Time for a new look at TTK?

Comments

  • ael1as
    16 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    ...

    It's not perplexing, facts are facts. The overwhelming majority of players like the current TTK and overall gun play in this game, as was made painfully obvious when Dice tried to change it. So much so, that Dice reverted back in just one week. It is what it is, some people just wont accept it. So I ask you, what would be the logic in Dice changing the TTK for the sake of the clear minority here in this forum? Any way that you want to look at it, there is no pleasing everybody, so I'm sure these discussions will persist until the game eventually dies.

    you should consider that the loudest voice is not always the majority voice
    what about all the people who stopped playing this game? What if we add that number to the current TTK opponents?

    the plain fact is that the game is considered not funny from a good amount of people still playing it and from even larger amount of player who stopped to play it
    and the TTK is a key factor, not unique, but a factor with deep impact on gameplay

    the current TTK suppresses movements over the map, it favors camping and defensive gameplay, it endevours people to do their own game instead of playing the gamemode

    and now look at this honest video by TheBrokenMachine, 2m18s and 5m16s

    Battlefield 5 not fun enough
    "There is just too much risk in moving around in this game, it becomes incredibly unbalanced"

    Quoting TheBrokenMachine in his video is the best way to synthesize the problem we still have in BFV.
    "when they changed it i didnt like it, looking back....personally I think a slightly higher TTK...could actually improve the game "

    He is honestly admitting that he is changing his mind with regard the TTK question.







  • DyD6Marina
    548 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    ael1as wrote: »
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    Nope, I like the current TTK, and while I really wasn't too effected by the TTD bug, I have become used to it and it doesn't even bother me anymore. No need to be messing with any of that stuff right now, all making major changes to the gun play at this point in time would do is create another community melt down of epic proportions.
    I do find that logic perplexing how it is not fine to make major changes in first 6 months but after 2 years it is ok. With that same logic the yappers and followers insisted it would take months to relearn a game that had been out for 2 months. Yet in BF1 they said it would only take days.

    It's not perplexing, facts are facts. The overwhelming majority of players like the current TTK and overall gun play in this game, as was made painfully obvious when Dice tried to change it. So much so, that Dice reverted back in just one week. It is what it is, some people just wont accept it. So I ask you, what would be the logic in Dice changing the TTK for the sake of the clear minority here in this forum? Any way that you want to look at it, there is no pleasing everybody, so I'm sure these discussions will persist until the game eventually dies.

    you should consider that the loudest voice is not always the majority voice
    what about all the people who stopped playing this game? What if we add that number to the current TTK opponents?

    the plain fact is that the game is considered not funny from a good amount of people still playing it and from even larger amount of player who stopped to play it
    and the TTK is a key factor, not unique, but a factor with deep impact on gameplay

    the current TTK suppresses movements over the map, it favors camping and defensive gameplay, it endevours people to do their own game instead of playing the gamemode

    and now look at this honest video by TheBrokenMachine

    Battlefield 5 not fun enough?
    "There is just too much risk in moving around in this game, it becomes incredibly unbalanced"

    Quoting TheBrokenMachine in his video is the best way to synthesize the problem we still have in BFV.
    "when they changed it i didnt like it, looking back....personally I think a slightly higher TTK...could actually improve the game "

    He is honestly admitting that he is changing his mind with regard the TTK question.





    Dice don't need to take care of casuals if they want to make the game better.

    Specially because many lying about ttk too quick.

    A defensive gameplay is a good thing, more in line with the original gameplay of Battlefield, instead of the cod battlefield we have from bf1943.

    Campers are simple bad players, not known how moving around the map, they will not help even with a slow ttk.

    Youtubers want a easier and quicker gameplay, where you can rush without problem, a gameplay more "funny to see on video", their earn money on "spectacular" gameplay.


    Considered the situation ther opinion is really biased.
  • ael1as
    16 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    ...

    Dice don't need to take care of casuals if they want to make the game better.

    Specially because many lying about ttk too quick.

    A defensive gameplay is a good thing, more in line with the original gameplay of Battlefield, instead of the cod battlefield we have from bf1943.

