an example of a game without issues. The issue is consumers not understanding a damn thing about how games are actually designed and act as if fixing something is easy and dice devs are miracle workers who should be able to fix any issue, regardless of complexity, in a matter of weeks, despite not knowing themselves how the issue would even go about being solved, legitimately, in the first place. The issue is people wanting or expecting new maps every single month, holding BF5 to an expected standard of free dlc that no other game in the industry holds up to, regardless of the fact that BF1 had paid dlc and didn't get its first map pack until 6 months after launch. The issue is that people got tons of assets removed from this game before it even publicly launched based on the asinine notion that BF5 should be historically accurate, regardless of the fact NO other BF title has been historically accurate, and despite the fact some of those things WERE period correct and used in ww2.

    The issue is gamers went from consumers that freely choose to support developers by buying thier work, to acting like they're the royalty of gaming, they're responsible for the existence of gaming, and thus should expect to get whatever they want handed to them on a silver platter - regardless of how illogical or ridiculous thier expectations or desires are.

    When did gaming go from being a free market where devs who love games created products for the world to play and enjoy, to being a market wholistically dictated by what customers want, even after a game has already released? When did gaming go from getting what you purchased and researching beforehand to make sure you want it before you buy it, to buying the game anyway and demanding the developers change whatever you dislike?

    Honestly, I think the smartest thing said in the history of the gaming industry was said in regards to this game, by Patrick Soderlund himself. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you don't want it, don't buy it.

    What happened to the days of not buying a game you dislike or that you believe has too many issues at launch for you to enjoy? Why has it now shifted to buying a game you dislike anyway just to callously and incessantly complain to try and get it molded into whatever you want?

    When did this entirely subjective, vastly varying expectation start dictating the type of game a developer makes? When did gamers become so demanding and holding things to a completely unrealistic and illogical standard met by no other games out there?

    That's the reason this community, or any other gaming community really will never be happy. They can't accept gaming and video games the way they are and always have been, and will willfully put blinders on in terms of the past to insist that newer games be held to this entirely made up, subjective, unrealistic standard. They'll ignore that BFs direct competition has an equal amount of issues and backlash in thier community just to proclaim BF5 is a broken heap of garbage. They'll call a perfectly playable game "unplayable trash" because of things like failing to vault through a window or failing to track assignments. They'll praise bf4, the game with objectively the worst launch in the history of BF and one of the worst in AAA gaming in general, while insisting BF5 launched in a pathetic broken state.

    I honestly wish I could share what I truly think of this community, but the turning of this forum into Sesame Street via EA prevents me from doing so without being banned, regardless of whether it's the truth or not.

    EA, Bethesda, Activision, etc, they're all getting hammered, and it has to do with bad games, and bad business practice. It's not the gamers "self entitlement", or any consumer for that matter to want more value for their money. Heroic effort though. You get an A for that lol.

    But no, the games and business practice just stink as compared to years ago when they all had to compete, where now they make so much money, they show no care or concern. That's meeting it's end. They got too big for their britches, thought they can do anything they want, and are paying for it. Plain and simple.

    Lmao, and by business practices you mean what in terms of BF5? Including a gender option that has been requested before? Not making BF5 the sole historically accurate game in the BF franchise?

    Tell me what's worse in practice - developing a BF game in line with every other game in the franchise and telling the playerbase to accept it, or inanely demanding that just this BF title be historically accurate solely based on its setting after playing two years of the most blatantly inaccurate and unrealistic ww1 game to ever exist?

    And again, about the "value for your money" thing - you are acting as if people are buying these games blindly. And if such is the case, it's thier own fault. If the game isn't what you wanted, up to your personal subjective standard of quality or value, why are you buying it in the first place?

    Isn't the gamer anthem nowadays "speak with your wallet"? If so, why is everyone doing the opposite, buying games they dislike and disapprove of, and then crying to the developers to change it into the game they want and do approve of? It's not as if the game is universally disliked and talked down upon.

    Tell me which is a more realistically viable option - DICE releasing the game they want to, or DICE pleasing every single person with a subjectively different opinion on where the game should be changed and how?

    Lol, I mean ffs, one of the primary criticisms of BF5 to this day is that it has an identity crisis, that it's trying to be several different types of games.

    What I think that stems from is DICE literally molding and shaping thier game to appease a fanbase that consists of people who want an immensely varying amount of different things out of a shooter, and who all expect different experiences from BF games. They're literally getting contradicting feedback from all facets of the community, and are trying to change thier game to appease all sides based on said feedback. That can't be good for the game at all.

    To the extent that this patch has come out and contains SEVERAL changes made solely because of player feedback, and those same changes are now being lambasted as bad and unwarranted. We asked for a better kill cam, we got it, now it's too long. We asked for louder footsteps, we got them, now they're too loud. We asked for a louder Stuka siren, we got it, now it's too loud.

    The point being that no matter what changes are made to the game, no matter what is fixed, no matter what is added - the community outrages and DICE are still the bad guy, the devs are still lazy, the wrong things are still being worked on, etc.

    Lol they can release a new gun or game mode and there will be SOMEONE on this forum saying "why are they releasing maps instead of fixing issues", as if map designers and core game coders are the same job at DICE and the guy who fixes bugs is a taking a break to make a map or something.

    It's to the point people are acting like BF5 is the most broken pos in the history of BF, while referencing BF4 positively in the very same post.

    Whether you want to admit it or not, there is an issue with consumers in gaming and what they've come to expect from video games. They'll hold bi-annual regular released games to the same standard they hold games with a 8-9 year development cycle to. They're unrealistic in thier demands, like expecting a game to be bug free despite no game, ever, being bug free. They'll ignore the past to claim the present game is the worst we've ever seen. They'll ignore the true low points in the franchise to proclaim THIS is the low point.

    There's more blatantly false, illogical, self-contradicting BS said about past BF games in relation to BF5 on this forum than I can even begin to list - yet those same people expect thier feedback to be taken seriously, and act as if it's actually constructive.

    If this whole "historical accuracy" debacle has proven anything, it's that gamers nowadays will throw on rose-tinted glasses with full blinders just to proclaim some BS about the BF franchise as a whole in order to further attain what they want in a game. That is an issue, a big one. That is entitlement, blatantly.
  • Loqtrall
    12020 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    BA2VGT wrote: »
    BfV makes the BF4 launch look smooth...and that isn't good.

    Case.
    In.
    Point.
  • Loqtrall
    12020 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    warslag wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Stahlmach wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    I'd be willing to bet cold, hard cash that if anyone, anyone at all on this forum, had thier favorite BF game re-released in the same exact state it was in when it originally launched, there would still be incessant complaints about its state and all its issues. Regardless of whether it's BF2, BC2, BF3, or especially BF4.

    I'd be willing to bet that the community has become so blatantly divided that if said game was re-released, it would be taken in a completely different direction, post-launch development wise, than it was originally.

    There's nothing that will make gamers in general happy nowadays. They've gone from loving video games just because they exist and are miracles of technological online entertainment, to acting like the gaming industry owes us everything, like we're entitled to whatever game we want, and act as if a game has ever actually existed that is free of issues.

    It seems online gaming and self-entitled toxic vitriol go hand-in-hand nowadays. The issue isn't the game, BF5 is made just like any other game, it has objectively less issues than even more highly regarded BF games did at launch. The issue is the over-expectation of the fanbase, the shifting of BF to a higher, completely made up standard that no other game achieves. The issue is people expecting this game to be bug free when they couldn't list a single damn game as an example of a game without issues. The issue is consumers not understanding a damn thing about how games are actually designed and act as if fixing something is easy and dice devs are miracle workers who should be able to fix any issue, regardless of complexity, in a matter of weeks, despite not knowing themselves how the issue would even go about being solved, legitimately, in the first place. The issue is people wanting or expecting new maps every single month, holding BF5 to an expected standard of free dlc that no other game in the industry holds up to, regardless of the fact that BF1 had paid dlc and didn't get its first map pack until 6 months after launch. The issue is that people got tons of assets removed from this game before it even publicly launched based on the asinine notion that BF5 should be historically accurate, regardless of the fact NO other BF title has been historically accurate, and despite the fact some of those things WERE period correct and used in ww2.

    The issue is gamers went from consumers that freely choose to support developers by buying thier work, to acting like they're the royalty of gaming, they're responsible for the existence of gaming, and thus should expect to get whatever they want handed to them on a silver platter - regardless of how illogical or ridiculous thier expectations or desires are.

    When did gaming go from being a free market where devs who love games created products for the world to play and enjoy, to being a market wholistically dictated by what customers want, even after a game has already released? When did gaming go from getting what you purchased and researching beforehand to make sure you want it before you buy it, to buying the game anyway and demanding the developers change whatever you dislike?

    Honestly, I think the smartest thing said in the history of the gaming industry was said in regards to this game, by Patrick Soderlund himself. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you don't want it, don't buy it.

    What happened to the days of not buying a game you dislike or that you believe has too many issues at launch for you to enjoy? Why has it now shifted to buying a game you dislike anyway just to callously and incessantly complain to try and get it molded into whatever you want?

    When did this entirely subjective, vastly varying expectation start dictating the type of game a developer makes? When did gamers become so demanding and holding things to a completely unrealistic and illogical standard met by no other games out there?

    That's the reason this community, or any other gaming community really will never be happy. They can't accept gaming and video games the way they are and always have been, and will willfully put blinders on in terms of the past to insist that newer games be held to this entirely made up, subjective, unrealistic standard. They'll ignore that BFs direct competition has an equal amount of issues and backlash in thier community just to proclaim BF5 is a broken heap of garbage. They'll call a perfectly playable game "unplayable trash" because of things like failing to vault through a window or failing to track assignments. They'll praise bf4, the game with objectively the worst launch in the history of BF and one of the worst in AAA gaming in general, while insisting BF5 launched in a pathetic broken state.

    I honestly wish I could share what I truly think of this community, but the turning of this forum into Sesame Street via EA prevents me from doing so without being banned, regardless of whether it's the truth or not.

