Sigh, I have strongly the feeling that BF5 is flopping.
It did, none of my friends playing anymore. Theu moved to other games.
BF5 sold less than 8 million copies in several months. For comparison, BF3 sold 10 million in a single week, BF1 sold even more. That says a lot about how poorly BF5 sold.
The sales has been low. The player base is low og people are still leaving the game.
Imo adding a few maps and weapons wont increase sales but only reduce the numbers leaving the game.
I can't see how EA is suppose to make a business out of that unless microtransactions. My guess is that all ressources will be transferred to BF6 and BF5 will get a few crumbs to keep the small playerbase alive.
This is exactly the problem with BFV management. I’ve been waiting for the roadmap to see where the game is heading and, maybe, buy it. Even for a full price just to support company who has realized its mistakes and is trying to save the game
And what do I see in the roadmap? Same stuff nobody asked for, competitive ¯\_(ツ)_/¯, new theatre of war with no details ( apparently they also don’t have a clue what will be in it), Secret Urban map (Secret? Really? Is this a new way to bring new players?).
Game will be supported for 2 years, but in the end of 2019 we will still be in 1941. Apparently in 2020 they will do 2-3 Eastern Front maps, announce Bad Company 3 and throw this game into a garbage bin
Well not minding something is a bit different than playing the **** out of something. Chances are high that this mode is just a resource drain. DICE is lacking the infrastructure to support a really competitive mode, and so far the BF community has not exactly expressed a huge interest in that, not even in BF3/4 times, when "competitive" communities were a thing.
Squad conquest is pretty popular and sweaty.
Hmm, I enjoyed it and it was well enough received to make a comeback, agreed. I am not sure if it was popular number-wise though. However the new mode is something completely different by the datamine. A game that is closer to R6S and Overwatch than core BF. And it is 5vs5 without vehicles.
Truth is, they go through a lot of hassle to add another wildcard and even develop at least some entirely new maps and mechanics for it. Yet, we have never seen a ladder, tournaments, a large viewing audience for competitive BF, no RSP or community features that would encourage a third party or dedicated group of people to come up with something themselves. And everything they add to this mode, is exclusive, there is no chance we will see Provence on Conquest Core, because therei is no way to scale this map up for 64 players, unless you invest another couple of months of devtime.
Squad Conquest is easy to understand and 8vs8 with vehicles, it is pretty close to standard BF, just with reduced numbers, and therefore more tactical and "competitive". That is why it was popular. It still had major flaws like player downtime through leaving or being afk. In a 5vs5 this is even worse naturally, and the infrastructure around it is simply missing.
We don't have enough information to know what will be built around it come launch. Like I said before I'll will reserve judge and jury when it comes time to release. Right now is just speculation.
Well the datamine is out there. No reason not to believe the stuff writen there. It does appear very similar to R6S with elements of Battlefield. The point still stands, competitive has never drawn much of an audience, it was never well-received as a mode either and DICE does not have any form of infrastructure to make it worthwhile, nor do they provide tools to support competitive play.
Even when comp gameplay was a thing in BF4, it was 5vs5 Domination or TDM where 75% of weapons and gadgets were banned and a team would consist of 4 Assaults and one Engi, which is such a bastardized version of BF it could have been any other shooter.
Now we have a game that is vastly less popular than BF4, which had a sort of comp scene, and the tools for it in a gaming environment with not much audience to generate or steal, because it is taking up by really big players, and with direct in-house competition in the form of Apex and Firestorm. And it is still at least 3 months away.
So they are again developing something with great effort, that is incredibly nichey and that will bring no benefit to the core game, because nothing from that mode can be used or even converted.
It does seem like they saw that SQC was mildly popular and totally drew the wrong conclusions.
@azelenkin0306 wrote
And what do I see in the roadmap? Same stuff nobody asked for, competitive ****, new theatre of war with no details ( apparently they also don’t have a clue what will be in it), Secret Urban map (Secret? Really? Is this a new way to bring new players?).
it seems like they are shooting with a shoot gun trying to his something without a clue about what it takes to get new players and maintain existing players.
It is very confusing, but so is the game and the patches DICE releases. Hard to see where they are going with this game or what they want it to be or is competent of doing.