    Campers are simple bad players, not known how moving around the map, they will not help even with a slow ttk.

    Youtubers want a easier and quicker gameplay, where you can rush without problem, a gameplay more "funny to see on video", their earn money on "spectacular" gameplay.


    Considered the situation ther opinion is really biased.

    Youtubers Westie and Jackfrags were one of the most fierce opponents to the TTK change, they created a mess and disturbed the test process rolled out by DICE, in my opinion

    something went really wrong in that moment and now I think it is the right time to reassess the issue

  • DyD6Marina
    548 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited March 12
    ael1as wrote: »
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    ...

    Dice don't need to take care of casuals if they want to make the game better.

    Specially because many lying about ttk too quick.

    A defensive gameplay is a good thing, more in line with the original gameplay of Battlefield, instead of the cod battlefield we have from bf1943.

    Campers are simple bad players, not known how moving around the map, they will not help even with a slow ttk.

    Youtubers want a easier and quicker gameplay, where you can rush without problem, a gameplay more "funny to see on video", their earn money on "spectacular" gameplay.


    Considered the situation ther opinion is really biased.

    Youtubers Westie and Jackfrags were one of the most fierce opponents to the TTK change, they created a mess and disturbed the test process rolled out by DICE, in my opinion

    something went really wrong in that moment and now I think it is the right time to reassess the issue

    Not care of youtubers in both cases, if they earn money on a particular gameplay, their opinion can't be trusted.

    TTK(based on damage) isn't an issue, isn't too quick, bf3 have a quicker ttk.

    Only real issue are casuals players, lyers and 30hz servers consoles.

  • Trokey66
    8599 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    It's sad people can't adapt to a gameplay need more reflex, awareness, map knowledge and skill.

    Bad game like bf1 really ruined players.

    Stop rushing like cod player and you will not get problem from a quicker TTK.

    A funny thing is bf3-bf4 have a nearly identical ttk or even more quicker on some weapons of bf3, but suppression ruined all.

    There are many people, even in this thread, lying about ttk too quick, for some reason and this is even more sad.



    Simple comparison can be done on Assault "dmr" weapon of Battlefield V compared to dmr of Battlefield 3.

    Battlefield 3 ranges from 209ms/215ms/240ms-372ms, Battlefield V ranges from 320ms-384ms.

    Here honest people can find all the numbers.

    http://symthic.com/bf3-ttk-charts?class=4&mode=co

    https://www.reddit.com/r/BattlefieldV/comments/aqg3m1/battlefield_v_lightning_strikes_part_iii/



    And console players is better they abstain from commenting on ttk, considered the bad state of console server, they must start to pressure to EA/Dice to finally give 60hz even on console, every time a play with friends on console(ps4) is a pain.

    With good servers console players will see a "slower ttk".

    Now compare spread and recoil values then factor suppression affects.

    We'll wait......
  • disposalist
    8680 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Some people liked insta-gib with actual lasers in games like Unreal Tournament. That didn't make it 'better' than another setting, just popular with a certain group.

    What it comes down to is: is the current BF5 gunplay popular with players and which players? In my humble opinion, DICE thought they should try to appeal to competitive types AND hardcore types AND set up ready for Battle Royale and they are left with a frustrating mess that is unpopular with the majority of players who are pretty casual.

    It used to be that competitive types and hardcore types had a good RSP and could configure the game to please themselves. These arguments over what type of settings were 'better' were largely redundant.

    There has never been one community and none of them are the 'best', just different. BF5 has tried to squash everyone together and failed.
  • ael1as
    16 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    It's sad people can't adapt to a gameplay need more reflex, awareness, map knowledge and skill.

    Bad game like bf1 really ruined players.

    Stop rushing like cod player and you will not get problem from a quicker TTK.

    A funny thing is bf3-bf4 have a nearly identical ttk or even more quicker on some weapons of bf3, but suppression ruined all.

    There are many people, even in this thread, lying about ttk too quick, for some reason and this is even more sad.



    Simple comparison can be done on Assault "dmr" weapon of Battlefield V compared to dmr of Battlefield 3.