    Simple. When the Video game industry became the biggest media industry on this Planet and Games were not made any longer by the same people who played them but by analysts supported by a well funded Marketing.
    And everyone of them told us ( and still does ) it that he has the best gaming experience every coming with their next game. While most of them are just trash.
    So dont act surprised when you as Publishers and Developers cried Wolf so often that the Villagers get cranky.

    And again about that last part. People praise BF 3&4 because the gameplay and concept under these bugs was solid and well thought. While with BF V it seems that they had no idea at all what they really want.
    Well except more women as Soldiers of course.....

    Really? What, do you think dev studios like dice have completely shifted employees since being bought by EA? The same people that crafted those BF games you love are still making the games today. There are countless devs at DICE who have been there for well over a decade, even who developed BF games before EA bought them.

    Some publishing head saying that thier game will be next level in terms of gaming experience does not somehow negate the fact that you aren't required to purchase said game BLINDLY. It doesn't negate the fact you can research beforehand. What you said doesn't truly retort any of the points I made. Publishers have nothing to do with what I said, nor how they present thier games. Believe it or not, I hasn't changed much at all in the past 10+ years - the expectation of gamers has. Out of the blue, out of nowhere, despite reality.

    Lastly, I don't know what the hell you're talking about in terms of BF3 and BF4 being a better base platform. BF5 is highly regarded as a BF game with great core gameplay and immense potential in spite of its bugs and issues.

    If you people are willing to give that heaping dumpster fire that was bf4 at launch a chance and then sing its praises to high heavens AFTER IT WENT THROUGH 2 YEARS OF FIXES, but not willing to do the same for BF5, honestly imo dice should just ignore you and your feedback.

    If it's the core of the game, BF5 as a whole, that you dislike - then again the "don't like it don't buy it" thing comes up again.

    Again, I ask, when did video games all of a sudden become products that need to appeal to the desires of everyone? How can a game possibly please every person when what someone wants from a game varies greatly from person to person in a playerbase of millions of players?

    Some people need to accept that every BF game isn't going to be what they want, regardless of how long they've been playing BF.

    I've been playing BF since 2002, everyone around here knows that I'm a vastly huge supporter of the franchise.

    But I absolutely, abhorrently, vehemently despite Hardline. It's objectively the BF game I put the least amount of time in, and I didn't enjoy a single minute of playing it.

    You know what I did? I researched it first, didn't think I'd like it, so I bought a physical copy, ended up hating it, and returned it.

    What I didn't do was spend 1 1/2 years incessantly lambasting the devs at Visceral to change the game to what I wanted it to be. I didn't like the game, so I returned it instead of playing it.

    I don't know where to start with all that. But basically, if you're one of the 'happy' Battlefield players then it's not coming across in that post.

    I'm happy with the core game, it has its issues but so has every other BF game.

    What I'm unhappy with is this community and the fact that people are acting like they just started playing BF yesterday and it's the only video game they've ever played that launched with bugs.
  • warslag
    1536 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    warslag wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Stahlmach wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    I'd be willing to bet cold, hard cash that if anyone, anyone at all on this forum, had thier favorite BF game re-released in the same exact state it was in when it originally launched, there would still be incessant complaints about its state and all its issues. Regardless of whether it's BF2, BC2, BF3, or especially BF4.

    I'd be willing to bet that the community has become so blatantly divided that if said game was re-released, it would be taken in a completely different direction, post-launch development wise, than it was originally.

    There's nothing that will make gamers in general happy nowadays. They've gone from loving video games just because they exist and are miracles of technological online entertainment, to acting like the gaming industry owes us everything, like we're entitled to whatever game we want, and act as if a game has ever actually existed that is free of issues.

    It seems online gaming and self-entitled toxic vitriol go hand-in-hand nowadays. The issue isn't the game, BF5 is made just like any other game, it has objectively less issues than even more highly regarded BF games did at launch. The issue is the over-expectation of the fanbase, the shifting of BF to a higher, completely made up standard that no other game achieves. The issue is people expecting this game to be bug free when they couldn't list a single damn game as an example of a game without issues. The issue is consumers not understanding a damn thing about how games are actually designed and act as if fixing something is easy and dice devs are miracle workers who should be able to fix any issue, regardless of complexity, in a matter of weeks, despite not knowing themselves how the issue would even go about being solved, legitimately, in the first place. The issue is people wanting or expecting new maps every single month, holding BF5 to an expected standard of free dlc that no other game in the industry holds up to, regardless of the fact that BF1 had paid dlc and didn't get its first map pack until 6 months after launch. The issue is that people got tons of assets removed from this game before it even publicly launched based on the asinine notion that BF5 should be historically accurate, regardless of the fact NO other BF title has been historically accurate, and despite the fact some of those things WERE period correct and used in ww2.

    The issue is gamers went from consumers that freely choose to support developers by buying thier work, to acting like they're the royalty of gaming, they're responsible for the existence of gaming, and thus should expect to get whatever they want handed to them on a silver platter - regardless of how illogical or ridiculous thier expectations or desires are.

    When did gaming go from being a free market where devs who love games created products for the world to play and enjoy, to being a market wholistically dictated by what customers want, even after a game has already released? When did gaming go from getting what you purchased and researching beforehand to make sure you want it before you buy it, to buying the game anyway and demanding the developers change whatever you dislike?

    Honestly, I think the smartest thing said in the history of the gaming industry was said in regards to this game, by Patrick Soderlund himself. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you don't want it, don't buy it.

    What happened to the days of not buying a game you dislike or that you believe has too many issues at launch for you to enjoy? Why has it now shifted to buying a game you dislike anyway just to callously and incessantly complain to try and get it molded into whatever you want?

    When did this entirely subjective, vastly varying expectation start dictating the type of game a developer makes? When did gamers become so demanding and holding things to a completely unrealistic and illogical standard met by no other games out there?

    That's the reason this community, or any other gaming community really will never be happy. They can't accept gaming and video games the way they are and always have been, and will willfully put blinders on in terms of the past to insist that newer games be held to this entirely made up, subjective, unrealistic standard. They'll ignore that BFs direct competition has an equal amount of issues and backlash in thier community just to proclaim BF5 is a broken heap of garbage. They'll call a perfectly playable game "unplayable trash" because of things like failing to vault through a window or failing to track assignments. They'll praise bf4, the game with objectively the worst launch in the history of BF and one of the worst in AAA gaming in general, while insisting BF5 launched in a pathetic broken state.

    I honestly wish I could share what I truly think of this community, but the turning of this forum into Sesame Street via EA prevents me from doing so without being banned, regardless of whether it's the truth or not.

    Simple. When the Video game industry became the biggest media industry on this Planet and Games were not made any longer by the same people who played them but by analysts supported by a well funded Marketing.
    And everyone of them told us ( and still does ) it that he has the best gaming experience every coming with their next game. While most of them are just trash.
    So dont act surprised when you as Publishers and Developers cried Wolf so often that the Villagers get cranky.

    And again about that last part. People praise BF 3&4 because the gameplay and concept under these bugs was solid and well thought. While with BF V it seems that they had no idea at all what they really want.
    Well except more women as Soldiers of course.....

    Really? What, do you think dev studios like dice have completely shifted employees since being bought by EA? The same people that crafted those BF games you love are still making the games today. There are countless devs at DICE who have been there for well over a decade, even who developed BF games before EA bought them.

    Some publishing head saying that thier game will be next level in terms of gaming experience does not somehow negate the fact that you aren't required to purchase said game BLINDLY. It doesn't negate the fact you can research beforehand. What you said doesn't truly retort any of the points I made. Publishers have nothing to do with what I said, nor how they present thier games. Believe it or not, I hasn't changed much at all in the past 10+ years - the expectation of gamers has. Out of the blue, out of nowhere, despite reality.

    Lastly, I don't know what the hell you're talking about in terms of BF3 and BF4 being a better base platform. BF5 is highly regarded as a BF game with great core gameplay and immense potential in spite of its bugs and issues.

    If you people are willing to give that heaping dumpster fire that was bf4 at launch a chance and then sing its praises to high heavens AFTER IT WENT THROUGH 2 YEARS OF FIXES, but not willing to do the same for BF5, honestly imo dice should just ignore you and your feedback.

    If it's the core of the game, BF5 as a whole, that you dislike - then again the "don't like it don't buy it" thing comes up again.

    Again, I ask, when did video games all of a sudden become products that need to appeal to the desires of everyone? How can a game possibly please every person when what someone wants from a game varies greatly from person to person in a playerbase of millions of players?

    Some people need to accept that every BF game isn't going to be what they want, regardless of how long they've been playing BF.

    I've been playing BF since 2002, everyone around here knows that I'm a vastly huge supporter of the franchise.

    But I absolutely, abhorrently, vehemently despite Hardline. It's objectively the BF game I put the least amount of time in, and I didn't enjoy a single minute of playing it.

    You know what I did? I researched it first, didn't think I'd like it, so I bought a physical copy, ended up hating it, and returned it.

    What I didn't do was spend 1 1/2 years incessantly lambasting the devs at Visceral to change the game to what I wanted it to be. I didn't like the game, so I returned it instead of playing it.

    I don't know where to start with all that. But basically, if you're one of the 'happy' Battlefield players then it's not coming across in that post.

    I'm happy with the core game, it has its issues but so has every other BF game.

    What I'm unhappy with is this community and the fact that people are acting like they just started playing BF yesterday and it's the only video game they've ever played that launched with bugs.

    That's because most people buying games these days expect to be entertained and to feel good. They're expecting the games they buy to deliver that.

    I only want to be successful in the games I play both in a competitive sense and in the technical sense of mastering the game. Therefore I am interested in gameplay, integrity and fair play.

    But other players expect the game itself to be the source of their satisfaction.
  • smokintom214
    1794 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    I'd be willing to bet cold, hard cash that if anyone, anyone at all on this forum, had thier favorite BF game re-released in the same exact state it was in when it originally launched, there would still be incessant complaints about its state and all its issues. Regardless of whether it's BF2, BC2, BF3, or especially BF4.

