Battlefield is being killed by the "hardcore" players

Comments

  • Pelliy
    2228 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I'll keep it simple and short, when reading through the topics we can see there are a lot of different sections of players, who play for different reasons. Most of them are alright, but a good portion of these people can only be described as "elitist" and kind of authoritarian in their thinking, the kind of people who say things like "x doesn't belong in an fps" "x requires no skill, so it's bad" "too fast ttk negates skill because you can't turn around and return fire" "bipods should be removed from battlefield" "5 vs 5 game-modes are great and we should see more of them" " 64 players is too chaotic and random, it requires no skill" "snipers are useless and should be removed from the game" and so on and so forth, I think you perfectly understand who I am talking about, it's a mix of normal people and some stupid youtubers with too much following for their own good who, for some incomprehensible reason, seem convinced that they know how to "balance" (whatever that means in a game where everyone has access to the same equipment) the game and react with anger towards anyone who dares to oppose their views (of course not all, but there are plenty of examples in this forum of total unwillingness to debate and discuss).

    To these people: I understand, you probably come from other games that are much more streamlined and provide less content for the sake of better balancing and better reflecting the individual skill of the players and their tactical choices. The problem is, battlefield has never been this game. Battlefield is about immersion and teamwork, it's spirit is creativity, variety and pure fun. Skill is important of course, but in the game itself you quickly find out you can't do much against two tanks on your own, the game discourages the "rambo" mentality and it is not to **** you off and make you sad, it's because it is another breed of game, much more about a beautiful experience than competitive gaming (or even professional gaming). All the rest of us are baffled by how a tiny vocal minority has succeded through the years in modifying the game up to battlefield V, where it seems the developers almost exclusively listen to this feedback and ignore all the other players. You're trying to make battlefield into something it isn't, and the result will be that both you and the old-school fans will be disappointed. Stop making changes to appease these people, they're the kind of players that go from game to game and follow the trends, be yourself and try to recapture the spirit of the original game, don't follow the trends too.

    I write this topic because I love battlefield and I can't stand how disappointing V was, it's a good game but it's so distant from how purely EPIC a battlefield release is. Battlefield used to mean "game from the future", great graphics new mechanics bigger scale, every battlefield release has been a step forward for the whole industry, V was the first battlefield to release and just... meh.

    thanks for reading and I hope this sparks an interesting discussion
    tl;dr please make battlefield fun again.
    I disagree with you on battlefield is about teamwork :D It hasn't been about teamwork since BF2. They made these changes to make people work together more. Except it was the opposite effect. More people started camping more due to attrition. bipods with attrition makes people afraid to cross at all.

    I agree battlefield is a casual game but it does need balancing. The chaos needs to find a balance. You can't jsut enter a game and someone is just plane farming and call that a fun experience. Their goal is to have mass appeal and challenge other shooters on the market. They fail at it when it comes to the AAA games. I mean a buggy game like PUBG outsold probably the two last battlefields, hell the last 3 battlefield titles. 

    PUBG has sold over 50 million. BF1 sold like 16 million, BFV- 7million(and counting) and BF4 14m 

    So its a balancing act. What appeals to the masses (Casuals the one that you are supposedly for) and so far, compared to other triple A titles, its sells the worse.
  • SirTerrible
    1713 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 2019
    It's almost unbelievable how some still complaint about attrition. We all saw the trailers, we all saw game footage and COULD have tested the game for 13 bucks when it came out. Buying a game after all the mechanics and details about gameplay have been laid open, and then start complaining you want it changed is just flat out backseat developing(abbreviation of backseat gaming) and is most shameful for the person doing it.

    I don't want to hit someones toe but..
    A: Want a new car?
    B: Yea, I'm thinking about a super car... Bought a SUV though. Not happy with it... might reconstruct it to a compact.
    A: Sorry, but are you by any chance mentally ill?
    that's how it sounds to me.
    So we can only discuss things if they were added post launch? That doesn't make sense.
    .
    Your analogy is off too. Wanting attrition removed (if you don't like it) is more like buying a mustang and having an aftermarket ECU and exhaust put in boosting your horsepower by 30. You knew what you were getting when you bought it but there's no harm in improving it further if you want.
  • mf_shro0m
    2348 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Shadeblast wrote: »
    It's almost unbelievable how some still complaint about attrition. We all saw the trailers, we all saw game footage and COULD have tested the game for 13 bucks when it came out. Buying a game after all the mechanics and details about gameplay have been laid open, and then start complaining you want it changed is just flat out backseat developing(abbreviation of backseat gaming) and is most shameful for the person doing it.

