Battlefield 5 gameplay looks way too fast

2»

Comments

  • disposalist
    8319 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 2018
    ...because gunplay is alot harder in BF5...
    Huh? No RBD. Learnable recoil. No hard range restrictions. Short TTK. How is this 'harder' than BF1? Unless you consider twitch-tap gunplay 'hard' I suppose.

    Me, I think keeping an innately inaccurate gun on target for longer and having to cope with strict effective range is 'harder'.
    ...hipfire isn't as good...
    What? Hipfire is awesome in BF5. Try the medic Sten.
    ...there is no suppression...
    What? Suppression is awesome in BF5. Try the Lewis and the suppression-spots-the-enemy perk.
    BF1 is the kiddy pool, BFV is the deep end. The amount of threads complaining on how its, "too fast" or ,"I get killed out of nowhere!", shows that people have no clue how to look before they leap.
    Lol yeah twitch-tap gunplay is what all the grown-ups prefer. Kiddy pool. Lol. If you mean that BF1 was fun and BF5 isn't so much, then, yeah.
  • SRI_simon
    71 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    its a weird one, with the super fast time to kill it still feels less frantic and chaotic than BF4 and BF1, i feel as though i have more chance to aim and plan my attack on objectives in BFV than i did in BF4 and BF1 those two games people just ran around like maniacs, i think the movement speed is faster and the maps are smaller which might give the false impression of the game being really fast, this game doesnt really reward running into gun fights solo like other BF games did, just take your time and you will be fine, i normally go about 34/41 - 5/10 using the mp40 on most maps, this game just rewards people for playing smart, unlearn everything you were taught in BF1 and BF4
  • disposalist
    8319 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    SRI_simon wrote: »
    its a weird one, with the super fast time to kill it still feels less frantic and chaotic than BF4 and BF1, i feel as though i have more chance to aim and plan my attack on objectives in BFV than i did in BF4 and BF1 those two games people just ran around like maniacs, i think the movement speed is faster and the maps are smaller which might give the false impression of the game being really fast, this game doesnt really reward running into gun fights solo like other BF games did, just take your time and you will be fine, i normally go about 34/41 - 5/10 using the mp40 on most maps, this game just rewards people for playing smart, unlearn everything you were taught in BF1 and BF4
    All FPSs reward you for being smart. It's a matter of emphasis and the kind of gameplay you want.

    Low TTK like in BF5 (and BF4) rewards twitch play. Perfectly accurate guns like in BF5 (and BF4) reward tap tap gunplay from all ranges. Learnable recoil patterns like in BF5 (and BF4) reward players who only use one weapon a lot. If fast TTK makes it feel *less* chaotic to you that's because players are camping in corners or at range, so you have time to think and move before the final encounter, but that encounter is more of a random who-sees-who-first because who pulls the trigger first more often wins, especially combined with more accurate weapons.

    In BF1 you could take fire and maybe have time to get cover or even return fire or at least spot your killer to help your team.

    BF1 did not reward people running into gunfights. Having less accurate weapons and being able to take more bullets meant you had to hold your aim better and there were more tactical options after the engagement began.

    Could noobs take a few hits in BF1? Yes. Did that mean they won games? No. It just meant they had more fun and felt less frustrated. Did skilled players win? Yes. Did they get constantly randomly killed by noobs? No. Even behemoths and elites could be countered by good players.

    A high skill floor and a high skill gap just means those that are more skilled win even easier. Great. That's what we all need. A game that makes it easier for good players to win by even more. Such fun.
  • CHAMMOND1992
    963 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    ...because gunplay is alot harder in BF5...
    Huh? No RBD. Learnable recoil. No hard range restrictions. Short TTK. How is this 'harder' than BF1? Unless you consider twitch-tap gunplay 'hard' I suppose.