    I'd be willing to bet that the community has become so blatantly divided that if said game was re-released, it would be taken in a completely different direction, post-launch development wise, than it was originally.

    There's nothing that will make gamers in general happy nowadays. They've gone from loving video games just because they exist and are miracles of technological online entertainment, to acting like the gaming industry owes us everything, like we're entitled to whatever game we want, and act as if a game has ever actually existed that is free of issues.

    It seems online gaming and self-entitled toxic vitriol go hand-in-hand nowadays. The issue isn't the game, BF5 is made just like any other game, it has objectively less issues than even more highly regarded BF games did at launch. The issue is the over-expectation of the fanbase, the shifting of BF to a higher, completely made up standard that no other game achieves. The issue is people expecting this game to be bug free when they couldn't list a single damn game as an example of a game without issues. The issue is consumers not understanding a damn thing about how games are actually designed and act as if fixing something is easy and dice devs are miracle workers who should be able to fix any issue, regardless of complexity, in a matter of weeks, despite not knowing themselves how the issue would even go about being solved, legitimately, in the first place. The issue is people wanting or expecting new maps every single month, holding BF5 to an expected standard of free dlc that no other game in the industry holds up to, regardless of the fact that BF1 had paid dlc and didn't get its first map pack until 6 months after launch. The issue is that people got tons of assets removed from this game before it even publicly launched based on the asinine notion that BF5 should be historically accurate, regardless of the fact NO other BF title has been historically accurate, and despite the fact some of those things WERE period correct and used in ww2.

    The issue is gamers went from consumers that freely choose to support developers by buying thier work, to acting like they're the royalty of gaming, they're responsible for the existence of gaming, and thus should expect to get whatever they want handed to them on a silver platter - regardless of how illogical or ridiculous thier expectations or desires are.

    When did gaming go from being a free market where devs who love games created products for the world to play and enjoy, to being a market wholistically dictated by what customers want, even after a game has already released? When did gaming go from getting what you purchased and researching beforehand to make sure you want it before you buy it, to buying the game anyway and demanding the developers change whatever you dislike?

    Honestly, I think the smartest thing said in the history of the gaming industry was said in regards to this game, by Patrick Soderlund himself. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you don't want it, don't buy it.

    What happened to the days of not buying a game you dislike or that you believe has too many issues at launch for you to enjoy? Why has it now shifted to buying a game you dislike anyway just to callously and incessantly complain to try and get it molded into whatever you want?

    When did this entirely subjective, vastly varying expectation start dictating the type of game a developer makes? When did gamers become so demanding and holding things to a completely unrealistic and illogical standard met by no other games out there?

    That's the reason this community, or any other gaming community really will never be happy. They can't accept gaming and video games the way they are and always have been, and will willfully put blinders on in terms of the past to insist that newer games be held to this entirely made up, subjective, unrealistic standard. They'll ignore that BFs direct competition has an equal amount of issues and backlash in thier community just to proclaim BF5 is a broken heap of garbage. They'll call a perfectly playable game "unplayable trash" because of things like failing to vault through a window or failing to track assignments. They'll praise bf4, the game with objectively the worst launch in the history of BF and one of the worst in AAA gaming in general, while insisting BF5 launched in a pathetic broken state.

    I honestly wish I could share what I truly think of this community, but the turning of this forum into Sesame Street via EA prevents me from doing so without being banned, regardless of whether it's the truth or not.

    EA, Bethesda, Activision, etc, they're all getting hammered, and it has to do with bad games, and bad business practice. It's not the gamers "self entitlement", or any consumer for that matter to want more value for their money. Heroic effort though. You get an A for that lol.

    But no, the games and business practice just stink as compared to years ago when they all had to compete, where now they make so much money, they show no care or concern. That's meeting it's end. They got too big for their britches, thought they can do anything they want, and are paying for it. Plain and simple.

    Dice could be doing this on purpose at attempts to break away from EAs ownership of 62%. It makes Abit of sense considering, dice at the time needed a helping hand at boosting sales of bf2 but got stuck in a contract deal they wish they never were apart of, and this last fiasco with Star wars battlefront 2 may have pushed the last button.

    Well, that seems to be the new trend, that everyone is now pointing fingers, be it it's EA's, or it's DICEs fault etc. But idk if EA is the one that told DICE to go the political direction they did. Or focusing on these unknown battles not many care for. Or the ttk situation or ttd, or netcode, bugs and other factors. EA has the game on sale on Xbox, and be it half price mid Jan, but it's number 14 in most played games.

    And so, one could come to the conclusion, EA is having them buy it, but the game stinks and they don''t play it. And idk if a 2 year development cycle, as opposed to what they used to do annually, is going to have e say, they needed more time.

    How much more time than two years do you need, when they came out with much better games on an annual cycle?

    So no, i'm not going to get DICE off the hook, in that they just come out with games that are not very good, and may need to clean shop over there, hire a whole new team of Devs going into next gen, or it's going to be MOH all over again for this franchise.

    I mean these kids today, i think got it right. They don't like being lied too or bad quality on their tech. They don't like shady business practice, and at their ages where they're getting near 40, they have to buy these games. Not mom and dad of a decade or more ago, and they show it with their wallets.

    I saw that whole microtransactionary process, and at my age, i said that figures. But they went ape over it, and i guess rightfully so, and it cost. So, gamers are aging, times are changing, and so are companies practices having to change. I think that's all more the rationale of what's going on, more so than folks taking sides between EA and DICE.

    I distinctively remember ETA taking the whole wheel on making things right with Star wars battlefront 2. Star wars battlefront 2 was a side thing that was given two dice by EA who is by their right to cover that up. As for BFV I also remember after the world release and the whole backlash of women EA try to take the home and cover things up again there was a lot of radio silence from both but I think it was dice telling to go effect themselves and let them run their game. Right now, it's just dice's routine not much marketing, or sales pitch.. etc.. I think bugs are getting fixed faster than normal, many improvements/additions have been made to the game.
  • Loqtrall
    12020 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    warslag wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    warslag wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Stahlmach wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    I'd be willing to bet cold, hard cash that if anyone, anyone at all on this forum, had thier favorite BF game re-released in the same exact state it was in when it originally launched, there would still be incessant complaints about its state and all its issues. Regardless of whether it's BF2, BC2, BF3, or especially BF4.

    I'd be willing to bet that the community has become so blatantly divided that if said game was re-released, it would be taken in a completely different direction, post-launch development wise, than it was originally.

    There's nothing that will make gamers in general happy nowadays. They've gone from loving video games just because they exist and are miracles of technological online entertainment, to acting like the gaming industry owes us everything, like we're entitled to whatever game we want, and act as if a game has ever actually existed that is free of issues.

    It seems online gaming and self-entitled toxic vitriol go hand-in-hand nowadays. The issue isn't the game, BF5 is made just like any other game, it has objectively less issues than even more highly regarded BF games did at launch. The issue is the over-expectation of the fanbase, the shifting of BF to a higher, completely made up standard that no other game achieves. The issue is people expecting this game to be bug free when they couldn't list a single damn game as an example of a game without issues. The issue is consumers not understanding a damn thing about how games are actually designed and act as if fixing something is easy and dice devs are miracle workers who should be able to fix any issue, regardless of complexity, in a matter of weeks, despite not knowing themselves how the issue would even go about being solved, legitimately, in the first place. The issue is people wanting or expecting new maps every single month, holding BF5 to an expected standard of free dlc that no other game in the industry holds up to, regardless of the fact that BF1 had paid dlc and didn't get its first map pack until 6 months after launch. The issue is that people got tons of assets removed from this game before it even publicly launched based on the asinine notion that BF5 should be historically accurate, regardless of the fact NO other BF title has been historically accurate, and despite the fact some of those things WERE period correct and used in ww2.

    The issue is gamers went from consumers that freely choose to support developers by buying thier work, to acting like they're the royalty of gaming, they're responsible for the existence of gaming, and thus should expect to get whatever they want handed to them on a silver platter - regardless of how illogical or ridiculous thier expectations or desires are.

    When did gaming go from being a free market where devs who love games created products for the world to play and enjoy, to being a market wholistically dictated by what customers want, even after a game has already released? When did gaming go from getting what you purchased and researching beforehand to make sure you want it before you buy it, to buying the game anyway and demanding the developers change whatever you dislike?

    Honestly, I think the smartest thing said in the history of the gaming industry was said in regards to this game, by Patrick Soderlund himself. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you don't want it, don't buy it.

    What happened to the days of not buying a game you dislike or that you believe has too many issues at launch for you to enjoy? Why has it now shifted to buying a game you dislike anyway just to callously and incessantly complain to try and get it molded into whatever you want?

    When did this entirely subjective, vastly varying expectation start dictating the type of game a developer makes? When did gamers become so demanding and holding things to a completely unrealistic and illogical standard met by no other games out there?

    That's the reason this community, or any other gaming community really will never be happy. They can't accept gaming and video games the way they are and always have been, and will willfully put blinders on in terms of the past to insist that newer games be held to this entirely made up, subjective, unrealistic standard. They'll ignore that BFs direct competition has an equal amount of issues and backlash in thier community just to proclaim BF5 is a broken heap of garbage. They'll call a perfectly playable game "unplayable trash" because of things like failing to vault through a window or failing to track assignments. They'll praise bf4, the game with objectively the worst launch in the history of BF and one of the worst in AAA gaming in general, while insisting BF5 launched in a pathetic broken state.

    I honestly wish I could share what I truly think of this community, but the turning of this forum into Sesame Street via EA prevents me from doing so without being banned, regardless of whether it's the truth or not.

    Simple. When the Video game industry became the biggest media industry on this Planet and Games were not made any longer by the same people who played them but by analysts supported by a well funded Marketing.
    And everyone of them told us ( and still does ) it that he has the best gaming experience every coming with their next game. While most of them are just trash.
    So dont act surprised when you as Publishers and Developers cried Wolf so often that the Villagers get cranky.