    Battlefield 3 ranges from 209ms/215ms/240ms-372ms, Battlefield V ranges from 320ms-384ms.

    Here honest people can find all the numbers.

    http://symthic.com/bf3-ttk-charts?class=4&mode=co

    https://www.reddit.com/r/BattlefieldV/comments/aqg3m1/battlefield_v_lightning_strikes_part_iii/



    And console players is better they abstain from commenting on ttk, considered the bad state of console server, they must start to pressure to EA/Dice to finally give 60hz even on console, every time a play with friends on console(ps4) is a pain.

    With good servers console players will see a "slower ttk".

    Now compare spread and recoil values then factor suppression affects.

    We'll wait......

    and attrition?

    we are forgetting that we generally have fewer health in BFV, and this helps to create fast death

    TTK is an issue along with the average health level induced by the attrition system
  • DyD6Marina
    548 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited March 12
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    It's sad people can't adapt to a gameplay need more reflex, awareness, map knowledge and skill
    It's sad people keep trotting out this 'argument' to supposedly support low TTK.

    ANY shooter needs reflex, awareness, map knowledge and skill.

    A low TTK shooter *relies* on reflex (twitch) and map knowledge (hiding and camping?). Skill? Depends if you consider muscle memorising recoil patterns 'skill'.

    Some would say a higher TTK requires more skill and allows for more tactics, because you don't just die to whoever sees you first, you have time to use cover or movement.

    Too subjective.

    I can adapt to lower TTK and all the other weird design choices in BF5. It's just not fun.
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    Bad game like bf1 really ruined players.
    Subjective. Low TTK turns players into twitch frenzy zergers and campers and 'ruined' them. Is that statement any more or less reasonable?
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    Stop rushing like cod player and you will not get problem from a quicker TTK.
    Headless chicken play is bad with any TTK. Some would say that low TTK means it's more viable, since the final encounter is so quick it doesn't much matter how you get there as long as your trigger finger is faster.
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    A funny thing is bf3-bf4 have a nearly identical ttk or even more quicker on some weapons of bf3, but suppression ruined all.

    There are many people, even in this thread, lying about ttk too quick, for some reason and this is even more sad.
    There are many aspects. BF3 may have had similar strict TTK, but a very different TTD due to things like attrition. In BF5 there are so many detrimental mechanics that the technical TTK of weapons is only the final part of the equation. Because accuracy is so good on some weapons the *possible* TTK and the *probably* TTK are very similar. What people perceive as 'low TTK' may not be strictly technically much different from previous games, but all things considered is much different.
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    With good servers console players will see a "slower ttk".
    Possibly true. There are many contributing factors to people feeling that TTK is too low. PC players feel it too, though.


    Low TTK punish bad players , rushers and even campers, if you known the map, you can kill easily even a camper.

    There is no aspect of low ttk to be objectively wrong if not for people want easier game for a reason or another.

    Even the older Battlefield have low ttk, Battlefield 2 have even one shot headshot on some assault rifle and lmg

    Attrition, or better Partial Health Regen, is a good change for make the game more challenge, make people think before moving and make more important the medics.

    This is how older Battlefield worked, even more because of the no health regen, casual battlefield have full health regen.

    This the biggest problem, too many casuals come to the Battlefield series, after the series come to consoles and become more easy.

    People like this must be ignored to make the series regain is identity instead continue to appeal cod/casual players.


    Battlefield V is the first Battlefield from 2006 to be near to be a Battlefield, some people will not like, but for this people there are other types of fps.





    The best way to achieve have both high and low TTK together is to raise recoil/spread, only few people will achieve low TTK thanks to hard weapon to control and most of the players will experience an high TTK.

    But first casuals will not like weapons hard to control, and second i doubt gamepad can work with truly high recoil/spread weapons, considered how cs:go failed on consoles.

    Battlefield V actually is the best solution to make game have a Battlefield identity and not make a game totally for casuals.
  • DyD6Marina
    548 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    It's sad people can't adapt to a gameplay need more reflex, awareness, map knowledge and skill.

    Bad game like bf1 really ruined players.

    Stop rushing like cod player and you will not get problem from a quicker TTK.