    I don't want to hit someones toe but..
    A: Want a new car?
    B: Yea, I'm thinking about a super car... Bought a SUV though. Not happy with it... might reconstruct it to a compact.
    A: Sorry, but are you by any chance mentally ill?
    that's how it sounds to me.

    1. Some things sound than they work out to be in practice e.g. timed finishing in FIFA
    e.g. Dynamic damage to tanks
    And whilst I’m still for attrition I think it needs tweaking
    2. Most of us had enough faith in Dice to buy or even preorder BFV. What happen with the next BF remains to be seen
  • mf_shro0m
    2348 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    SirBobdk wrote: »
    I wonder why they left the concept of BF1. It sold the most, was popular and had a large player base.
    It was not my favorite BF game, and personel I would have prefered a game more like BF4, but BF1 was a succes and maybe even the biggest one in the BF series.

    In short

    - the older players kept complaining that behemoths and elites ‘aren’t BF’ so they were removed
    - People kept complaining that snipers are OP because they were killed like 8 times each round by the 16 or so recons on the other team (anyone remember how people kept talking about how the Boys is OP when it first came out because everyone was using it out of novelty and yet it’s barely used now?) so Dice made recon a joke
    - people kept complaining that tanks were OP because infantry couldn’t destroy them in 10 seconds flat so now most tanks are too scared to leave their campsite as
    - Map design’s gone to s because loads of devs left

    That’s pretty much it
  • mf_shro0m
    2348 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 2019
    y_j_es_i wrote: »
    With BattleFront II and BFV there was a push to "listen to the community". Along with SJW aspects, terrible marketing, adding in BR for no needed reason, Its created a mess.

    Build it and they will come. There's a reason GOW won all top 3 GOTY awards. And FWIW, they did this with BF1...no one was amped about WWI but it turned into a much better product because the vision was there.

    "When prone is your meta, you got a problem" is the best comment here.
    With BattleFront II and BFV there was a push to "listen to the community". Along with SJW aspects, terrible marketing, adding in BR for no needed reason, Its created a mess.

    Build it and they will come. There's a reason GOW won all top 3 GOTY awards. And FWIW, they did this with BF1...no one was amped about WWI but it turned into a much better product because the vision was there.

    "When prone is your meta, you got a problem" is the best comment here.

    Studios should engage and discuss things with the community. The funny thing with BFV’s development process is that Dice weren’t sufficiently discerning at first but now they’re just not listening and look at what’s happening

    Community : could you please add anti-hack software
    Dice :
    Community : could you please import BFI’s MMG meta and auto balancing??
    Dice :
    Community : could you please add more cover and verticality to the maps???
    Dice :
    Community : Dice could we please talk about a few things?
    Dice :

    clearly I'm not part of the community. none of those things are a priority to me at all. also some of these I never even heard anyone talk about. like what the actual.... is a bf1 mmg meta? there are no mmgs in bf1. what is this supposed to mean?
    more verticality on maps? not once have I heard anyone say this.

    I think this comment clearly shows the actual problem. lots of people think they speak on behalf of the community and that dice is just not listening. I rather think the community is super split up into many different groups that have completely different ideas of what battlefield should be all about. hence dice doesn't just not listen... they listened too much. they tried to please everyone and now ended up pleasing noone due to all the compromises they had to make.

    Verticality’s part of the call for more cover. There’s a limit to how many random bits of cover you can have a times and another way to reduce the number of places with extensive open ground is to have more verticality. It’s only become a thing on the forums fairly recently tho I’ve been asking for it since December

    In BF1 MMGs could be used in the same way as LMGs just with more recoil

    Well tbh an issue we have is that a lot of people will ask for various things they want but won’t be able to suggest any specific ways of making it happen.

    E.g.
    we want more vehicle focused maps!
    What like panzerstorm?
    No but kinda. Panzerstorm’s big but boring.
    So what would you like?
    Like what we had in BF4
    Yeh BF4 was great but what specifically?
    Um uh. Just make it more like BF4’s!
    How exactly?
    Just make it like Bf4’s! REEEEEE!!!