    And again about that last part. People praise BF 3&4 because the gameplay and concept under these bugs was solid and well thought. While with BF V it seems that they had no idea at all what they really want.
    Well except more women as Soldiers of course.....

    Really? What, do you think dev studios like dice have completely shifted employees since being bought by EA? The same people that crafted those BF games you love are still making the games today. There are countless devs at DICE who have been there for well over a decade, even who developed BF games before EA bought them.

    Some publishing head saying that thier game will be next level in terms of gaming experience does not somehow negate the fact that you aren't required to purchase said game BLINDLY. It doesn't negate the fact you can research beforehand. What you said doesn't truly retort any of the points I made. Publishers have nothing to do with what I said, nor how they present thier games. Believe it or not, I hasn't changed much at all in the past 10+ years - the expectation of gamers has. Out of the blue, out of nowhere, despite reality.

    Lastly, I don't know what the hell you're talking about in terms of BF3 and BF4 being a better base platform. BF5 is highly regarded as a BF game with great core gameplay and immense potential in spite of its bugs and issues.

    If you people are willing to give that heaping dumpster fire that was bf4 at launch a chance and then sing its praises to high heavens AFTER IT WENT THROUGH 2 YEARS OF FIXES, but not willing to do the same for BF5, honestly imo dice should just ignore you and your feedback.

    If it's the core of the game, BF5 as a whole, that you dislike - then again the "don't like it don't buy it" thing comes up again.

    Again, I ask, when did video games all of a sudden become products that need to appeal to the desires of everyone? How can a game possibly please every person when what someone wants from a game varies greatly from person to person in a playerbase of millions of players?

    Some people need to accept that every BF game isn't going to be what they want, regardless of how long they've been playing BF.

    I've been playing BF since 2002, everyone around here knows that I'm a vastly huge supporter of the franchise.

    But I absolutely, abhorrently, vehemently despite Hardline. It's objectively the BF game I put the least amount of time in, and I didn't enjoy a single minute of playing it.

    You know what I did? I researched it first, didn't think I'd like it, so I bought a physical copy, ended up hating it, and returned it.

    What I didn't do was spend 1 1/2 years incessantly lambasting the devs at Visceral to change the game to what I wanted it to be. I didn't like the game, so I returned it instead of playing it.

    I don't know where to start with all that. But basically, if you're one of the 'happy' Battlefield players then it's not coming across in that post.

    I'm happy with the core game, it has its issues but so has every other BF game.

    What I'm unhappy with is this community and the fact that people are acting like they just started playing BF yesterday and it's the only video game they've ever played that launched with bugs.

    That's because most people buying games these days expect to be entertained and to feel good. They're expecting the games they buy to deliver that.

    I only want to be successful in the games I play both in a competitive sense and in the technical sense of mastering the game. Therefore I am interested in gameplay, integrity and fair play.

    But other players expect the game itself to be the source of their satisfaction.

    Well you can't go around expecting to enjoy every game. Not every game is designed to please everyone.

    They should find out BEFORE a purchase if they really want a product and will enjoy it. It's called research. That's my point.

    Nowadays we see droves of people buying games they dislike, just to say they dislike it on game forums and try to get it changed to what they want. Thus the issue I speak of, gamers acting like they're entitled to whatever they want, even though they're not forced to purchase this or any other game. They willfiully buy a game they'll wholistically dislike or disapprove of, only to follow up that illogical choice by insisting the game be changed to be what they want it to be.
  • Hawxxeye
    5937 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    warslag wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    warslag wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Stahlmach wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    I'd be willing to bet cold, hard cash that if anyone, anyone at all on this forum, had thier favorite BF game re-released in the same exact state it was in when it originally launched, there would still be incessant complaints about its state and all its issues. Regardless of whether it's BF2, BC2, BF3, or especially BF4.

    I'd be willing to bet that the community has become so blatantly divided that if said game was re-released, it would be taken in a completely different direction, post-launch development wise, than it was originally.

    There's nothing that will make gamers in general happy nowadays. They've gone from loving video games just because they exist and are miracles of technological online entertainment, to acting like the gaming industry owes us everything, like we're entitled to whatever game we want, and act as if a game has ever actually existed that is free of issues.

    It seems online gaming and self-entitled toxic vitriol go hand-in-hand nowadays. The issue isn't the game, BF5 is made just like any other game, it has objectively less issues than even more highly regarded BF games did at launch. The issue is the over-expectation of the fanbase, the shifting of BF to a higher, completely made up standard that no other game achieves. The issue is people expecting this game to be bug free when they couldn't list a single damn game as an example of a game without issues. The issue is consumers not understanding a damn thing about how games are actually designed and act as if fixing something is easy and dice devs are miracle workers who should be able to fix any issue, regardless of complexity, in a matter of weeks, despite not knowing themselves how the issue would even go about being solved, legitimately, in the first place. The issue is people wanting or expecting new maps every single month, holding BF5 to an expected standard of free dlc that no other game in the industry holds up to, regardless of the fact that BF1 had paid dlc and didn't get its first map pack until 6 months after launch. The issue is that people got tons of assets removed from this game before it even publicly launched based on the asinine notion that BF5 should be historically accurate, regardless of the fact NO other BF title has been historically accurate, and despite the fact some of those things WERE period correct and used in ww2.

    The issue is gamers went from consumers that freely choose to support developers by buying thier work, to acting like they're the royalty of gaming, they're responsible for the existence of gaming, and thus should expect to get whatever they want handed to them on a silver platter - regardless of how illogical or ridiculous thier expectations or desires are.

    When did gaming go from being a free market where devs who love games created products for the world to play and enjoy, to being a market wholistically dictated by what customers want, even after a game has already released? When did gaming go from getting what you purchased and researching beforehand to make sure you want it before you buy it, to buying the game anyway and demanding the developers change whatever you dislike?

    Honestly, I think the smartest thing said in the history of the gaming industry was said in regards to this game, by Patrick Soderlund himself. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you don't want it, don't buy it.

    What happened to the days of not buying a game you dislike or that you believe has too many issues at launch for you to enjoy? Why has it now shifted to buying a game you dislike anyway just to callously and incessantly complain to try and get it molded into whatever you want?

    When did this entirely subjective, vastly varying expectation start dictating the type of game a developer makes? When did gamers become so demanding and holding things to a completely unrealistic and illogical standard met by no other games out there?

    That's the reason this community, or any other gaming community really will never be happy. They can't accept gaming and video games the way they are and always have been, and will willfully put blinders on in terms of the past to insist that newer games be held to this entirely made up, subjective, unrealistic standard. They'll ignore that BFs direct competition has an equal amount of issues and backlash in thier community just to proclaim BF5 is a broken heap of garbage. They'll call a perfectly playable game "unplayable trash" because of things like failing to vault through a window or failing to track assignments. They'll praise bf4, the game with objectively the worst launch in the history of BF and one of the worst in AAA gaming in general, while insisting BF5 launched in a pathetic broken state.

    I honestly wish I could share what I truly think of this community, but the turning of this forum into Sesame Street via EA prevents me from doing so without being banned, regardless of whether it's the truth or not.

    Simple. When the Video game industry became the biggest media industry on this Planet and Games were not made any longer by the same people who played them but by analysts supported by a well funded Marketing.
    And everyone of them told us ( and still does ) it that he has the best gaming experience every coming with their next game. While most of them are just trash.
    So dont act surprised when you as Publishers and Developers cried Wolf so often that the Villagers get cranky.

    And again about that last part. People praise BF 3&4 because the gameplay and concept under these bugs was solid and well thought. While with BF V it seems that they had no idea at all what they really want.
    Well except more women as Soldiers of course.....

    Really? What, do you think dev studios like dice have completely shifted employees since being bought by EA? The same people that crafted those BF games you love are still making the games today. There are countless devs at DICE who have been there for well over a decade, even who developed BF games before EA bought them.

    Some publishing head saying that thier game will be next level in terms of gaming experience does not somehow negate the fact that you aren't required to purchase said game BLINDLY. It doesn't negate the fact you can research beforehand. What you said doesn't truly retort any of the points I made. Publishers have nothing to do with what I said, nor how they present thier games. Believe it or not, I hasn't changed much at all in the past 10+ years - the expectation of gamers has. Out of the blue, out of nowhere, despite reality.

    Lastly, I don't know what the hell you're talking about in terms of BF3 and BF4 being a better base platform. BF5 is highly regarded as a BF game with great core gameplay and immense potential in spite of its bugs and issues.

    If you people are willing to give that heaping dumpster fire that was bf4 at launch a chance and then sing its praises to high heavens AFTER IT WENT THROUGH 2 YEARS OF FIXES, but not willing to do the same for BF5, honestly imo dice should just ignore you and your feedback.

    If it's the core of the game, BF5 as a whole, that you dislike - then again the "don't like it don't buy it" thing comes up again.

    Again, I ask, when did video games all of a sudden become products that need to appeal to the desires of everyone? How can a game possibly please every person when what someone wants from a game varies greatly from person to person in a playerbase of millions of players?

    Some people need to accept that every BF game isn't going to be what they want, regardless of how long they've been playing BF.

    I've been playing BF since 2002, everyone around here knows that I'm a vastly huge supporter of the franchise.

    But I absolutely, abhorrently, vehemently despite Hardline. It's objectively the BF game I put the least amount of time in, and I didn't enjoy a single minute of playing it.

    You know what I did? I researched it first, didn't think I'd like it, so I bought a physical copy, ended up hating it, and returned it.

    What I didn't do was spend 1 1/2 years incessantly lambasting the devs at Visceral to change the game to what I wanted it to be. I didn't like the game, so I returned it instead of playing it.

    I don't know where to start with all that. But basically, if you're one of the 'happy' Battlefield players then it's not coming across in that post.

    I'm happy with the core game, it has its issues but so has every other BF game.