    A funny thing is bf3-bf4 have a nearly identical ttk or even more quicker on some weapons of bf3, but suppression ruined all.

    There are many people, even in this thread, lying about ttk too quick, for some reason and this is even more sad.



    Simple comparison can be done on Assault "dmr" weapon of Battlefield V compared to dmr of Battlefield 3.

    Battlefield 3 ranges from 209ms/215ms/240ms-372ms, Battlefield V ranges from 320ms-384ms.

    Here honest people can find all the numbers.

    http://symthic.com/bf3-ttk-charts?class=4&mode=co

    https://www.reddit.com/r/BattlefieldV/comments/aqg3m1/battlefield_v_lightning_strikes_part_iii/



    And console players is better they abstain from commenting on ttk, considered the bad state of console server, they must start to pressure to EA/Dice to finally give 60hz even on console, every time a play with friends on console(ps4) is a pain.

    With good servers console players will see a "slower ttk".

    Now compare spread and recoil values then factor suppression affects.

    We'll wait......

    Suppression isn't a factor every time and spread was minimal on bf3, weapon normally are a laser, with some random miss caused by random deviation.

    Instead on Battlefield V you need to control both recoil and spread(inserted in recoil) and you can really control with your skill, considered recoil pattern and removed random deviation.

    The differences is bf3 a game with low ttk and random miss, Battlefield V a game with low ttk and skill based gunplay.
  • disposalist
    8680 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Hilarious when people try to tell me that if I don't like the gunplay in BF5 I must not really like Battlefield at all. Yeah, I've suffered through thousands of hours of BF since BF1942, but never really liked it.

    I'm just a casual noob who doesn't know the game and isn't a real fan or a good player I guess.
  • Trokey66
    8599 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    It's sad people can't adapt to a gameplay need more reflex, awareness, map knowledge and skill.

    Bad game like bf1 really ruined players.

    Stop rushing like cod player and you will not get problem from a quicker TTK.

    A funny thing is bf3-bf4 have a nearly identical ttk or even more quicker on some weapons of bf3, but suppression ruined all.

    There are many people, even in this thread, lying about ttk too quick, for some reason and this is even more sad.



    Simple comparison can be done on Assault "dmr" weapon of Battlefield V compared to dmr of Battlefield 3.

    Battlefield 3 ranges from 209ms/215ms/240ms-372ms, Battlefield V ranges from 320ms-384ms.

    Here honest people can find all the numbers.

    http://symthic.com/bf3-ttk-charts?class=4&mode=co

    https://www.reddit.com/r/BattlefieldV/comments/aqg3m1/battlefield_v_lightning_strikes_part_iii/



    And console players is better they abstain from commenting on ttk, considered the bad state of console server, they must start to pressure to EA/Dice to finally give 60hz even on console, every time a play with friends on console(ps4) is a pain.

    With good servers console players will see a "slower ttk".

    Now compare spread and recoil values then factor suppression affects.

    We'll wait......

    Suppression isn't a factor every time and spread was minimal on bf3, weapon normally are a laser, with some random miss caused by random deviation.

    Instead on Battlefield V you need to control both recoil and spread(inserted in recoil) and you can really control with your skill, considered recoil pattern and removed random deviation.

    The differences is bf3 a game with low ttk and random miss, Battlefield V a game with low ttk and skill based gunplay.

    Gentleman's dangly bits.
  • ael1as
    16 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    ....


    Low TTK punish bad players , rushers and even campers, if you known the map, you can kill easily even a camper.

    There is no aspect of low ttk to be objectively wrong if not for people want easier game for a reason or another.

    Attrition, or better Partial Health Regen, is a good change for make the game more challenge, make people think before moving and make more important the medics.

    This is how older Battlefield worked, even more because of the no health regen, casual battlefield have full health regen.

    This the biggest problem, too many casuals come to the Battlefield series, after the series come to consoles and become more easy.

    People like this must be ignored to make the series regain is identity instead continue to appeal cod/casual players.