I didn't think incursions was that bad, the problem for mevwas people quitting mid way through a match. So if your anti tank guy quit you were screwed and got steamrolled.
90% of Incursions' population plagyed it only for melee weapon unlock. So they basically didn't care at all, just 3 wins and uninstall.
Which pretty much sums up the desire BF community has for "competitive" mode.
Yup. Deleted that hot mess as soon as i unlocked. Incursions was a total joke and a waste of resources! What were they thinking?!
I don't expect this post to be revolutionary at all.....
I can't get my head around why they put resources into that test range. I will never go into it.
What are they thinking with that Combined Arms. I will never go into that either.
There can't be many people that will go into a game to shoot bots/AI.
How can the big cheeses at EA/DICE not realise all they need to do is release maps.
One map every 6 weeks must be manageable? If not stretch it to one every 8 weeks.
It's crazy what they are doing. I've never played a BR game of any sort. But its a sorry state of affairs when I'm pinning all my hopes on Firestorm being good and it keeping my attention for a few months.
I don't expect this post to be revolutionary at all.....
I can't get my head around why they put resources into that test range. I will never go into it.
What are they thinking with that Combined Arms. I will never go into that either.
There can't be many people that will go into a game to shoot bots/AI.
How can the big cheeses at EA/DICE not realise all they need to do is release maps.
One map every 6 weeks must be manageable? If not stretch it to one every 8 weeks.
It's crazy what they are doing. I've never played a BR game of any sort. But its a sorry state of affairs when I'm pinning all my hopes on Firestorm being good and it keeping my attention for a few months.
Test range *was* a decent idea but the execution was terrible; there is zero point to it besides maybe fighter plane handling and practice and learning how to bomb better with the stuka. Cant use post launch weapons, no specs so you can't work out if you'd rather X spec over Y etc. All they had to do was copy BF4 test range and had the ability to bring in 3 friends.
Combined arms was also the same deal but a little better (hell it lets you use your own loadouts which you can sorta use to replace what the test range should've let you do and even tracks for certain assignments). People like me do enjoy what it offers its just a shame that even with the extra time (given that it was meant to be launch content) it's such a bland experience that is rather repetitive; it's just the same thing over 8 missions. At least BF3 coop missions were mini "stories" within themselves that had variation.
You do realise making a bf map doesn't happen overnight right? Devastation took 5 Devs 13 months to make. You've got to build it, detail it, QA test it and that's not including the initial pitch and checks and balances for it to even leave the concept art board.
We have no idea how many maps are in the works; we have confirmed at least 3 bf maps (Mercury and two next chapter) and two 5v5 maps (like what happened with Titanfall 2). 16 maps is the benchmark here by the year's end; and that's 16 bf maps not including 5v5 maps (though I think EA/Dice will regard it differently)
~
I find it kinda ironic that there's all this outcry for more maps when those same people wouldn't buy DLC maps and would play vanilla rotation till the next bf.
Hey I'm getting frustrated myself with all the content getting held back to try and make the "live service" look good or in the case of the cosmetics pretending they don't exist whilst flaunting them every second BUT; you aren't under any obligation to play the game each and every day if stuff like this gets you miffed. You can just wait for it to arrive; play something else in the meantime or do something productive other then play video if they are frustrating. I mean that is the advantage of the live service you can just jump back in at any time; the weapons and vehicles through ToW can be bought with CC after the fact (obviously you would miss out on the cosmetics and Chapter rank rewards).
It's clearly obvious that these forums have little to no impact on the workings of the Devs. No amount of bellyaching or demanding is gonna go anywhere here yell anywhere
I don't expect this post to be revolutionary at all.....
I can't get my head around why they put resources into that test range. I will never go into it.
What are they thinking with that Combined Arms. I will never go into that either.
There can't be many people that will go into a game to shoot bots/AI.
How can the big cheeses at EA/DICE not realise all they need to do is release maps.
One map every 6 weeks must be manageable? If not stretch it to one every 8 weeks.
It's crazy what they are doing. I've never played a BR game of any sort. But its a sorry state of affairs when I'm pinning all my hopes on Firestorm being good and it keeping my attention for a few months.