    What I'm unhappy with is this community and the fact that people are acting like they just started playing BF yesterday and it's the only video game they've ever played that launched with bugs.

    That's because most people buying games these days expect to be entertained and to feel good. They're expecting the games they buy to deliver that.

    I only want to be successful in the games I play both in a competitive sense and in the technical sense of mastering the game. Therefore I am interested in gameplay, integrity and fair play.

    But other players expect the game itself to be the source of their satisfaction.

    Well you can't go around expecting to enjoy every game. Not every game is designed to please everyone.

    They should find out BEFORE a purchase if they really want a product and will enjoy it. It's called research. That's my point.

    Nowadays we see droves of people buying games they dislike, just to say they dislike it on game forums and try to get it changed to what they want. Thus the issue I speak of, gamers acting like they're entitled to whatever they want, even though they're not forced to purchase this or any other game. They willfiully buy a game they'll wholistically dislike or disapprove of, only to follow up that illogical choice by insisting the game be changed to be what they want it to be.
    Are you talking about the type of people who complain about sexy games having sexy things?
  • Loqtrall
    12020 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    warslag wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    warslag wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Stahlmach wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    I'd be willing to bet cold, hard cash that if anyone, anyone at all on this forum, had thier favorite BF game re-released in the same exact state it was in when it originally launched, there would still be incessant complaints about its state and all its issues. Regardless of whether it's BF2, BC2, BF3, or especially BF4.

    I'd be willing to bet that the community has become so blatantly divided that if said game was re-released, it would be taken in a completely different direction, post-launch development wise, than it was originally.

    There's nothing that will make gamers in general happy nowadays. They've gone from loving video games just because they exist and are miracles of technological online entertainment, to acting like the gaming industry owes us everything, like we're entitled to whatever game we want, and act as if a game has ever actually existed that is free of issues.

    It seems online gaming and self-entitled toxic vitriol go hand-in-hand nowadays. The issue isn't the game, BF5 is made just like any other game, it has objectively less issues than even more highly regarded BF games did at launch. The issue is the over-expectation of the fanbase, the shifting of BF to a higher, completely made up standard that no other game achieves. The issue is people expecting this game to be bug free when they couldn't list a single damn game as an example of a game without issues. The issue is consumers not understanding a damn thing about how games are actually designed and act as if fixing something is easy and dice devs are miracle workers who should be able to fix any issue, regardless of complexity, in a matter of weeks, despite not knowing themselves how the issue would even go about being solved, legitimately, in the first place. The issue is people wanting or expecting new maps every single month, holding BF5 to an expected standard of free dlc that no other game in the industry holds up to, regardless of the fact that BF1 had paid dlc and didn't get its first map pack until 6 months after launch. The issue is that people got tons of assets removed from this game before it even publicly launched based on the asinine notion that BF5 should be historically accurate, regardless of the fact NO other BF title has been historically accurate, and despite the fact some of those things WERE period correct and used in ww2.

    The issue is gamers went from consumers that freely choose to support developers by buying thier work, to acting like they're the royalty of gaming, they're responsible for the existence of gaming, and thus should expect to get whatever they want handed to them on a silver platter - regardless of how illogical or ridiculous thier expectations or desires are.

    When did gaming go from being a free market where devs who love games created products for the world to play and enjoy, to being a market wholistically dictated by what customers want, even after a game has already released? When did gaming go from getting what you purchased and researching beforehand to make sure you want it before you buy it, to buying the game anyway and demanding the developers change whatever you dislike?

    Honestly, I think the smartest thing said in the history of the gaming industry was said in regards to this game, by Patrick Soderlund himself. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you don't want it, don't buy it.

    What happened to the days of not buying a game you dislike or that you believe has too many issues at launch for you to enjoy? Why has it now shifted to buying a game you dislike anyway just to callously and incessantly complain to try and get it molded into whatever you want?

    When did this entirely subjective, vastly varying expectation start dictating the type of game a developer makes? When did gamers become so demanding and holding things to a completely unrealistic and illogical standard met by no other games out there?

    That's the reason this community, or any other gaming community really will never be happy. They can't accept gaming and video games the way they are and always have been, and will willfully put blinders on in terms of the past to insist that newer games be held to this entirely made up, subjective, unrealistic standard. They'll ignore that BFs direct competition has an equal amount of issues and backlash in thier community just to proclaim BF5 is a broken heap of garbage. They'll call a perfectly playable game "unplayable trash" because of things like failing to vault through a window or failing to track assignments. They'll praise bf4, the game with objectively the worst launch in the history of BF and one of the worst in AAA gaming in general, while insisting BF5 launched in a pathetic broken state.

    I honestly wish I could share what I truly think of this community, but the turning of this forum into Sesame Street via EA prevents me from doing so without being banned, regardless of whether it's the truth or not.

    Simple. When the Video game industry became the biggest media industry on this Planet and Games were not made any longer by the same people who played them but by analysts supported by a well funded Marketing.
    And everyone of them told us ( and still does ) it that he has the best gaming experience every coming with their next game. While most of them are just trash.
    So dont act surprised when you as Publishers and Developers cried Wolf so often that the Villagers get cranky.

    And again about that last part. People praise BF 3&4 because the gameplay and concept under these bugs was solid and well thought. While with BF V it seems that they had no idea at all what they really want.
    Well except more women as Soldiers of course.....

    Really? What, do you think dev studios like dice have completely shifted employees since being bought by EA? The same people that crafted those BF games you love are still making the games today. There are countless devs at DICE who have been there for well over a decade, even who developed BF games before EA bought them.

    Some publishing head saying that thier game will be next level in terms of gaming experience does not somehow negate the fact that you aren't required to purchase said game BLINDLY. It doesn't negate the fact you can research beforehand. What you said doesn't truly retort any of the points I made. Publishers have nothing to do with what I said, nor how they present thier games. Believe it or not, I hasn't changed much at all in the past 10+ years - the expectation of gamers has. Out of the blue, out of nowhere, despite reality.

    Lastly, I don't know what the hell you're talking about in terms of BF3 and BF4 being a better base platform. BF5 is highly regarded as a BF game with great core gameplay and immense potential in spite of its bugs and issues.

    If you people are willing to give that heaping dumpster fire that was bf4 at launch a chance and then sing its praises to high heavens AFTER IT WENT THROUGH 2 YEARS OF FIXES, but not willing to do the same for BF5, honestly imo dice should just ignore you and your feedback.

    If it's the core of the game, BF5 as a whole, that you dislike - then again the "don't like it don't buy it" thing comes up again.

    Again, I ask, when did video games all of a sudden become products that need to appeal to the desires of everyone? How can a game possibly please every person when what someone wants from a game varies greatly from person to person in a playerbase of millions of players?

    Some people need to accept that every BF game isn't going to be what they want, regardless of how long they've been playing BF.

    I've been playing BF since 2002, everyone around here knows that I'm a vastly huge supporter of the franchise.

    But I absolutely, abhorrently, vehemently despite Hardline. It's objectively the BF game I put the least amount of time in, and I didn't enjoy a single minute of playing it.

    You know what I did? I researched it first, didn't think I'd like it, so I bought a physical copy, ended up hating it, and returned it.

    What I didn't do was spend 1 1/2 years incessantly lambasting the devs at Visceral to change the game to what I wanted it to be. I didn't like the game, so I returned it instead of playing it.

    I don't know where to start with all that. But basically, if you're one of the 'happy' Battlefield players then it's not coming across in that post.

    I'm happy with the core game, it has its issues but so has every other BF game.

    What I'm unhappy with is this community and the fact that people are acting like they just started playing BF yesterday and it's the only video game they've ever played that launched with bugs.

    That's because most people buying games these days expect to be entertained and to feel good. They're expecting the games they buy to deliver that.

    I only want to be successful in the games I play both in a competitive sense and in the technical sense of mastering the game. Therefore I am interested in gameplay, integrity and fair play.

    But other players expect the game itself to be the source of their satisfaction.

    Well you can't go around expecting to enjoy every game. Not every game is designed to please everyone.

    They should find out BEFORE a purchase if they really want a product and will enjoy it. It's called research. That's my point.

    Nowadays we see droves of people buying games they dislike, just to say they dislike it on game forums and try to get it changed to what they want. Thus the issue I speak of, gamers acting like they're entitled to whatever they want, even though they're not forced to purchase this or any other game. They willfiully buy a game they'll wholistically dislike or disapprove of, only to follow up that illogical choice by insisting the game be changed to be what they want it to be.
    Are you talking about the type of people who complain about sexy games having sexy things?

    I'm talking about the people who got German sniper masks, facial hair, a prosthetic arm, etc removed from this game before it even launched because it's not historically standard issue, despite all those things being era correct and actually used/seen in the war to some extent. I'm talking about the people who see a guy with legit ww2 anti flash paint on and calling him Braveheart or Kratos and saying he looks ridicious.
  • warslag
    1536 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    warslag wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    warslag wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Stahlmach wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    I'd be willing to bet cold, hard cash that if anyone, anyone at all on this forum, had thier favorite BF game re-released in the same exact state it was in when it originally launched, there would still be incessant complaints about its state and all its issues. Regardless of whether it's BF2, BC2, BF3, or especially BF4.

    I'd be willing to bet that the community has become so blatantly divided that if said game was re-released, it would be taken in a completely different direction, post-launch development wise, than it was originally.

    There's nothing that will make gamers in general happy nowadays. They've gone from loving video games just because they exist and are miracles of technological online entertainment, to acting like the gaming industry owes us everything, like we're entitled to whatever game we want, and act as if a game has ever actually existed that is free of issues.