    Battlefield V is the first Battlefield from 2006 to be near to be a Battlefield, some people will not like, but for this people there are other types of fps.


    as Disposalist said, it is subjective and here the point is that BFV is proving itself not funny, even to the players who loves it, and TTK is a serious part of the final equation (along with health regen and other stuff)

    you call low TTK "skilled and not easy", I remember that all competitive Battlefields were played on "normal" settings and not on "hardcore" settings (when available), why this? it was a common opinion that the best skills in BF were showed on the normal settings, with higher TTK

    I play BF since BF2, I loved BF2 so much, it was funny and it was not frustrating and it fostered movement and fast gameplay
    so I like some features introduced with BFV but the final outcome simply doesn't run pretty well

    a question for you? did you play BC2 BF3 and BF4?
    if so, I suppose you ever played them in hardcore mode? isn't it?

  • DyD6Marina
    548 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Hilarious when people try to tell me that if I don't like the gunplay in BF5 I must not really like Battlefield at all. Yeah, I've suffered through thousands of hours of BF since BF1942, but never really liked it.

    I'm just a casual noob who doesn't know the game and isn't a real fan or a good player I guess.

    Seems you don't have arguments.

    If you really remember Battlefield 1942 and the other true Battlefield, you can understand Battlefield V are doing the right change for the series.

    Casuals will need to search another game for this time.
  • DyD6Marina
    548 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited March 12
    ael1as wrote: »
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    ....


    Low TTK punish bad players , rushers and even campers, if you known the map, you can kill easily even a camper.

    There is no aspect of low ttk to be objectively wrong if not for people want easier game for a reason or another.

    Attrition, or better Partial Health Regen, is a good change for make the game more challenge, make people think before moving and make more important the medics.

    This is how older Battlefield worked, even more because of the no health regen, casual battlefield have full health regen.

    This the biggest problem, too many casuals come to the Battlefield series, after the series come to consoles and become more easy.

    People like this must be ignored to make the series regain is identity instead continue to appeal cod/casual players.


    Battlefield V is the first Battlefield from 2006 to be near to be a Battlefield, some people will not like, but for this people there are other types of fps.


    as Disposalist said, it is subjective and here the point is that BFV is proving itself not funny, even to the players who loves it, and TTK is a serious part of the final equation (along with health regen and other stuff)

    you call low TTK "skilled and not easy", I remember that all competitive Battlefields were played on "normal" settings and not on "hardcore" settings (when available), why this? it was a common opinion that the best skills in BF were showed on the normal settings, with higher TTK

    I play BF since BF2, I loved BF2 so much, it was funny and it was not frustrating and it fostered movement and fast gameplay
    so I like some features introduced with BFV but the final outcome simply doesn't run pretty well

    a question for you? did you play BC2 BF3 and BF4?
    if so, I suppose you ever played them in hardcore mode? isn't it?

    Battlefield V isn't fun for casuals and cod players, and this isn't a bad thing for the series.

    The true competitive Battlefield(basically only Battlefield 2) don't have hardcore setting.

    And older Battlefield have a ttk low like Battlefield V, and seems you forgotten Battlefield 2 have even headshot instantkill with assault rifle and lmg.

    You seems to not remember a medic weapon can easily one shot kill to the head.


    Played the games yes, but not hardcore, hardcore isn't Battlefield.

    Low ttk is only a part of true Battlefield, and Battlefield V is the more near to them.
  • Ferdinand_J_Foch
    3410 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Oh look, another TTK thread.

    giphy.gif
  • spartanx169x
    736 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    It's sad people can't adapt to a gameplay need more reflex, awareness, map knowledge and skill
    It's sad people keep trotting out this 'argument' to supposedly support low TTK.

    ANY shooter needs reflex, awareness, map knowledge and skill.

    A low TTK shooter *relies* on reflex (twitch) and map knowledge (hiding and camping?). Skill? Depends if you consider muscle memorising recoil patterns 'skill'.

    Some would say a higher TTK requires more skill and allows for more tactics, because you don't just die to whoever sees you first, you have time to use cover or movement.

    Too subjective.

