"BFV is lacking content"

Comments

  • SirBobdk
    4195 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    GP-Caliber wrote: »
    funny that you classify rush as a new game mode while it was already in bf1.

    Rush had been a part of BF sinse BC2 if i recall correct.
  • Trokey66
    8599 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    SirBobdk wrote: »
    GP-Caliber wrote: »
    funny that you classify rush as a new game mode while it was already in bf1.

    Rush had been a part of BF sinse BC2 if i recall correct.

    Bad Company 1......
  • SirBobdk
    4195 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member


    I'm sorry, but as someone who has been around since the Battlelog days, I am going to have to respectfully disagree with the notion that it rarely became 'personal'. Just ask some of the mods around here how personal some people got back in the days. .

    BF forums have been bad in the past, but imo it has become better in BFV. I like to debate with all in here, but sometimes we do misunderstand each other.
  • KitCatChunky
    83 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited April 21
    I`ve barely played battlefield 5 since launch since i was interested more in other games at that time. Did not like the fast twitch gameplay of this battlefield. 
    I might pick up the game again but then i`ve watched levelcaps state of the game video. That bf5 was to much rushed at launch and stil kind of is in a state moving up to be where it should be was it launched today instead of a half year ago.

    Should i invest time in playing bf5? Or did EA pull out most resources on this game and left with only a skeleton crew till a new big project comes out or Apex?
    How many players are still playing bf5? Is it much worse then bf1 at the same point of its life cycle?
  • Ferdinand_J_Foch
    3410 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    SirBobdk said:


    I'm sorry, but as someone who has been around since the Battlelog days, I am going to have to respectfully disagree with the notion that it rarely became 'personal'. Just ask some of the mods around here how personal some people got back in the days. .

    BF forums have been bad in the past, but imo it has become better in BFV. I like to debate with all in here, but sometimes we do misunderstand each other.
    The cynic in me makes me believe that these forums have calmed down slightly due to the fact that there aren't too many people around here these days ...

    Still, I will admit that it is indeed better than it used to be ... we don't have any Lordmangs around here nowadays, for one.
  • GP-Caliber
    651 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    SirBobdk wrote: »
    GP-Caliber wrote: »
    funny that you classify rush as a new game mode while it was already in bf1.

    Rush had been a part of BF sinse BC2 if i recall correct.

    yes thats correct even bc1 had it.wich makes it shameful its called a new game mode.
  • parkingbrake
    3202 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I know he’s hated around here but have you guys seen LevelCap’s recent video “Bad Company 3 Leak and Why Battlefield V Was Rushed Theory?”

    It actually makes a lot of sense as to to why BF5 is in that state it’s in (besides all the other theories). Apparently, BC3 was supposed to be the next BF game after 1, but for some reason that was pushed back and BF5 was brought out first which is why there’s still so much left unfinished. The idea is that BC3 was being saved for next-gen consoles.
    The console part is actually credible, EA has made decisions like that before.  I wouldn't be surprised if BF6 isn't even released for PC, I think EA would be happy to see kiss goodbye to that platform as it is more troublesome than consoles what with all the technical issues and the cheating.  Interesting if this turns out to be right.
  • parkingbrake
    3202 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    SirBobdk said:
    A community that once prided itself on being mature...
    That was before BF3 where BF began to turn towards cod. You saying BFV is a good game. Maybe it is compared to other FPS game right now, but not compared to the BF games many of us has been addicted to for the past 16 years. You don't seem to have played them, so you don't understand where we are comming from.  Do I blame EA/Dice, yes I do. They have taken a great franchise and turned it into a soulless pile of garbage, removed rental servers, killed the community and made it anonymously.


    Indeed ... the BF community has been extremely immature for a very long time. BF3's Battlelog forums were filled with some of the most childish complaints and insults ever. The same could be said for BF4, BF1 and Hardline.

    Remember when the BF3 community lost it's mind over some wallpapers, a la the August Content Drop? Remember when the BF3 community lost it's mind over the Close Quarters DLC, calling it the 'CoD DLC'? Remember when all of the prominent BF3 YouTubers led a one-day blackout? Remember when all of the Bad Company fanboys derided BF3 as a 'failure' because it was not faithful to their spin-off of this franchise?