    It seems online gaming and self-entitled toxic vitriol go hand-in-hand nowadays. The issue isn't the game, BF5 is made just like any other game, it has objectively less issues than even more highly regarded BF games did at launch. The issue is the over-expectation of the fanbase, the shifting of BF to a higher, completely made up standard that no other game achieves. The issue is people expecting this game to be bug free when they couldn't list a single damn game as an example of a game without issues. The issue is consumers not understanding a damn thing about how games are actually designed and act as if fixing something is easy and dice devs are miracle workers who should be able to fix any issue, regardless of complexity, in a matter of weeks, despite not knowing themselves how the issue would even go about being solved, legitimately, in the first place. The issue is people wanting or expecting new maps every single month, holding BF5 to an expected standard of free dlc that no other game in the industry holds up to, regardless of the fact that BF1 had paid dlc and didn't get its first map pack until 6 months after launch. The issue is that people got tons of assets removed from this game before it even publicly launched based on the asinine notion that BF5 should be historically accurate, regardless of the fact NO other BF title has been historically accurate, and despite the fact some of those things WERE period correct and used in ww2.

    The issue is gamers went from consumers that freely choose to support developers by buying thier work, to acting like they're the royalty of gaming, they're responsible for the existence of gaming, and thus should expect to get whatever they want handed to them on a silver platter - regardless of how illogical or ridiculous thier expectations or desires are.

    When did gaming go from being a free market where devs who love games created products for the world to play and enjoy, to being a market wholistically dictated by what customers want, even after a game has already released? When did gaming go from getting what you purchased and researching beforehand to make sure you want it before you buy it, to buying the game anyway and demanding the developers change whatever you dislike?

    Honestly, I think the smartest thing said in the history of the gaming industry was said in regards to this game, by Patrick Soderlund himself. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you don't want it, don't buy it.

    What happened to the days of not buying a game you dislike or that you believe has too many issues at launch for you to enjoy? Why has it now shifted to buying a game you dislike anyway just to callously and incessantly complain to try and get it molded into whatever you want?

    When did this entirely subjective, vastly varying expectation start dictating the type of game a developer makes? When did gamers become so demanding and holding things to a completely unrealistic and illogical standard met by no other games out there?

    That's the reason this community, or any other gaming community really will never be happy. They can't accept gaming and video games the way they are and always have been, and will willfully put blinders on in terms of the past to insist that newer games be held to this entirely made up, subjective, unrealistic standard. They'll ignore that BFs direct competition has an equal amount of issues and backlash in thier community just to proclaim BF5 is a broken heap of garbage. They'll call a perfectly playable game "unplayable trash" because of things like failing to vault through a window or failing to track assignments. They'll praise bf4, the game with objectively the worst launch in the history of BF and one of the worst in AAA gaming in general, while insisting BF5 launched in a pathetic broken state.

    I honestly wish I could share what I truly think of this community, but the turning of this forum into Sesame Street via EA prevents me from doing so without being banned, regardless of whether it's the truth or not.

    Simple. When the Video game industry became the biggest media industry on this Planet and Games were not made any longer by the same people who played them but by analysts supported by a well funded Marketing.
    And everyone of them told us ( and still does ) it that he has the best gaming experience every coming with their next game. While most of them are just trash.
    So dont act surprised when you as Publishers and Developers cried Wolf so often that the Villagers get cranky.

    And again about that last part. People praise BF 3&4 because the gameplay and concept under these bugs was solid and well thought. While with BF V it seems that they had no idea at all what they really want.
    Well except more women as Soldiers of course.....

    Really? What, do you think dev studios like dice have completely shifted employees since being bought by EA? The same people that crafted those BF games you love are still making the games today. There are countless devs at DICE who have been there for well over a decade, even who developed BF games before EA bought them.

    Some publishing head saying that thier game will be next level in terms of gaming experience does not somehow negate the fact that you aren't required to purchase said game BLINDLY. It doesn't negate the fact you can research beforehand. What you said doesn't truly retort any of the points I made. Publishers have nothing to do with what I said, nor how they present thier games. Believe it or not, I hasn't changed much at all in the past 10+ years - the expectation of gamers has. Out of the blue, out of nowhere, despite reality.

    Lastly, I don't know what the hell you're talking about in terms of BF3 and BF4 being a better base platform. BF5 is highly regarded as a BF game with great core gameplay and immense potential in spite of its bugs and issues.

    If you people are willing to give that heaping dumpster fire that was bf4 at launch a chance and then sing its praises to high heavens AFTER IT WENT THROUGH 2 YEARS OF FIXES, but not willing to do the same for BF5, honestly imo dice should just ignore you and your feedback.

    If it's the core of the game, BF5 as a whole, that you dislike - then again the "don't like it don't buy it" thing comes up again.

    Again, I ask, when did video games all of a sudden become products that need to appeal to the desires of everyone? How can a game possibly please every person when what someone wants from a game varies greatly from person to person in a playerbase of millions of players?

    Some people need to accept that every BF game isn't going to be what they want, regardless of how long they've been playing BF.

    I've been playing BF since 2002, everyone around here knows that I'm a vastly huge supporter of the franchise.

    But I absolutely, abhorrently, vehemently despite Hardline. It's objectively the BF game I put the least amount of time in, and I didn't enjoy a single minute of playing it.

    You know what I did? I researched it first, didn't think I'd like it, so I bought a physical copy, ended up hating it, and returned it.

    What I didn't do was spend 1 1/2 years incessantly lambasting the devs at Visceral to change the game to what I wanted it to be. I didn't like the game, so I returned it instead of playing it.

    I don't know where to start with all that. But basically, if you're one of the 'happy' Battlefield players then it's not coming across in that post.

    I'm happy with the core game, it has its issues but so has every other BF game.

    What I'm unhappy with is this community and the fact that people are acting like they just started playing BF yesterday and it's the only video game they've ever played that launched with bugs.

    That's because most people buying games these days expect to be entertained and to feel good. They're expecting the games they buy to deliver that.

    I only want to be successful in the games I play both in a competitive sense and in the technical sense of mastering the game. Therefore I am interested in gameplay, integrity and fair play.

    But other players expect the game itself to be the source of their satisfaction.

    Well you can't go around expecting to enjoy every game. Not every game is designed to please everyone.

    They should find out BEFORE a purchase if they really want a product and will enjoy it. It's called research. That's my point.

    Nowadays we see droves of people buying games they dislike, just to say they dislike it on game forums and try to get it changed to what they want. Thus the issue I speak of, gamers acting like they're entitled to whatever they want, even though they're not forced to purchase this or any other game. They willfiully buy a game they'll wholistically dislike or disapprove of, only to follow up that illogical choice by insisting the game be changed to be what they want it to be.

    As you say: if people "cannot expect to enjoy every game" or "games are not designed to please everyone", then there will be unhappy players. Plus, the potential is there for any number of players to be unhappy or happy, by turns.

    Really we are just little birds pecking away at big EA. But there are some who, like sleek ravens up in the trees, then swooping down on us little birds to peck our eyes out, wish us to not see that we are right to complain.
  • xBCxSEALxTEAMx6
    1441 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    warslag wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    warslag wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Stahlmach wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    I'd be willing to bet cold, hard cash that if anyone, anyone at all on this forum, had thier favorite BF game re-released in the same exact state it was in when it originally launched, there would still be incessant complaints about its state and all its issues. Regardless of whether it's BF2, BC2, BF3, or especially BF4.

    I'd be willing to bet that the community has become so blatantly divided that if said game was re-released, it would be taken in a completely different direction, post-launch development wise, than it was originally.

    There's nothing that will make gamers in general happy nowadays. They've gone from loving video games just because they exist and are miracles of technological online entertainment, to acting like the gaming industry owes us everything, like we're entitled to whatever game we want, and act as if a game has ever actually existed that is free of issues.

    It seems online gaming and self-entitled toxic vitriol go hand-in-hand nowadays. The issue isn't the game, BF5 is made just like any other game, it has objectively less issues than even more highly regarded BF games did at launch. The issue is the over-expectation of the fanbase, the shifting of BF to a higher, completely made up standard that no other game achieves. The issue is people expecting this game to be bug free when they couldn't list a single damn game as an example of a game without issues. The issue is consumers not understanding a damn thing about how games are actually designed and act as if fixing something is easy and dice devs are miracle workers who should be able to fix any issue, regardless of complexity, in a matter of weeks, despite not knowing themselves how the issue would even go about being solved, legitimately, in the first place. The issue is people wanting or expecting new maps every single month, holding BF5 to an expected standard of free dlc that no other game in the industry holds up to, regardless of the fact that BF1 had paid dlc and didn't get its first map pack until 6 months after launch. The issue is that people got tons of assets removed from this game before it even publicly launched based on the asinine notion that BF5 should be historically accurate, regardless of the fact NO other BF title has been historically accurate, and despite the fact some of those things WERE period correct and used in ww2.

    The issue is gamers went from consumers that freely choose to support developers by buying thier work, to acting like they're the royalty of gaming, they're responsible for the existence of gaming, and thus should expect to get whatever they want handed to them on a silver platter - regardless of how illogical or ridiculous thier expectations or desires are.

    When did gaming go from being a free market where devs who love games created products for the world to play and enjoy, to being a market wholistically dictated by what customers want, even after a game has already released? When did gaming go from getting what you purchased and researching beforehand to make sure you want it before you buy it, to buying the game anyway and demanding the developers change whatever you dislike?

    Honestly, I think the smartest thing said in the history of the gaming industry was said in regards to this game, by Patrick Soderlund himself. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you don't want it, don't buy it.

    What happened to the days of not buying a game you dislike or that you believe has too many issues at launch for you to enjoy? Why has it now shifted to buying a game you dislike anyway just to callously and incessantly complain to try and get it molded into whatever you want?

    When did this entirely subjective, vastly varying expectation start dictating the type of game a developer makes? When did gamers become so demanding and holding things to a completely unrealistic and illogical standard met by no other games out there?

    That's the reason this community, or any other gaming community really will never be happy. They can't accept gaming and video games the way they are and always have been, and will willfully put blinders on in terms of the past to insist that newer games be held to this entirely made up, subjective, unrealistic standard. They'll ignore that BFs direct competition has an equal amount of issues and backlash in thier community just to proclaim BF5 is a broken heap of garbage. They'll call a perfectly playable game "unplayable trash" because of things like failing to vault through a window or failing to track assignments. They'll praise bf4, the game with objectively the worst launch in the history of BF and one of the worst in AAA gaming in general, while insisting BF5 launched in a pathetic broken state.