    The suggestions above are specific ways of making things better
  • BosundaveE6
    28 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I love bf games, I don't mind this game being a little wacky, I don't understand how I register headshots, not with a sniper rifle, only a couple of times with my sniper rifle.  but I play support and assault more and I get the headshot symbol on my screen and the guy just runs away, sometimes even with a spray of bullets hitting him.  I don't like to ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ because I admit that I am a terrible player, I only squad up with one friend that is close to my age group, we do this so we aren't dragging a full squad down with our poor play.  someone was complaining about 30 snipers a game, I find that hard to believe, it might look that way because just like you they respawn,  a final not I do wish dice or ea would do something about the blatant cheating, its terrible and when we call them on it they just laugh at us.
  • The_BERG_366
    2780 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    The_BERG_366 said:


    Billydoc1 wrote: »
    Things that are killing BF

    1.DICE who listen all CoD players,snipers

    2.DICE who listen players who love hardcore mode

    3.DICE who don't use the stable & good foundation & mechanics of previous titles & wish to rebuild everything from the start causing new bugs & issues

    4.DICE who make BF games more complicated with too many animations & mechanics.The game can be more simple.

    5.Results of the above>

    Too fast TTK/TTD with a bad netcode making gameplay very bad & no fun at all....spawn & die & repeat is not fun...not being able to react when you see an enemy is bad for the game.

    Bipoded mg users & snipers all over the place ruin the gameplay experience for those who PTFO.

    Sniper friendly mechanics>>> every big map has almost 30 snipers....it's so bad for both teams

    Attrition ruined aggresive & objective gameplay.Very bad choice for the BF franchise.

    & finally spotting needs to come back at least for an individual player & not for all ...making the minimap full of red dots lol

    ps: i love BF...i want BF to be successful...we love BF. The only FPS for me which i think is by far the BEST franchise.Keep it alive folks.DICE good luck & use properly all the feedback.



    how does attrition ruin objective gameplay when the crates are primarily on objectives. if you actually play on the objectives attrition will nerver be an Isse for you. in fact I have less problems with running out of amo in this game then any other bf gane before.
    Lack of health regen keeps you out of the battle quite a bit as you track down teammates or backtrack to a safe health station, or you ignore the need for health and die more often making it so you can't help your team as often. Attrition definitely hurts objective play.

    it definitelty does not in general. again if you stay close to objectives there are always crates arround pretty close to you. of course there are situations where it can take you out of the fight but these aren't the only situations impacted by attrition. if you want to be effective at killing its in your best interest to stay close to those crates and hence close to the objective. this effect seems to have a ways grater impact then the one u mention. yeah maybe you don't go attack an objective but instead you go back to another one and maybe are able to defend that one when it gets attacked. attrition keeps people moving which is a good thing. I rather see people go back to pick up some health than camp behind a rock to wait for their health regen. I see a lot less people randomly off objective than in any other bf game before. of course players take advantage of the bad visibility and camp like no tomorrow but they still are on or close to objectives for the most part. claiming that attrition has a purley negative impact on objective play is very narrow minded.
  • The_BERG_366
    2780 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    The_BERG_366 said:


    y_j_es_i wrote: »


    chuckandcotton wrote: »
    With BattleFront II and BFV there was a push to "listen to the community". Along with SJW aspects, terrible marketing, adding in BR for no needed reason, Its created a mess.



    Build it and they will come. There's a reason GOW won all top 3 GOTY awards. And FWIW, they did this with BF1...no one was amped about WWI but it turned into a much better product because the vision was there.



    "When prone is your meta, you got a problem" is the best comment here.



    chuckandcotton wrote: »
    With BattleFront II and BFV there was a push to "listen to the community". Along with SJW aspects, terrible marketing, adding in BR for no needed reason, Its created a mess.



    Build it and they will come. There's a reason GOW won all top 3 GOTY awards. And FWIW, they did this with BF1...no one was amped about WWI but it turned into a much better product because the vision was there.



    "When prone is your meta, you got a problem" is the best comment here.



    Studios should engage and discuss things with the community. The funny thing with BFV’s development process is that Dice weren’t sufficiently discerning at first but now they’re just not listening and look at what’s happening



    Community : could you please add anti-hack software

    Dice :

    Community : could you please import BFI’s MMG meta and auto balancing??

    Dice :

    Community : could you please add more cover and verticality to the maps???

    Dice :

    Community : Dice could we please talk about a few things?

    Dice :



    clearly I'm not part of the community. none of those things are a priority to me at all. also some of these I never even heard anyone talk about. like what the actual.... is a bf1 mmg meta? there are no mmgs in bf1. what is this supposed to mean?

    more verticality on maps? not once have I heard anyone say this.



    I think this comment clearly shows the actual problem. lots of people think they speak on behalf of the community and that dice is just not listening. I rather think the community is super split up into many different groups that have completely different ideas of what battlefield should be all about. hence dice doesn't just not listen... they listened too much. they tried to please everyone and now ended up pleasing noone due to all the compromises they had to make.