    DICE has earned plenty of the blowback this franchise has generated since even BF 1942, but it's fans aren't innocent little angels that have never overreacted, as many here would have you believe.

    Yes, the level of immaturiy, foolishness and outright dishonesty I've seen here over the years is striking.  I've seen people rant over bugs that have already been fixed in a patch, they're complaining about something that's already gone.  A server shutdown for maintenance that is announced well in advance is assumed to be a server crash due to DICE incompetence--even though there was a sticky post at the top of the start page for a week!  Some claim EA makes and sells hacks for extra money (and then pays anti-cheat services at the same time).  Many posters can't even tell the difference between DICE and EA, they don't get that DICE is a small part of EA, an employee in effect, they think guys in Stockholm make all the decisions.

    There is more then enough incompetence and bad decision making at EA and DICE without anyone having to make up more, but that sure doesn't stop some folks from trying.  And then there is the personal vitriol expressed here, which thanks to the current moderators is nowhere near as bad as it once was.  In some ways I understand why EA/DICE reps don't come here more often, on the other hand I can recall a lot more communication with the community in years past, e.g. more detailed patch notes.  Silence is interpreted as indifference, it's just not a good way to go if you value your customers and want them to stick around.
  • aRrAyStArTaT0
    786 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    SirBobdk said:
    A community that once prided itself on being mature...
    That was before BF3 where BF began to turn towards cod. You saying BFV is a good game. Maybe it is compared to other FPS game right now, but not compared to the BF games many of us has been addicted to for the past 16 years. You don't seem to have played them, so you don't understand where we are comming from.  Do I blame EA/Dice, yes I do. They have taken a great franchise and turned it into a soulless pile of garbage, removed rental servers, killed the community and made it anonymously.


    Indeed ... the BF community has been extremely immature for a very long time. BF3's Battlelog forums were filled with some of the most childish complaints and insults ever. The same could be said for BF4, BF1 and Hardline.

    Remember when the BF3 community lost it's mind over some wallpapers, a la the August Content Drop? Remember when the BF3 community lost it's mind over the Close Quarters DLC, calling it the 'CoD DLC'? Remember when all of the prominent BF3 YouTubers led a one-day blackout? Remember when all of the Bad Company fanboys derided BF3 as a 'failure' because it was not faithful to their spin-off of this franchise?

    DICE has earned plenty of the blowback this franchise has generated since even BF 1942, but it's fans aren't innocent little angels that have never overreacted, as many here would have you believe.

    Yes, the level of immaturiy, foolishness and outright dishonesty I've seen here over the years is striking.  I've seen people rant over bugs that have already been fixed in a patch, they're complaining about something that's already gone.  A server shutdown for maintenance that is announced well in advance is assumed to be a server crash due to DICE incompetence--even though there was a sticky post at the top of the start page for a week!  Some claim EA makes and sells hacks for extra money (and then pays anti-cheat services at the same time).  Many posters can't even tell the difference between DICE and EA, they don't get that DICE is a small part of EA, an employee in effect, they think guys in Stockholm make all the decisions.

    There is more then enough incompetence and bad decision making at EA and DICE without anyone having to make up more, but that sure doesn't stop some folks from trying.  And then there is the personal vitriol expressed here, which thanks to the current moderators is nowhere near as bad as it once was.  In some ways I understand why EA/DICE reps don't come here more often, on the other hand I can recall a lot more communication with the community in years past, e.g. more detailed patch notes.  Silence is interpreted as indifference, it's just not a good way to go if you value your customers and want them to stick around.
    It's hard to justify posting here as an Employee if all you're going to do is be belittled and have your statements picked apart.

    It's obvious why they don't come here, but it's sad that the community doesn't see it and continues to do the same things over and over.
  • warslag
    1594 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    SirBobdk said:
    A community that once prided itself on being mature...
    That was before BF3 where BF began to turn towards cod. You saying BFV is a good game. Maybe it is compared to other FPS game right now, but not compared to the BF games many of us has been addicted to for the past 16 years. You don't seem to have played them, so you don't understand where we are comming from.  Do I blame EA/Dice, yes I do. They have taken a great franchise and turned it into a soulless pile of garbage, removed rental servers, killed the community and made it anonymously.


    Indeed ... the BF community has been extremely immature for a very long time. BF3's Battlelog forums were filled with some of the most childish complaints and insults ever. The same could be said for BF4, BF1 and Hardline.