    I honestly wish I could share what I truly think of this community, but the turning of this forum into Sesame Street via EA prevents me from doing so without being banned, regardless of whether it's the truth or not.

    Simple. When the Video game industry became the biggest media industry on this Planet and Games were not made any longer by the same people who played them but by analysts supported by a well funded Marketing.
    And everyone of them told us ( and still does ) it that he has the best gaming experience every coming with their next game. While most of them are just trash.
    So dont act surprised when you as Publishers and Developers cried Wolf so often that the Villagers get cranky.

    And again about that last part. People praise BF 3&4 because the gameplay and concept under these bugs was solid and well thought. While with BF V it seems that they had no idea at all what they really want.
    Well except more women as Soldiers of course.....

    Really? What, do you think dev studios like dice have completely shifted employees since being bought by EA? The same people that crafted those BF games you love are still making the games today. There are countless devs at DICE who have been there for well over a decade, even who developed BF games before EA bought them.

    Some publishing head saying that thier game will be next level in terms of gaming experience does not somehow negate the fact that you aren't required to purchase said game BLINDLY. It doesn't negate the fact you can research beforehand. What you said doesn't truly retort any of the points I made. Publishers have nothing to do with what I said, nor how they present thier games. Believe it or not, I hasn't changed much at all in the past 10+ years - the expectation of gamers has. Out of the blue, out of nowhere, despite reality.

    Lastly, I don't know what the hell you're talking about in terms of BF3 and BF4 being a better base platform. BF5 is highly regarded as a BF game with great core gameplay and immense potential in spite of its bugs and issues.

    If you people are willing to give that heaping dumpster fire that was bf4 at launch a chance and then sing its praises to high heavens AFTER IT WENT THROUGH 2 YEARS OF FIXES, but not willing to do the same for BF5, honestly imo dice should just ignore you and your feedback.

    If it's the core of the game, BF5 as a whole, that you dislike - then again the "don't like it don't buy it" thing comes up again.

    Again, I ask, when did video games all of a sudden become products that need to appeal to the desires of everyone? How can a game possibly please every person when what someone wants from a game varies greatly from person to person in a playerbase of millions of players?

    Some people need to accept that every BF game isn't going to be what they want, regardless of how long they've been playing BF.

    I've been playing BF since 2002, everyone around here knows that I'm a vastly huge supporter of the franchise.

    But I absolutely, abhorrently, vehemently despite Hardline. It's objectively the BF game I put the least amount of time in, and I didn't enjoy a single minute of playing it.

    You know what I did? I researched it first, didn't think I'd like it, so I bought a physical copy, ended up hating it, and returned it.

    What I didn't do was spend 1 1/2 years incessantly lambasting the devs at Visceral to change the game to what I wanted it to be. I didn't like the game, so I returned it instead of playing it.

    I don't know where to start with all that. But basically, if you're one of the 'happy' Battlefield players then it's not coming across in that post.

    I'm happy with the core game, it has its issues but so has every other BF game.

    What I'm unhappy with is this community and the fact that people are acting like they just started playing BF yesterday and it's the only video game they've ever played that launched with bugs.

    That's because most people buying games these days expect to be entertained and to feel good. They're expecting the games they buy to deliver that.

    I only want to be successful in the games I play both in a competitive sense and in the technical sense of mastering the game. Therefore I am interested in gameplay, integrity and fair play.

    But other players expect the game itself to be the source of their satisfaction.

    Well you can't go around expecting to enjoy every game. Not every game is designed to please everyone.

    They should find out BEFORE a purchase if they really want a product and will enjoy it. It's called research. That's my point.

    Nowadays we see droves of people buying games they dislike, just to say they dislike it on game forums and try to get it changed to what they want. Thus the issue I speak of, gamers acting like they're entitled to whatever they want, even though they're not forced to purchase this or any other game. They willfiully buy a game they'll wholistically dislike or disapprove of, only to follow up that illogical choice by insisting the game be changed to be what they want it to be.
    Are you talking about the type of people who complain about sexy games having sexy things?

    I'm talking about the people who got German sniper masks, facial hair, a prosthetic arm, etc removed from this game before it even launched because it's not historically standard issue, despite all those things being era correct and actually used/seen in the war to some extent. I'm talking about the people who see a guy with legit ww2 anti flash paint on and calling him Braveheart or Kratos and saying he looks ridicious.

    Hm, idk man, but respectfully, if they listen to you they may as well pack up shop lol.
  • ackers75
    2438 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    warslag wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Stahlmach wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    I'd be willing to bet cold, hard cash that if anyone, anyone at all on this forum, had thier favorite BF game re-released in the same exact state it was in when it originally launched, there would still be incessant complaints about its state and all its issues. Regardless of whether it's BF2, BC2, BF3, or especially BF4.

    I'd be willing to bet that the community has become so blatantly divided that if said game was re-released, it would be taken in a completely different direction, post-launch development wise, than it was originally.

    There's nothing that will make gamers in general happy nowadays. They've gone from loving video games just because they exist and are miracles of technological online entertainment, to acting like the gaming industry owes us everything, like we're entitled to whatever game we want, and act as if a game has ever actually existed that is free of issues.

    It seems online gaming and self-entitled toxic vitriol go hand-in-hand nowadays. The issue isn't the game, BF5 is made just like any other game, it has objectively less issues than even more highly regarded BF games did at launch. The issue is the over-expectation of the fanbase, the shifting of BF to a higher, completely made up standard that no other game achieves. The issue is people expecting this game to be bug free when they couldn't list a single damn game as an example of a game without issues. The issue is consumers not understanding a damn thing about how games are actually designed and act as if fixing something is easy and dice devs are miracle workers who should be able to fix any issue, regardless of complexity, in a matter of weeks, despite not knowing themselves how the issue would even go about being solved, legitimately, in the first place. The issue is people wanting or expecting new maps every single month, holding BF5 to an expected standard of free dlc that no other game in the industry holds up to, regardless of the fact that BF1 had paid dlc and didn't get its first map pack until 6 months after launch. The issue is that people got tons of assets removed from this game before it even publicly launched based on the asinine notion that BF5 should be historically accurate, regardless of the fact NO other BF title has been historically accurate, and despite the fact some of those things WERE period correct and used in ww2.

    The issue is gamers went from consumers that freely choose to support developers by buying thier work, to acting like they're the royalty of gaming, they're responsible for the existence of gaming, and thus should expect to get whatever they want handed to them on a silver platter - regardless of how illogical or ridiculous thier expectations or desires are.

    When did gaming go from being a free market where devs who love games created products for the world to play and enjoy, to being a market wholistically dictated by what customers want, even after a game has already released? When did gaming go from getting what you purchased and researching beforehand to make sure you want it before you buy it, to buying the game anyway and demanding the developers change whatever you dislike?

    Honestly, I think the smartest thing said in the history of the gaming industry was said in regards to this game, by Patrick Soderlund himself. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you don't want it, don't buy it.

    What happened to the days of not buying a game you dislike or that you believe has too many issues at launch for you to enjoy? Why has it now shifted to buying a game you dislike anyway just to callously and incessantly complain to try and get it molded into whatever you want?

    When did this entirely subjective, vastly varying expectation start dictating the type of game a developer makes? When did gamers become so demanding and holding things to a completely unrealistic and illogical standard met by no other games out there?

    That's the reason this community, or any other gaming community really will never be happy. They can't accept gaming and video games the way they are and always have been, and will willfully put blinders on in terms of the past to insist that newer games be held to this entirely made up, subjective, unrealistic standard. They'll ignore that BFs direct competition has an equal amount of issues and backlash in thier community just to proclaim BF5 is a broken heap of garbage. They'll call a perfectly playable game "unplayable trash" because of things like failing to vault through a window or failing to track assignments. They'll praise bf4, the game with objectively the worst launch in the history of BF and one of the worst in AAA gaming in general, while insisting BF5 launched in a pathetic broken state.

    I honestly wish I could share what I truly think of this community, but the turning of this forum into Sesame Street via EA prevents me from doing so without being banned, regardless of whether it's the truth or not.

    Simple. When the Video game industry became the biggest media industry on this Planet and Games were not made any longer by the same people who played them but by analysts supported by a well funded Marketing.
    And everyone of them told us ( and still does ) it that he has the best gaming experience every coming with their next game. While most of them are just trash.
    So dont act surprised when you as Publishers and Developers cried Wolf so often that the Villagers get cranky.

    And again about that last part. People praise BF 3&4 because the gameplay and concept under these bugs was solid and well thought. While with BF V it seems that they had no idea at all what they really want.
    Well except more women as Soldiers of course.....

    Really? What, do you think dev studios like dice have completely shifted employees since being bought by EA? The same people that crafted those BF games you love are still making the games today. There are countless devs at DICE who have been there for well over a decade, even who developed BF games before EA bought them.

    Some publishing head saying that thier game will be next level in terms of gaming experience does not somehow negate the fact that you aren't required to purchase said game BLINDLY. It doesn't negate the fact you can research beforehand. What you said doesn't truly retort any of the points I made. Publishers have nothing to do with what I said, nor how they present thier games. Believe it or not, I hasn't changed much at all in the past 10+ years - the expectation of gamers has. Out of the blue, out of nowhere, despite reality.

    Lastly, I don't know what the hell you're talking about in terms of BF3 and BF4 being a better base platform. BF5 is highly regarded as a BF game with great core gameplay and immense potential in spite of its bugs and issues.

    If you people are willing to give that heaping dumpster fire that was bf4 at launch a chance and then sing its praises to high heavens AFTER IT WENT THROUGH 2 YEARS OF FIXES, but not willing to do the same for BF5, honestly imo dice should just ignore you and your feedback.

    If it's the core of the game, BF5 as a whole, that you dislike - then again the "don't like it don't buy it" thing comes up again.

