10 new multiplayer maps or battleroyale?
39 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
What do you think of that? Nice movement or ...?
Also, what do you think, should dice use parts of firestorm's map and put them into multiplayer matches?
or criterior should help from now and on to make those new multiplayer maps we all want?
Also, what do you think, should dice use parts of firestorm's map and put them into multiplayer matches?
or criterior should help from now and on to make those new multiplayer maps we all want?
0
Comments
As for your suggestion, BR map is just a giant open space with few bits on bobs thrown around to make it look like a map, so it won't fit into standard multiplayer formula.
_______________________
Customer: I really like this car, but the tires are bald.
Salesman: Well we only have bald tires on this car because we thought you would prefer to have power-steering.
Customer: I would like both power-steering and newer tires. But what good is power-steering if I slide off a cliff in a rain storm?
Salesman: If you don't like it, don't buy it.
Customer: Oh look at the time, I forgot I have a dental appointment in 15 minutes.
Been salty since the original announcement
Autocorrect somehow changed angry to made. 😓
@HardAimedKid started drooling for a bf br before the announcement of it.
I’m indifferent.
I don't know why there's this whole 'would you rather get (large amount of content) or Firestorm?' thing, because in the time it's taken to develop Firestorm I doubt they would be able to make 10 full large multiplayer maps (ignoring the fact that Criterion has developed Firestorm, so it's a separate team to the main development team on BFV). Obviously most people would rather get 10 maps than a new mode - but if maps had been prioritised and there was only one team, then they wouldn't have made 10 maps.
But saying Criterion could have made more maps in this time would just make me wonder what Dice Sweden has been doing these past four months.
They probably will, or at least use some of the assets as there appears to be new assets based on the trailer.
Please not, BR maps are usually set-up like a blend of Panzerstorm and Suez. Vast wasteland with long sightlines and in between point-blank engagement ranges. Using assets is fine since I've seen more unique landmarks and buildings in the Firestorm trailer than in all the 9 maps.
And this is the basic mentality most of us have. This game is a lost cause. All Apex needs is more content and balance along with doubles and singles. Trios just doesn't work when you don't have the squads. Not sure how this BR will play out. In theory it could be decent, but I just don't like anything about the UI and progression system for this game. It kills any hype I might have.
At the end of the day BFV sucks. And it will continue to suck.
The thing is with a sort of 'ultimatum' like that (that's probably entirely the wrong word, oh well) is that it's very biased - of course almost anyone would prefer 10 new maps over BR, but if we weren't getting BR we wouldn't get 10 maps instead - unless Criterion were developing maps instead of BR, we'd have the same amount of content basically but minus the promise of BR.
I bet the roadmap will not have anything really exiting. And we will be stuck in the endless no proper content loop.
Let’s hope not.