    Me, I think keeping an innately inaccurate gun on target for longer and having to cope with strict effective range is 'harder'.
    ...hipfire isn't as good...
    What? Hipfire is awesome in BF5. Try the medic Sten.
    ...there is no suppression...
    What? Suppression is awesome in BF5. Try the Lewis and the suppression-spots-the-enemy perk.
    BF1 is the kiddy pool, BFV is the deep end. The amount of threads complaining on how its, "too fast" or ,"I get killed out of nowhere!", shows that people have no clue how to look before they leap.
    Lol yeah twitch-tap gunplay is what all the grown-ups prefer. Kiddy pool. Lol. If you mean that BF1 was fun and BF5 isn't so much, then, yeah.

    Yeah sure, you haven't a clue.
  • Sixclicks
    5073 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 2018
    SRI_simon wrote: »
    its a weird one, with the super fast time to kill it still feels less frantic and chaotic than BF4 and BF1, i feel as though i have more chance to aim and plan my attack on objectives in BFV than i did in BF4 and BF1 those two games people just ran around like maniacs, i think the movement speed is faster and the maps are smaller which might give the false impression of the game being really fast, this game doesnt really reward running into gun fights solo like other BF games did, just take your time and you will be fine, i normally go about 34/41 - 5/10 using the mp40 on most maps, this game just rewards people for playing smart, unlearn everything you were taught in BF1 and BF4
    All FPSs reward you for being smart. It's a matter of emphasis and the kind of gameplay you want.

    Low TTK like in BF5 (and BF4) rewards twitch play. Perfectly accurate guns like in BF5 (and BF4) reward tap tap gunplay from all ranges. Learnable recoil patterns like in BF5 (and BF4) reward players who only use one weapon a lot. If fast TTK makes it feel *less* chaotic to you that's because players are camping in corners or at range, so you have time to think and move before the final encounter, but that encounter is more of a random who-sees-who-first because who pulls the trigger first more often wins, especially combined with more accurate weapons.

    In BF1 you could take fire and maybe have time to get cover or even return fire or at least spot your killer to help your team.

    BF1 did not reward people running into gunfights. Having less accurate weapons and being able to take more bullets meant you had to hold your aim better and there were more tactical options after the engagement began.

    Could noobs take a few hits in BF1? Yes. Did that mean they won games? No. It just meant they had more fun and felt less frustrated. Did skilled players win? Yes. Did they get constantly randomly killed by noobs? No. Even behemoths and elites could be countered by good players.

    A high skill floor and a high skill gap just means those that are more skilled win even easier. Great. That's what we all need. A game that makes it easier for good players to win by even more. Such fun.

    There's definitely a ton more camping in BFV. That's for sure. It is also definitely "whoever sees who first wins" pretty often. I think some weapons certainly require a good amount of skill to do well with in BFV, but then there are also a lot that are really braindead easy to do well with. I think weapon balancing is still pretty bad right now. Assault has a lot of weapons that are too easy to use and also very strong at the same time. It's currently my highest KDR class by quite a margin. Those "learnable recoil" patterns that you need you need to master are a joke with a good number of weapons.

    The only really fast parts of the gameplay are the very quick TTK in combination with very accurate weapons which does lead to those whoever shoots first situations, and the movement/strafe speed. The ADAD spam, or strafing, is especially annoying if you're trying to play Recon who 100% relies on headshots to get kills now and otherwise gets mowed down from across the map by an assault player who's strafing back and forth and spray accurately while doing so.
  • Jonny_ChaosMCR
    1350 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 2018
    For me in the beta it felt slow overall, but then you died mega fast which just felt annoying. From what i've read it sounds exactly the same.