    I can adapt to lower TTK and all the other weird design choices in BF5. It's just not fun.
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    Bad game like bf1 really ruined players.
    Subjective. Low TTK turns players into twitch frenzy zergers and campers and 'ruined' them. Is that statement any more or less reasonable?
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    Stop rushing like cod player and you will not get problem from a quicker TTK.
    Headless chicken play is bad with any TTK. Some would say that low TTK means it's more viable, since the final encounter is so quick it doesn't much matter how you get there as long as your trigger finger is faster.
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    A funny thing is bf3-bf4 have a nearly identical ttk or even more quicker on some weapons of bf3, but suppression ruined all.

    There are many people, even in this thread, lying about ttk too quick, for some reason and this is even more sad.
    There are many aspects. BF3 may have had similar strict TTK, but a very different TTD due to things like attrition. In BF5 there are so many detrimental mechanics that the technical TTK of weapons is only the final part of the equation. Because accuracy is so good on some weapons the *possible* TTK and the *probably* TTK are very similar. What people perceive as 'low TTK' may not be strictly technically much different from previous games, but all things considered is much different.
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    With good servers console players will see a "slower ttk".
    Possibly true. There are many contributing factors to people feeling that TTK is too low. PC players feel it too, though.


    Low TTK punish bad players , rushers and even campers, if you known the map, you can kill easily even a camper.

    There is no aspect of low ttk to be objectively wrong if not for people want easier game for a reason or another.

    Even the older Battlefield have low ttk, Battlefield 2 have even one shot headshot on some assault rifle and lmg

    Attrition, or better Partial Health Regen, is a good change for make the game more challenge, make people think before moving and make more important the medics.

    This is how older Battlefield worked, even more because of the no health regen, casual battlefield have full health regen.

    This the biggest problem, too many casuals come to the Battlefield series, after the series come to consoles and become more easy.

    People like this must be ignored to make the series regain is identity instead continue to appeal cod/casual players.


    Battlefield V is the first Battlefield from 2006 to be near to be a Battlefield, some people will not like, but for this people there are other types of fps.





    The best way to achieve have both high and low TTK together is to raise recoil/spread, only few people will achieve low TTK thanks to hard weapon to control and most of the players will experience an high TTK.

    But first casuals will not like weapons hard to control, and second i doubt gamepad can work with truly high recoil/spread weapons, considered how cs:go failed on consoles.

    Battlefield V actually is the best solution to make game have a Battlefield identity and not make a game totally for casuals.

    AH, Hating the casuals huh. Buddy go look at prior sales. Prior to the game coming to console it sold just a few million a little over 2 million. Today given development costs, Battlefield would never survive with just a couple of million in sales. IF you really want to kill the series, getting rid of the casuals is a good way to achieve that. EA would shelve this series in a heartbeat if they can’t even break 5 million in sales.

    The proper business thing to do is offer different gametypes to the different demographics. Halo 3 argubly one of the most popular and successful halo games had about 15 gametypes (I’m guessing because the game is not in front of me). It had several gametypes for the competitive players, not just a single one. But it also had just as many gametypes for casual players. This is what should have been done with the game from the beginning. But what we have gotten was the opposite, fewer gametypes. I have determined that given we are now into March and nothing like this has happened, Its not going to.
  • SirBobdk
    4195 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    @DyD6Marina wrote
    If you really remember Battlefield 1942 and the other true Battlefield, you can understand Battlefield V are doing the right change for the series.
    Gunplay may be more like old BF games, but not vehicle play, map design and size of maps. In this sense, BFV does not feel like a BF game at all.
  • DyD6Marina
    548 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited March 12
    SirBobdk wrote: »
    @DyD6Marina wrote
    If you really remember Battlefield 1942 and the other true Battlefield, you can understand Battlefield V are doing the right change for the series.
    Gunplay may be more like old BF games, but not vehicle play, map design and size of maps. In this sense, BFV does not feel like a BF game at all.

    Maps and vehicles are the best after 2006, their are far from older Battlefield, but compared to casual Battlefield are in general a good step foward.

    Even a bad map(for Battlefield series) like Fjell, is alot better of metro, locker, senna, bazaar argonne and similar map.
  • DyD6Marina
    548 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    It's sad people can't adapt to a gameplay need more reflex, awareness, map knowledge and skill
    It's sad people keep trotting out this 'argument' to supposedly support low TTK.