    Remember when the BF3 community lost it's mind over some wallpapers, a la the August Content Drop? Remember when the BF3 community lost it's mind over the Close Quarters DLC, calling it the 'CoD DLC'? Remember when all of the prominent BF3 YouTubers led a one-day blackout? Remember when all of the Bad Company fanboys derided BF3 as a 'failure' because it was not faithful to their spin-off of this franchise?

    DICE has earned plenty of the blowback this franchise has generated since even BF 1942, but it's fans aren't innocent little angels that have never overreacted, as many here would have you believe.
    The rage over BF3 Close Quarters astounded me as I absolutely loved Close Quarters. I had friends from BF2 who I played BF3 with but they didn't hate Close Quarters until they discovered that they just weren't very good at it. It was kind of a challenging game for players who didn't put a lot of effort into their gameplay, and who were probably only there for a chat with a few mates while they had a beer. Which is what you could do in BF2. You couldn't get away with not being fully engaged with the gameplay in BF3 and Close Quarters. So they all went nuts at EA saying it wasn't Battlefield.

    But EA seemed to accept the criticism around BF3. Which is why I think Battlefield has since evolved in the way it has because of what happened back then. The gameplay has become childish and cinematic in BF1 and BFV. It's not really a gamers game to the extent that BF3 was. That's why I started posting on the forums. To try and show that there was another point of view that enjoyed BF3 and wanted more of it. It just completely blew my mind that there was no Close Quarters in BF4. It seems cretinously cynical to not have had that mode back.

    I really do think that the Battlefield producers used the forums and those stupid surveys to shape Battlefield. It almost seemed like part of how the world has over the last 10 years or so become just kind of weird. They developed Battlefield with a sort of normalisation to suit all those people who were going nuts on forums, in surveys and wherever else. Instead, they should have, in my opinion, built on BF3. There also should have been another Close Quarters immediately, instead of all that shooting through doorways rubbish in Lockers.

    I play Apex now and it's immense fun. It's very free and fast, or slow, depending on how you want to play. It's brutal but also funny. But again, there are a heck of a lot of moaners demanding really stupid things with completely warped, stupid and irrational justifications for them. I'm just sort of waiting to see if the developers do the right thing and ignore them.
  • the_lone_ran9er
    61 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I feel like I'm staring at an undeserved financial wreckage for a game which I received for free ( bought a GPU ) and am currently enjoying, I mean I'm actually alt tabbed out and I really like the game overall.  I think we are feeling the effects of the internets volatility and the overwhelming sensationalism of games reviews by youtubers who I feel need to either grandstand a new game as the greatest thing ever or utterly crush it for view counts and therefor add revenue. It's like the tabloids. 

    I never would have touched this game if I went by the influence of the internet and almost skipped it all together. Glad I didn't

    As for the comment made by another poster to the effect of EA being happy to see PC go away as a platform.  I've got new for you, the internet isn't going anywhere.  If PS4 was the only gaming platform, you'd be dealing with the same thing as youtube and reddit still exist without PC games.  The last thing any of us needs is for a closed platform to dominate gaming, consoles are bad for everyone even console players, they just don't know it.

    Being a veteran of Battlefield 1942, 3, 4 and now trying 5 with probably over 2500 hours combined I have some opinions on this. I'd like to say that too many people make assumptions as to why they're not feeling BFV as a game. They Quote " More Maps" " More Weapon Progression " etc. And it's not that those things aren't good, but they are not what's truly missing. They need to do more with what they have, it only takes a few good maps and one good mode to float a successful game. I'd say the problem with Battlefield is that all of it's modes more and more resemble just another whirling swirling Team Death match. It's just a better COD. And now Battle Royal. They need to re structure the definitive mode Conquest.

    My favorite part of any Battlefield match is the beginning, when all of the players spawn in together, roll out together, platoons of tanks and infantry on the move ( think operation firestorm ) then that first big engagement winds down and the noob snipers disappear into the hills, a few guys go AFK, Pilots take to the skies and the hardcore players zoom around the map in jeeps back capping each others empty flags and the tanks arrive one at a time in a trickle. No more large unit clashes, big battles over a single objective RUSH style. A 64 player server suddenly starts to feel empty and lonely. They need to find a way to re ignite those " Big Pushes " over and over throughout the course of the round. Have a way of prioritizing objectives so the empty ones in the back have less value. Pulse the spawning of tanks and vehicles all at once so there are few vehicles, then suddenly many on the field moving together. Perhaps make it Main or SQUAD spawn only and only when your Squad mate is on an objective. There are all kinds of ideas you could play with, but Team Death Match Type A-Z isn't my game, and Battle Royal isn't why I play Battlefield.