    Don't know if anyone watched 'They Shall Not Grow Old'. A UK WW1 documentary, remastered with colour and sound. It was incredible but watching that kept giving me flashes to BF1 and they really did an amazing job with that game. I absolutely loved BF1, still not played BFV yet til Tuesday but from what i've seen it doesn't look or feel like WW2. I didn't enjoy the beta, but as i've not played the actual game yet. The reactions are polar opposite though. It's impossible to get a gist of how it will be from all the communities feedback.
  • Dral13
    350 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    TTK is faster than BF1 but in both 3-4 you could get shredded just as fast by aek, mtar etc etc.
  • CrypticalCypher
    19 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Ant0067 wrote: »
    Hi I've been an avid Battlefield player since the release of Bad Company.

    To me Battlefield 3 and Battlefield 4 were the pinnacle of what I consider to be the most realistic, authentic representation of how it would feel for me to partake in a war without actually being there. That's what the Battlefield series offered to me the player.

    It wasn't so much a game, it was an experience, it was a realistic simulation, which didn't play out like all your other typical FPS shooting games. However Battlefield Hardline and Battlefield 1, were a major step away from that immersion. Star Wars Battlefront 2 suffers the same problems.

    Now we have Battlefield 5, and my impressions of the multiplayer gameplay are not good. In my opinion it looks far too cartoony and unrealistic. The biggest problem for me, is the gameplay speed which is far too fast. There is no way someone could run around on a Battlefield like a headless chicken, popping enemies off like some invincible Rambo type.

    Jumping, rolling and running should not be a part of any serious Battlefield game. Stealth, cover, slow teamwork should be the name of the game. Something like Americas Army. Even H1Z1 gameplay feels more authentic.. Nowadays the Battlefield series plays out, more like a Call Of Duty game than it does a serious Battlefield game!!! Very very disappointed!!!!!!!!

    Does anyone else share the same views?
    Ant0067 wrote: »
    Hi I've been an avid Battlefield player since the release of Bad Company.

    To me Battlefield 3 and Battlefield 4 were the pinnacle of what I consider to be the most realistic, authentic representation of how it would feel for me to partake in a war without actually being there. That's what the Battlefield series offered to me the player.

    It wasn't so much a game, it was an experience, it was a realistic simulation, which didn't play out like all your other typical FPS shooting games. However Battlefield Hardline and Battlefield 1, were a major step away from that immersion. Star Wars Battlefront 2 suffers the same problems.

    Now we have Battlefield 5, and my impressions of the multiplayer gameplay are not good. In my opinion it looks far too cartoony and unrealistic. The biggest problem for me, is the gameplay speed which is far too fast. There is no way someone could run around on a Battlefield like a headless chicken, popping enemies off like some invincible Rambo type.

    Jumping, rolling and running should not be a part of any serious Battlefield game. Stealth, cover, slow teamwork should be the name of the game. Something like Americas Army. Even H1Z1 gameplay feels more authentic.. Nowadays the Battlefield series plays out, more like a Call Of Duty game than it does a serious Battlefield game!!! Very very disappointed!!!!!!!!

    Does anyone else share the same views?
    Ant0067 wrote: »
    Hi I've been an avid Battlefield player since the release of Bad Company.

    To me Battlefield 3 and Battlefield 4 were the pinnacle of what I consider to be the most realistic, authentic representation of how it would feel for me to partake in a war without actually being there. That's what the Battlefield series offered to me the player.

    It wasn't so much a game, it was an experience, it was a realistic simulation, which didn't play out like all your other typical FPS shooting games. However Battlefield Hardline and Battlefield 1, were a major step away from that immersion. Star Wars Battlefront 2 suffers the same problems.

    Now we have Battlefield 5, and my impressions of the multiplayer gameplay are not good. In my opinion it looks far too cartoony and unrealistic. The biggest problem for me, is the gameplay speed which is far too fast. There is no way someone could run around on a Battlefield like a headless chicken, popping enemies off like some invincible Rambo type.

    Jumping, rolling and running should not be a part of any serious Battlefield game. Stealth, cover, slow teamwork should be the name of the game. Something like Americas Army. Even H1Z1 gameplay feels more authentic.. Nowadays the Battlefield series plays out, more like a Call Of Duty game than it does a serious Battlefield game!!! Very very disappointed!!!!!!!!