    ANY shooter needs reflex, awareness, map knowledge and skill.

    A low TTK shooter *relies* on reflex (twitch) and map knowledge (hiding and camping?). Skill? Depends if you consider muscle memorising recoil patterns 'skill'.

    Some would say a higher TTK requires more skill and allows for more tactics, because you don't just die to whoever sees you first, you have time to use cover or movement.

    Too subjective.

    I can adapt to lower TTK and all the other weird design choices in BF5. It's just not fun.
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    Bad game like bf1 really ruined players.
    Subjective. Low TTK turns players into twitch frenzy zergers and campers and 'ruined' them. Is that statement any more or less reasonable?
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    Stop rushing like cod player and you will not get problem from a quicker TTK.
    Headless chicken play is bad with any TTK. Some would say that low TTK means it's more viable, since the final encounter is so quick it doesn't much matter how you get there as long as your trigger finger is faster.
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    A funny thing is bf3-bf4 have a nearly identical ttk or even more quicker on some weapons of bf3, but suppression ruined all.

    There are many people, even in this thread, lying about ttk too quick, for some reason and this is even more sad.
    There are many aspects. BF3 may have had similar strict TTK, but a very different TTD due to things like attrition. In BF5 there are so many detrimental mechanics that the technical TTK of weapons is only the final part of the equation. Because accuracy is so good on some weapons the *possible* TTK and the *probably* TTK are very similar. What people perceive as 'low TTK' may not be strictly technically much different from previous games, but all things considered is much different.
    DyD6Marina wrote: »
    With good servers console players will see a "slower ttk".
    Possibly true. There are many contributing factors to people feeling that TTK is too low. PC players feel it too, though.


    Low TTK punish bad players , rushers and even campers, if you known the map, you can kill easily even a camper.

    There is no aspect of low ttk to be objectively wrong if not for people want easier game for a reason or another.

    Even the older Battlefield have low ttk, Battlefield 2 have even one shot headshot on some assault rifle and lmg

    Attrition, or better Partial Health Regen, is a good change for make the game more challenge, make people think before moving and make more important the medics.

    This is how older Battlefield worked, even more because of the no health regen, casual battlefield have full health regen.

    This the biggest problem, too many casuals come to the Battlefield series, after the series come to consoles and become more easy.

    People like this must be ignored to make the series regain is identity instead continue to appeal cod/casual players.


    Battlefield V is the first Battlefield from 2006 to be near to be a Battlefield, some people will not like, but for this people there are other types of fps.





    The best way to achieve have both high and low TTK together is to raise recoil/spread, only few people will achieve low TTK thanks to hard weapon to control and most of the players will experience an high TTK.

    But first casuals will not like weapons hard to control, and second i doubt gamepad can work with truly high recoil/spread weapons, considered how cs:go failed on consoles.

    Battlefield V actually is the best solution to make game have a Battlefield identity and not make a game totally for casuals.

    AH, Hating the casuals huh. Buddy go look at prior sales. Prior to the game coming to console it sold just a few million a little over 2 million. Today given development costs, Battlefield would never survive with just a couple of million in sales. IF you really want to kill the series, getting rid of the casuals is a good way to achieve that. EA would shelve this series in a heartbeat if they can’t even break 5 million in sales.

    The proper business thing to do is offer different gametypes to the different demographics. Halo 3 argubly one of the most popular and successful halo games had about 15 gametypes (I’m guessing because the game is not in front of me). It had several gametypes for the competitive players, not just a single one. But it also had just as many gametypes for casual players. This is what should have been done with the game from the beginning. But what we have gotten was the opposite, fewer gametypes. I have determined that given we are now into March and nothing like this has happened, Its not going to.

    Dice getting rid of many casual and make a good gunplay and gameplay alot less casual and get more of 7 million of sales even with all the marketing problem.

    From this result the gameplay is good even for financial results and we can keep pure casuals away.

    Pls halo, the basically worst game for aim assists, an casual fps multiplayer game for consoles nothing else.
Sign In or Register to comment.