What’s obvious is that DICE is not a data driven organization, which is shocking because they are supposedly a AAA developer. They are winging it vs looking at what the data is telling them.
I don't expect this post to be revolutionary at all.....
I can't get my head around why they put resources into that test range. I will never go into it.
What are they thinking with that Combined Arms. I will never go into that either.
There can't be many people that will go into a game to shoot bots/AI.
How can the big cheeses at EA/DICE not realise all they need to do is release maps.
One map every 6 weeks must be manageable? If not stretch it to one every 8 weeks.
It's crazy what they are doing. I've never played a BR game of any sort. But its a sorry state of affairs when I'm pinning all my hopes on Firestorm being good and it keeping my attention for a few months.
What’s obvious is that DICE is not a data driven organization, which is shocking because they are supposedly a AAA developer. They are winging it vs looking at what the data is telling them.
They arent a AAA Developer any longer, that is very clear now. The Battlefield Series needs to be switched into the hands of a competent Developer and a Publisher who isnt only thinking about his quarterly revenue and his Investors.
Sigh, I have strongly the feeling that BF5 is flopping.
It did, none of my friends playing anymore. Theu moved to other games.
BF5 sold less than 8 million copies in several months. For comparison, BF3 sold 10 million in a single week, BF1 sold even more. That says a lot about how poorly BF5 sold.
Sigh, I have strongly the feeling that BF5 is flopping.
It did, none of my friends playing anymore. Theu moved to other games.
BF5 sold less than 8 million copies in several months. For comparison, BF3 sold 10 million in a single week, BF1 sold even more. That says a lot about how poorly BF5 sold.
i played 3 matches a week ago and they were full and competetive. even on golmund 24/7 maps. just a different DICE and they cant create a replayable game like BF4
I might have to pick this up...
==
The Price is Right
@Redstripe101
===
My firestorm feedback:
===
(sorry if pic is sideways.. not sure how to fix)
But the player base isn't split and that's all that matters......
You can't split the community if there is no community lol. And trust me, people will be quitting this game soon enough.
thats what ive been telling the "the community's not split" crusaders from the very beginning. without Premium you will get very little maps. i guess they got what they wanted.
The game was not even half finished at launch.
What ever plan DICE might have had my guess would be that it has been terminated and replaced with crumbs to desperately trying to maintain a decreasing player base.
The difference between BFV and Titanic is that BFV does not have an orchestra.
i played 3 matches a week ago and they were full and competetive. even on golmund 24/7 maps. just a different DICE and they cant create a replayable game like BF4
I might have to pick this up...
==
The Price is Right
@Redstripe101
===
My firestorm feedback:
===
(sorry if pic is sideways.. not sure how to fix)
Comments
It did, none of my friends playing anymore. Theu moved to other games.
BF5 sold less than 8 million copies in several months. For comparison, BF3 sold 10 million in a single week, BF1 sold even more. That says a lot about how poorly BF5 sold.
This is exactly the problem with BFV management. I’ve been waiting for the roadmap to see where the game is heading and, maybe, buy it. Even for a full price just to support company who has realized its mistakes and is trying to save the game
And what do I see in the roadmap? Same stuff nobody asked for, competitive ¯\_(ツ)_/¯, new theatre of war with no details ( apparently they also don’t have a clue what will be in it), Secret Urban map (Secret? Really? Is this a new way to bring new players?).
Game will be supported for 2 years, but in the end of 2019 we will still be in 1941. Apparently in 2020 they will do 2-3 Eastern Front maps, announce Bad Company 3 and throw this game into a garbage bin
Well the datamine is out there. No reason not to believe the stuff writen there. It does appear very similar to R6S with elements of Battlefield. The point still stands, competitive has never drawn much of an audience, it was never well-received as a mode either and DICE does not have any form of infrastructure to make it worthwhile, nor do they provide tools to support competitive play.
Even when comp gameplay was a thing in BF4, it was 5vs5 Domination or TDM where 75% of weapons and gadgets were banned and a team would consist of 4 Assaults and one Engi, which is such a bastardized version of BF it could have been any other shooter.