    Again, I ask, when did video games all of a sudden become products that need to appeal to the desires of everyone? How can a game possibly please every person when what someone wants from a game varies greatly from person to person in a playerbase of millions of players?

    Some people need to accept that every BF game isn't going to be what they want, regardless of how long they've been playing BF.

    I've been playing BF since 2002, everyone around here knows that I'm a vastly huge supporter of the franchise.

    But I absolutely, abhorrently, vehemently despite Hardline. It's objectively the BF game I put the least amount of time in, and I didn't enjoy a single minute of playing it.

    You know what I did? I researched it first, didn't think I'd like it, so I bought a physical copy, ended up hating it, and returned it.

    What I didn't do was spend 1 1/2 years incessantly lambasting the devs at Visceral to change the game to what I wanted it to be. I didn't like the game, so I returned it instead of playing it.

    I don't know where to start with all that. But basically, if you're one of the 'happy' Battlefield players then it's not coming across in that post.

    I'm happy with the core game, it has its issues but so has every other BF game.

    What I'm unhappy with is this community and the fact that people are acting like they just started playing BF yesterday and it's the only video game they've ever played that launched with bugs.


    Maybe just maybe the community is getting a little tired of the bugs.
  • MBT_Layzan
    1599 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    This has been easily the worst bf game for me, it's not even close. Each patch is making it worse too.
  • TEKNOCODE
    11018 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    warslag wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    warslag wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Stahlmach wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    I'd be willing to bet cold, hard cash that if anyone, anyone at all on this forum, had thier favorite BF game re-released in the same exact state it was in when it originally launched, there would still be incessant complaints about its state and all its issues. Regardless of whether it's BF2, BC2, BF3, or especially BF4.

    I'd be willing to bet that the community has become so blatantly divided that if said game was re-released, it would be taken in a completely different direction, post-launch development wise, than it was originally.

    There's nothing that will make gamers in general happy nowadays. They've gone from loving video games just because they exist and are miracles of technological online entertainment, to acting like the gaming industry owes us everything, like we're entitled to whatever game we want, and act as if a game has ever actually existed that is free of issues.

    It seems online gaming and self-entitled toxic vitriol go hand-in-hand nowadays. The issue isn't the game, BF5 is made just like any other game, it has objectively less issues than even more highly regarded BF games did at launch. The issue is the over-expectation of the fanbase, the shifting of BF to a higher, completely made up standard that no other game achieves. The issue is people expecting this game to be bug free when they couldn't list a single damn game as an example of a game without issues. The issue is consumers not understanding a damn thing about how games are actually designed and act as if fixing something is easy and dice devs are miracle workers who should be able to fix any issue, regardless of complexity, in a matter of weeks, despite not knowing themselves how the issue would even go about being solved, legitimately, in the first place. The issue is people wanting or expecting new maps every single month, holding BF5 to an expected standard of free dlc that no other game in the industry holds up to, regardless of the fact that BF1 had paid dlc and didn't get its first map pack until 6 months after launch. The issue is that people got tons of assets removed from this game before it even publicly launched based on the asinine notion that BF5 should be historically accurate, regardless of the fact NO other BF title has been historically accurate, and despite the fact some of those things WERE period correct and used in ww2.

    The issue is gamers went from consumers that freely choose to support developers by buying thier work, to acting like they're the royalty of gaming, they're responsible for the existence of gaming, and thus should expect to get whatever they want handed to them on a silver platter - regardless of how illogical or ridiculous thier expectations or desires are.

    When did gaming go from being a free market where devs who love games created products for the world to play and enjoy, to being a market wholistically dictated by what customers want, even after a game has already released? When did gaming go from getting what you purchased and researching beforehand to make sure you want it before you buy it, to buying the game anyway and demanding the developers change whatever you dislike?

    Honestly, I think the smartest thing said in the history of the gaming industry was said in regards to this game, by Patrick Soderlund himself. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you don't want it, don't buy it.

    What happened to the days of not buying a game you dislike or that you believe has too many issues at launch for you to enjoy? Why has it now shifted to buying a game you dislike anyway just to callously and incessantly complain to try and get it molded into whatever you want?

    When did this entirely subjective, vastly varying expectation start dictating the type of game a developer makes? When did gamers become so demanding and holding things to a completely unrealistic and illogical standard met by no other games out there?

    That's the reason this community, or any other gaming community really will never be happy. They can't accept gaming and video games the way they are and always have been, and will willfully put blinders on in terms of the past to insist that newer games be held to this entirely made up, subjective, unrealistic standard. They'll ignore that BFs direct competition has an equal amount of issues and backlash in thier community just to proclaim BF5 is a broken heap of garbage. They'll call a perfectly playable game "unplayable trash" because of things like failing to vault through a window or failing to track assignments. They'll praise bf4, the game with objectively the worst launch in the history of BF and one of the worst in AAA gaming in general, while insisting BF5 launched in a pathetic broken state.

    I honestly wish I could share what I truly think of this community, but the turning of this forum into Sesame Street via EA prevents me from doing so without being banned, regardless of whether it's the truth or not.

    Simple. When the Video game industry became the biggest media industry on this Planet and Games were not made any longer by the same people who played them but by analysts supported by a well funded Marketing.
    And everyone of them told us ( and still does ) it that he has the best gaming experience every coming with their next game. While most of them are just trash.
    So dont act surprised when you as Publishers and Developers cried Wolf so often that the Villagers get cranky.

    And again about that last part. People praise BF 3&4 because the gameplay and concept under these bugs was solid and well thought. While with BF V it seems that they had no idea at all what they really want.
    Well except more women as Soldiers of course.....

    Really? What, do you think dev studios like dice have completely shifted employees since being bought by EA? The same people that crafted those BF games you love are still making the games today. There are countless devs at DICE who have been there for well over a decade, even who developed BF games before EA bought them.

    Some publishing head saying that thier game will be next level in terms of gaming experience does not somehow negate the fact that you aren't required to purchase said game BLINDLY. It doesn't negate the fact you can research beforehand. What you said doesn't truly retort any of the points I made. Publishers have nothing to do with what I said, nor how they present thier games. Believe it or not, I hasn't changed much at all in the past 10+ years - the expectation of gamers has. Out of the blue, out of nowhere, despite reality.

    Lastly, I don't know what the hell you're talking about in terms of BF3 and BF4 being a better base platform. BF5 is highly regarded as a BF game with great core gameplay and immense potential in spite of its bugs and issues.

    If you people are willing to give that heaping dumpster fire that was bf4 at launch a chance and then sing its praises to high heavens AFTER IT WENT THROUGH 2 YEARS OF FIXES, but not willing to do the same for BF5, honestly imo dice should just ignore you and your feedback.

    If it's the core of the game, BF5 as a whole, that you dislike - then again the "don't like it don't buy it" thing comes up again.

    Again, I ask, when did video games all of a sudden become products that need to appeal to the desires of everyone? How can a game possibly please every person when what someone wants from a game varies greatly from person to person in a playerbase of millions of players?

    Some people need to accept that every BF game isn't going to be what they want, regardless of how long they've been playing BF.

    I've been playing BF since 2002, everyone around here knows that I'm a vastly huge supporter of the franchise.

    But I absolutely, abhorrently, vehemently despite Hardline. It's objectively the BF game I put the least amount of time in, and I didn't enjoy a single minute of playing it.

    You know what I did? I researched it first, didn't think I'd like it, so I bought a physical copy, ended up hating it, and returned it.

    What I didn't do was spend 1 1/2 years incessantly lambasting the devs at Visceral to change the game to what I wanted it to be. I didn't like the game, so I returned it instead of playing it.

    I don't know where to start with all that. But basically, if you're one of the 'happy' Battlefield players then it's not coming across in that post.

    I'm happy with the core game, it has its issues but so has every other BF game.

    What I'm unhappy with is this community and the fact that people are acting like they just started playing BF yesterday and it's the only video game they've ever played that launched with bugs.

    That's because most people buying games these days expect to be entertained and to feel good. They're expecting the games they buy to deliver that.

    I only want to be successful in the games I play both in a competitive sense and in the technical sense of mastering the game. Therefore I am interested in gameplay, integrity and fair play.

    But other players expect the game itself to be the source of their satisfaction.

    Well you can't go around expecting to enjoy every game. Not every game is designed to please everyone.

    They should find out BEFORE a purchase if they really want a product and will enjoy it. It's called research. That's my point.

    Nowadays we see droves of people buying games they dislike, just to say they dislike it on game forums and try to get it changed to what they want. Thus the issue I speak of, gamers acting like they're entitled to whatever they want, even though they're not forced to purchase this or any other game. They willfiully buy a game they'll wholistically dislike or disapprove of, only to follow up that illogical choice by insisting the game be changed to be what they want it to be.
    Are you talking about the type of people who complain about sexy games having sexy things?

    I'm talking about the people who got German sniper masks, facial hair, a prosthetic arm, etc removed from this game before it even launched because it's not historically standard issue, despite all those things being era correct and actually used/seen in the war to some extent. I'm talking about the people who see a guy with legit ww2 anti flash paint on and calling him Braveheart or Kratos and saying he looks ridicious.
    Those people ruined muh mursion.
  • Loqtrall
    12020 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    warslag wrote: »
    As you say: if people "cannot expect to enjoy every game" or "games are not designed to please everyone", then there will be unhappy players. Plus, the potential is there for any number of players to be unhappy or happy, by turns.

    Really we are just little birds pecking away at big EA. But there are some who, like sleek ravens up in the trees, then swooping down on us little birds to peck our eyes out, wish us to not see that we are right to complain.

    Good way to put it.
    Hm, idk man, but respectfully, if they listen to you they may as well pack up shop lol.

    And when did I ever insist DICE should listen to me?
    I never have
    ackers75 wrote: »
    Maybe just maybe the community is getting a little tired of the bugs.

    Well then this community would be tired of every single game at launch because they all have them. Even your favorite, most revered BF titles or games in general.
Sign In or Register to comment.