    ---------------

    The #1 thing I would do to improve this game before even looking at anything else. Increase the Squad Size.

    The game needs to be more social. I have friends on Fortnite. But on BFV I can play for hours and hardly speak a word to my Squad Mates. They need to increase the squad size just to make the game more social.

    Every play the game SQUAD ?  10 man squads, having people to communicate with and who talk back is really great. I know the pace of BFV makes it harder, but larger squad sizes would add more purpose to communication as well as increasing the likelihood you have someone to talk to.  This day and age your Multiplayer game needs to be a social experience.

    ------------

    The #1 Mistake they made was bringing gender wars into their marketing, it was like financial suicide. I can look past the near 50/50 Female split while I enjoy the game, but why did they do it are they crazy? It's the thing that means the least either way in terms of making a FUN game and hurts the most financially.  They paid too much for to little trying to advertise their gargantuan virtue.  At the very least they could have just added Female models "later".

  • christianomaxim
    5 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Stahlmach said:
    Its a combination of many things, not only the number of Maps in particular.

    The Maps in BF 1 just as in BF 3/4 had a big variety towards each other AND inside the maps. In BF V its one theme on the map only. And these maps are mostly small, medium, heavy infantry focused maps.
    And while the lack of Vehicles in a WW1 themed Game can be in some way supporting the Immersion, its the total opposite in a WW 2 shooter. Especially when this was once a major pillar of the battlefield series.
    I dont care about reskined BF 1 Weapons in BF V, it even gets annyoing when these weapons out of nowhere are better than their more modern counterparts.

    Although BF 1 didnt catched me the way BF 3/4 did, at least it gave me a different Vibe then BF V due to its Immersion and Gameplay. Germans, French, British, Austrian, Ottomans and later Russians. The main actors were there on maps that gave a variety.
    In BF V its germans against british. In Rotterdam....

    The difference can also be seen in the campaigns. Yes, yes i know the discussion that the Battlefield series isnt about a Singleplayer. But the previous titles like Bad Company, BF 3/4 and BF 1 made one thing right with their campaigns: they took you through the places you later played in the Multiplayer! Seine Crossing, Caspian Border, Valparaiso, Sinai, Shanghai etc.
    While in BF V you get partly Norway from " Nordlys " but thats it. Where are beautiful, different maps giving us scenes like for example in Tirailleur ? With large defense structures ? Dense forests ? Beautiful cheateaus on a higher level while you fight in a small village on the ground ?
    There could be enough opportunities to also have Terrain/Maps that arent just plain flat and in 80% just having three story buildings as the highest point on the map.

    But nothing of that is in BF V and the Gameplay isnt even in that picture.

    Totally agree, these locations would be wonderful to play in multiplayer. I enjoyed the game a lot, and sometimes I still do. But after a while it gets boring, always the same in my eyes, although there is a lot of content, but maybe a lack of creativity/originality? I used to play for hours and hours, but after two-three weeks I had seen it all. Other games, I could play for hours and hours and still not getting bored. I think it's the "flow" of the game, and although I'm a bfV fan, the "flow" is mostly the same.
  • Ferdinand_J_Foch
    3410 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    warslag said:
    The rage over BF3 Close Quarters astounded me as I absolutely loved Close Quarters. I had friends from BF2 who I played BF3 with but they didn't hate Close Quarters until they discovered that they just weren't very good at it. It was kind of a challenging game for players who didn't put a lot of effort into their gameplay, and who were probably only there for a chat with a few mates while they had a beer. Which is what you could do in BF2. You couldn't get away with not being fully engaged with the gameplay in BF3 and Close Quarters. So they all went nuts at EA saying it wasn't Battlefield.

    It's quite funny that you mention that ... a lot of 'veterans' insist that BF2 was a game where you couldn't goof around at all. People say that it's a game where people constantly played the objective, and there was non-stop coordination and teamplay in literally every single match.