    Does anyone else share the same views?

    LITERALLY!!
  • IKroetenlikoerI
    26 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited March 8

    A high skill floor and a high skill gap just means those that are more skilled win even easier. Great. That's what we all need. A game that makes it easier for good players to win by even more. Such fun.

    in my opinion its excactly what "we" need.
    maybe its just me getting grumpy almost hitting 40, but what else is there to motivate myself than to show my skill. i don't give a flying **** about bling bling skins or cosmetic stuff, neither do i need some carrot on a stick.
    if i put in my hours of practise, blood and sweat i want my name high on the score table. at the end of the day i count my wins and analyse my mistakes to improve myself.
    even more so if i find a well behaved squad of proper players, the game really shines.

    and yes, beginners and less skilled people should get stomped, for what logic is there in getting the good ones handicapped for all the effort they put in their training and reward casuals for just joining a "fun round".
    in sports terms this would punish world class athletes so the audience wouldn't feel declassed by their performance, something they sacrifice a lot in the process.

    will this result in a smaller playerbase, sure, still i prefer 10 servers full of good players to play with and against, than 1000 servers full of walking hitboxes.

    guess most of "gamers" these days are used to instand gratification and cant stand the idea of getting stomped and dragged through the mud for months or years before gaining proper skill and earn their place on the winning side.

    gotta think of "pepperidge farm remembers", back in the day the first year you were basically meat in any league before you learned your lesson.

    nowadays a game gets ditched in 6-12 months when the next "hot ****" gets released. no wonder the majority won't reach maturity in terms of skill.

    always get an "eastwood" cringe when i read about "adad" spam when its really the most basic quintessence of close combat movement. and no, bf never was "tacticamp", at least back in my day of bf1942, when we would warm up in quake 3, jump on servers and emptied them.
    when they proned, we ran circles around them., when they camped corners, we literally ran them dizzy.

    never should idle sitting be rewarded over fast movement imho, for the later takes effort and practice, the first takes nothing.

    and btw, when are you considered a grown up, for i hope I retain my reflexes for years to come and twitch aim my way through.

    for when i'll be unable to perform on said level i'll quit playing altogether.
    no fun in just participating.

    like i wrote earlier, this will come off grumpy no doubt, but where i come from, camping was the most shameful thing to do and when i read some 17 years later that my beloved bf is considered to be a walking simulator like arma or flashpoint i wonder whether those ever enjoyed a proper clan war in bf1942 back in the day with all the twitch aim and fast pace stuff like plane surfing or going ham on an 8 player squad alone only to be taken out by your own team mates grenade.
    good times.

    as for bf v: as much as i dislike the idea of women in the german army, i found it rather easy to ignore and the speed of the game almost gave me some nice 1942 flashbacks.

    just my little wall of text, guess i just had to rant a little ;)
  • TropicPoison
    2243 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Maybe you two damn 'experts' can look at when the last post was and stop necroing threads.
  • IKroetenlikoerI
    26 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    huh, the irony of the forum's sheriff avatar behind bars. well excuse me, didn't realize coming late to the party automatically making my opinion on a topic less valid. even more so if the discussion was a bit one sided for my taste. vocal minority ringing a bell? can see where that ended up in terms of ttk when a developer listens to a few youtube channels to many.

    cheers
  • parkingbrake
    3000 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Ant0067 wrote: »
    Hi I've been an avid Battlefield player since the release of Bad Company.

    To me Battlefield 3 and Battlefield 4 were the pinnacle of what I consider to be the most realistic, authentic representation of how it would feel for me to partake in a war without actually being there. That's what the Battlefield series offered to me the player.

    It wasn't so much a game, it was an experience, it was a realistic simulation, which didn't play out like all your other typical FPS shooting games. However Battlefield Hardline and Battlefield 1, were a major step away from that immersion. Star Wars Battlefront 2 suffers the same problems.