Now we have a game that is vastly less popular than BF4, which had a sort of comp scene, and the tools for it in a gaming environment with not much audience to generate or steal, because it is taking up by really big players, and with direct in-house competition in the form of Apex and Firestorm. And it is still at least 3 months away.
So they are again developing something with great effort, that is incredibly nichey and that will bring no benefit to the core game, because nothing from that mode can be used or even converted.
It does seem like they saw that SQC was mildly popular and totally drew the wrong conclusions.
It is very confusing, but so is the game and the patches DICE releases. Hard to see where they are going with this game or what they want it to be or is competent of doing.
Makes a lof of sense as the amateurs can’t even get the basic UI right. Abominable and sad!
Yup. Deleted that hot mess as soon as i unlocked. Incursions was a total joke and a waste of resources! What were they thinking?!
I can't get my head around why they put resources into that test range. I will never go into it.
What are they thinking with that Combined Arms. I will never go into that either.
There can't be many people that will go into a game to shoot bots/AI.
How can the big cheeses at EA/DICE not realise all they need to do is release maps.
One map every 6 weeks must be manageable? If not stretch it to one every 8 weeks.
It's crazy what they are doing. I've never played a BR game of any sort. But its a sorry state of affairs when I'm pinning all my hopes on Firestorm being good and it keeping my attention for a few months.
Test range *was* a decent idea but the execution was terrible; there is zero point to it besides maybe fighter plane handling and practice and learning how to bomb better with the stuka. Cant use post launch weapons, no specs so you can't work out if you'd rather X spec over Y etc. All they had to do was copy BF4 test range and had the ability to bring in 3 friends.
Combined arms was also the same deal but a little better (hell it lets you use your own loadouts which you can sorta use to replace what the test range should've let you do and even tracks for certain assignments). People like me do enjoy what it offers its just a shame that even with the extra time (given that it was meant to be launch content) it's such a bland experience that is rather repetitive; it's just the same thing over 8 missions. At least BF3 coop missions were mini "stories" within themselves that had variation.
You do realise making a bf map doesn't happen overnight right? Devastation took 5 Devs 13 months to make. You've got to build it, detail it, QA test it and that's not including the initial pitch and checks and balances for it to even leave the concept art board.
We have no idea how many maps are in the works; we have confirmed at least 3 bf maps (Mercury and two next chapter) and two 5v5 maps (like what happened with Titanfall 2). 16 maps is the benchmark here by the year's end; and that's 16 bf maps not including 5v5 maps (though I think EA/Dice will regard it differently)
~
I find it kinda ironic that there's all this outcry for more maps when those same people wouldn't buy DLC maps and would play vanilla rotation till the next bf.
Hey I'm getting frustrated myself with all the content getting held back to try and make the "live service" look good or in the case of the cosmetics pretending they don't exist whilst flaunting them every second BUT; you aren't under any obligation to play the game each and every day if stuff like this gets you miffed. You can just wait for it to arrive; play something else in the meantime or do something productive other then play video if they are frustrating. I mean that is the advantage of the live service you can just jump back in at any time; the weapons and vehicles through ToW can be bought with CC after the fact (obviously you would miss out on the cosmetics and Chapter rank rewards).
It's clearly obvious that these forums have little to no impact on the workings of the Devs. No amount of bellyaching or demanding is gonna go anywhere here yell anywhere
What’s obvious is that DICE is not a data driven organization, which is shocking because they are supposedly a AAA developer. They are winging it vs looking at what the data is telling them.
They arent a AAA Developer any longer, that is very clear now. The Battlefield Series needs to be switched into the hands of a competent Developer and a Publisher who isnt only thinking about his quarterly revenue and his Investors.
Wrong. BF3 sold 5 million in the first week.
Yeah none of the battlefield games out sold BF3
@Redstripe101
===
My firestorm feedback:
===
(sorry if pic is sideways.. not sure how to fix)
thats what ive been telling the "the community's not split" crusaders from the very beginning. without Premium you will get very little maps. i guess they got what they wanted.
Which is why I didn't expect much from this.
It's unfortunate.
What ever plan DICE might have had my guess would be that it has been terminated and replaced with crumbs to desperately trying to maintain a decreasing player base.
The difference between BFV and Titanic is that BFV does not have an orchestra.
I paid 5 dollars for bf4