    Those sorts of people said the exact opposite things about games past BC1 ... the newer BF games were 'casualised, 'consolised trash', 'CoD clones', and so on, and so forth.

    Hell, I remember people saying that BF3 was just a CoD Modern Warfare game with some vehicles and larger maps.

    People have such vastly different perceptions of every thing in this entire world, let alone video games, that one wonders how you can you trust anyone's opinions.

    Just a few days ago, I saw someone saying that Donald Trump was a hardcore Jewish socialist. Most people couldn't even imagine such a thing being uttered by anyone, but at this point, I was almost, almost, not surprised.
  • the_lone_ran9er
    61 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    warslag said:
    The rage over BF3 Close Quarters astounded me as I absolutely loved Close Quarters. I had friends from BF2 who I played BF3 with but they didn't hate Close Quarters until they discovered that they just weren't very good at it. It was kind of a challenging game for players who didn't put a lot of effort into their gameplay, and who were probably only there for a chat with a few mates while they had a beer. Which is what you could do in BF2. You couldn't get away with not being fully engaged with the gameplay in BF3 and Close Quarters. So they all went nuts at EA saying it wasn't Battlefield.


    Those sorts of people said the exact opposite things about games past BC1 ... the newer BF games were 'casualised, 'consolised trash', 'CoD clones', and so on, and so forth.

    Hell, I remember people saying that BF3 was just a CoD Modern Warfare game with some vehicles and larger maps.

    I can't picture that being said, Unless it was a Console to Console statement.  The timeframe doesn't match up, PS4 didn't exist yet and the newest COD would have been Black Ops 1 on PS3.  The gap between Console and PC hardware at the time was so large that COD anything PS3 would be un- comparable to BF3 PC.  Even COD PC......Just can't picture it, it's a comparison that could only be made by someone who never actually played BF3 but maybe just seen a couple of videos out of the corner of their eye.
  • Ferdinand_J_Foch
    3410 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    warslag said:
    The rage over BF3 Close Quarters astounded me as I absolutely loved Close Quarters. I had friends from BF2 who I played BF3 with but they didn't hate Close Quarters until they discovered that they just weren't very good at it. It was kind of a challenging game for players who didn't put a lot of effort into their gameplay, and who were probably only there for a chat with a few mates while they had a beer. Which is what you could do in BF2. You couldn't get away with not being fully engaged with the gameplay in BF3 and Close Quarters. So they all went nuts at EA saying it wasn't Battlefield.


    Those sorts of people said the exact opposite things about games past BC1 ... the newer BF games were 'casualised, 'consolised trash', 'CoD clones', and so on, and so forth.

    Hell, I remember people saying that BF3 was just a CoD Modern Warfare game with some vehicles and larger maps.

    I can't picture that being said, Unless it was a Console to Console statement.  The timeframe doesn't match up, PS4 didn't exist yet and the newest COD would have been Black Ops 1 on PS3.  The gap between Console and PC hardware at the time was so large that COD anything PS3 would be un- comparable to BF3 PC.  Even COD PC......Just can't picture it, it's a comparison that could only be made by someone who never actually played BF3 but maybe just seen a couple of videos out of the corner of their eye.
    Trust me when I say that plenty of people were saying that BF3 was a 'consolised game/console port' back in the day. A lot of people were also comparing BF3 to Modern Warfare 3. They were complaining about how most players preferred maps like Metro or Noshar Canals TDM over maps with vehicles. I mean, the Close Quarters DLC got called the 'CoD DLC', and the strange thing is that it ended up being a fan favourite, whereas the vehicle-heavy Armoured Kill DLC was seen as the most unpopular DLC, which furthered the impression people had of BF3 being a CoD infantry-only clone.

    People complained about how little recoil there was for most guns in BF3, saying that it was so much harder to control your weapon in BF2. They also talked about the fact that vehicles had infinite ammo, though they'd had that since BC1. I remember some people saying that vehicles were like CoD kill-streaks with more control in BF3, with barely any strategy involved in them except 'rush the enemy and kill them', even though that wasn't quite the case when you were pitted against competent Engineers or cunning Supports.

    Hell, the fact that a lot of people played Recon back in BF3 made some claim that that was evidence of the game becoming like CoD. The amount of quickscoping montages for BF3 on YouTube was also fairly high.