    Now we have Battlefield 5, and my impressions of the multiplayer gameplay are not good. In my opinion it looks far too cartoony and unrealistic. The biggest problem for me, is the gameplay speed which is far too fast. There is no way someone could run around on a Battlefield like a headless chicken, popping enemies off like some invincible Rambo type.

    Jumping, rolling and running should not be a part of any serious Battlefield game. Stealth, cover, slow teamwork should be the name of the game. Something like Americas Army. Even H1Z1 gameplay feels more authentic.. Nowadays the Battlefield series plays out, more like a Call Of Duty game than it does a serious Battlefield game!!! Very very disappointed!!!!!!!!

    Does anyone else share the same views?

    If you're referring to the "cartoon ninja" movement of infantry, I agree, it makes the game look downright silly at times. The idea that a soldier loaded down with weapons and ammo can run so fast it's hard to track and lead him with your weapon is ridiculous, and then he vaults over a wall and does a shoulder roll and comes up and snaps a throwing knife into you faster than you can pull your trigger--it looks like a guerilla should start throwing barrels at you sometimes. Part of this is the poor network performance in which action can seem compressed, like you lost twenty or thirty frames during which you died. EA seems to have become a maker of arcade-style console games, preferably short-lived and disposable games at that. Apparently this is what we have to look forward to.
  • MidriffUrchin0
    109 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    edited March 9
    Well op, I started playing with bf vietnam and BF2, both of which are pedestrian compared to the breakneck speeds that increased so much from bf3 to bf1. In a weird way, depending on what mode you play, bfv does seem to be a slightly slower pace than bf1. I think there's a split with people who don't mind sitting back and slowly working an objective and then rambo types who want to run and gun, perhaps those who panic about stats and getting top of the leader board as quick as possible are the ones who hate a pause and breather in an fps game.

    I do find it amusing that bf3/4 is often quoted as the pinnacle of the series (I'm not saying they aren't, I love those too) and the same people quote that specifically bf1-v have took us down a path to make bf just like cod (nope) .

    If anything, after BF2, bf3 took that mantle. Its a great game but did start to cater for mass appeal with cod like qualities than any bf game before it.
    It's understandable though as bf3 launched to multi platforms unlike bf2/2142, and perhaps to appeal to a younger audience that like faster more frantic action.

    I think it's never going to go back to speeds pre bf3, BF2 was at a sweet spot imo, mainly because of attrition and more squad based and running solo was difficult. If you played BF2 mod project reality then we got real slow and tactical.

    Kids today would bawk and squeal at the pace of the older games, perhaps it would be deemed boring, I mean some even say that about bfv gameplay which is quite astonishing.


    In bfv I think the ttk is slightly too fast and I feel it would make the pace better if it didn't feel as if I'm getting hit by laser carbines from star wars, zap zap dead. But it seems the TKK debacle is over and its staying where it is.

    Overall I much prefer it to bf1, both good games though.
  • trip1ex
    4465 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    edited March 9
    old games were slower for different reasons. bigger maps, lack of spawn points, even no sprinting in BF42. BF2 had limited sprinting. there was more downtime because battles in the old games.

    BFV slow because of a keep your head down 24/7 feel to it due to all the map clutter on small maps with 64 players and the poor visibility along with uber ranged weapons. You feel like at anytime someone somewhere you can't see is going to shoot you. So it forces you to play slower. You can't quickly clear a flag zone in BFV either because of all the clutter/hiding spots/poor visibility. That feeling wasn't in BF42 nor BF2.

    BFV is fast in the sense the uber ranged weapon can drop you in a half second more easily more frequently than I can recall in old BF games and you don't really know where it's coming from half the time. Also soldier speed seems fast.
  • bloodprizm
    90 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    TTK is too fast. Always believed that, still do. I think the number of people that die repeatedly in an instant and eventually say forget this, is pretty high.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

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