    The UI of BF3 is praised nowadays, but back then, people called it overly simplistic, and further 'evidence' that BF3 was prioritised for consoles over PC. People complained about the menu being designed for consoles rather than PC.

    I do believe that the console population for BF3 was usually higher than the PC population.

    There are still people out there who, to this very day, will insist that BF3 was a console port rather than a true PC game.

    I will say that BF3 was the game that made this franchise mainstream. I definitely noticed a lot of CoD players move into the Battlefield franchise specifically because of BF3. A lot of them saw the fantastic graphics, vehicles that you had more control over, and all of the YouTube videos of people going on insane infantry killstreaks, so it was somewhat inevitable that they decided to jump ship.

    BF3 wasn't getting compared to ArmA II, Operation Flashpoint, or some other milsim or milsim-esque game ... it's direct competitor was, indeed, Modern Warfare 3. The Metacritic reviews back then even reflected this ... people who reviewed MW3 sometimes gave the game a 0/10, and the review would basically state that BF3 was the better game, as if they were direct rivals. BF3 reviews were filled with people saying that the game was much better than MW3.
  • AsocialLoner
    3 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield Member
    Does anyone else remember when American players were getting outraged by the influx of Japanese 'invaders' in BF4? Some of the language they used about Japanese players looked straight out of WW2 American propaganda. 
    LOL! I remember those days. It was legitimately bad, and quite frankly unfair to players who were playing in their own region. Every hit would register with American players and kill them, while it wouldn't happen to OOR's. That wasn't fair, and made me feel disgusted that players who playing in their proper regions were being penalized. So I went on Google Translate, screenshotted my messages and kept sending  PS messages to Japanese players. Like threatening to nuke them again for being in East US servers. The OOR problem actually got fixed eventually, I don't even notice OOR's anymore. It's noticeable in Hardline though, stark difference. I gotta give whoever fixed BF4 credit, you all did an excellent job. 
  • Ferdinand_J_Foch
    3410 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited April 22
    Does anyone else remember when American players were getting outraged by the influx of Japanese 'invaders' in BF4? Some of the language they used about Japanese players looked straight out of WW2 American propaganda. 
    LOL! I remember those days. It was legitimately bad, and quite frankly unfair to players who were playing in their own region. Every hit would register with American players and kill them, while it wouldn't happen to OOR's. That wasn't fair, and made me feel disgusted that players who playing in their proper regions were being penalized. So I went on Google Translate, screenshotted my messages and kept sending  PS messages to Japanese players. Like threatening to nuke them again for being in East US servers. The OOR problem actually got fixed eventually, I don't even notice OOR's anymore. It's noticeable in Hardline though, stark difference. I gotta give whoever fixed BF4 credit, you all did an excellent job. 
    I definitely understood and sympathised with many American players back when BF4 was at it's peak. There were even a few instances of Japanese players taunting American players about having an advantage over them, so I can see how that enraged people further.

    With that being said, I was still discouraged by a lot of the language used by American players back then. It wasn't uncommon to look at American servers with banners saying 'No Dirty Japanese (get rid of the 'anese' in Japanese and add an s at the end to get the actual word, as it's censored on this forum) Allowed', and that was usually fairly mild compared to some of the other stuff you would see. 
  • Trokey66
    8599 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I genuinely think that for the most part, this is a game that the 'community' made.

    If you look back at forums past and see what the 'community' demanded, it is in this game.

    Of course, and at the end of the day, DICE made the decision to include such features and mechanics so should rightly shoulder some responsibility for the issues but this is what 'we' wanted.

    I also maintain there is a strong 'hate bandwagon' against BFV such that no matter what DICE do, it will be met with derision. Rose tinted glasses are also a problem, as has been stated, previous games were in no way universally lauded as some would claim.

    The game is by no means perfect, but is not as bad as some make out.
  • ragnarok013
    3418 postsMember, Moderator, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Moderator
    Trokey66 said:
    SirBobdk wrote: »
    GP-Caliber wrote: »
    funny that you classify rush as a new game mode while it was already in bf1.

    Rush had been a part of BF sinse BC2 if i recall correct.

    Bad Company 1......
    Indeed Trokey66  Back when it used to be called "Gold Rush"!
Sign In or Register to comment.