    Parabellum MG, IMG 08/18, M1917 MG, probably missing a few but they where all in BF1. 

    those weren't classified as mmgs though. they were lmgs like all other guns for the support class. and even if those were mmgs I still don't understand what the bf1 mmg meta would be.
  • mf_shro0m
    2348 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    xKusagamix wrote: »
    Billydoc1 wrote: »
    Things that are killing BF
    1.DICE who listen all CoD players,snipers
    2.DICE who listen players who love hardcore mode
    3.DICE who don't use the stable & good foundation & mechanics of previous titles & wish to rebuild everything from the start causing new bugs & issues
    4.DICE who make BF games more complicated with too many animations & mechanics.The game can be more simple.
    5.Results of the above>
    Too fast TTK/TTD with a bad netcode making gameplay very bad & no fun at all....spawn & die & repeat is not fun...not being able to react when you see an enemy is bad for the game.
    Bipoded mg users & snipers all over the place ruin the gameplay experience for those who PTFO.
    Sniper friendly mechanics>>> every big map has almost 30 snipers....it's so bad for both teams
    Attrition ruined aggresive & objective gameplay.Very bad choice for the BF franchise.
    & finally spotting needs to come back at least for an individual player & not for all ...making the minimap full of red dots lol
    ps: i love BF...i want BF to be successful...we love BF. The only FPS for me which i think is by far the BEST franchise.Keep it alive folks.DICE good luck & use properly all the feedback.
    What? Sniper friendly? Are we playing the same game?
    Because Recon in BFV is by far the worst ever in Battlefield history with ridiculous scope glint with the 3X scope while Assault do not. Slower overall speed and does less damage at torso hit without 1HK ability. Slower bullet velocity, higher bullet drop and drag, even the M95 with the straight pull bolt doesn't even let you scoping while rechamber. They're totally wrecked at close range and being mocked by Assault's SARs at medium to long range.

    Clueless players like him are why Dice don’t listen to players anymore
  • BFB-LeCharybdis
    857 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Billydoc1 wrote: »
    Things that are killing BF
    1.DICE who listen all CoD players,snipers
    2.DICE who listen players who love hardcore mode
    3.DICE who don't use the stable & good foundation & mechanics of previous titles & wish to rebuild everything from the start causing new bugs & issues
    4.DICE who make BF games more complicated with too many animations & mechanics.The game can be more simple.
    5.Results of the above>
    Too fast TTK/TTD with a bad netcode making gameplay very bad & no fun at all....spawn & die & repeat is not fun...not being able to react when you see an enemy is bad for the game.
    Bipoded mg users & snipers all over the place ruin the gameplay experience for those who PTFO.
    Sniper friendly mechanics>>> every big map has almost 30 snipers....it's so bad for both teams
    Attrition ruined aggresive & objective gameplay.Very bad choice for the BF franchise.
    & finally spotting needs to come back at least for an individual player & not for all ...making the minimap full of red dots lol
    ps: i love BF...i want BF to be successful...we love BF. The only FPS for me which i think is by far the BEST franchise.Keep it alive folks.DICE good luck & use properly all the feedback.
    What? Sniper friendly? Are we playing the same game?
    Because Recon in BFV is by far the worst ever in Battlefield history with ridiculous scope glint with the 3X scope while Assault do not. Slower overall speed and does less damage at torso hit without 1HK ability. Slower bullet velocity, higher bullet drop and drag, even the M95 with the straight pull bolt doesn't even let you scoping while rechamber. They're totally wrecked at close range and being mocked by Assault's SARs at medium to long range.
    I don't think he's saying that Snipers are OP. More that there's just too many people getting their arses kicked and reverting to Sniper to hide at the back and be generally useless. Playing Recon takes skill, being a Sniper does not.

    Skilled Recon are worth their weight in gold at the moment, unfortunately they seem to make up maybe 2% of the current Sniper population. If you end up with a sniper heavy team you're automatically at a disadvantage.

    Other games put a cap on how many Snipers are allowed on a team, I actually think that would be a good idea in terms of  V's gameplay.

    There's an argument that anyone should be allowed to play the game the way they like. But Dice made this game with extra emphasis on teamwork and 'tactical' gameplay, it's not BF1 where you could still carry and make a good fight of it even on a weak team. 
    V's design demands teamwork to succeed, hence the need for everyone to play their part.
  • mf_shro0m
    2348 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    The_BERG_366 said:


    y_j_es_i wrote: »


    chuckandcotton wrote: »
    With BattleFront II and BFV there was a push to "listen to the community". Along with SJW aspects, terrible marketing, adding in BR for no needed reason, Its created a mess.



    Build it and they will come. There's a reason GOW won all top 3 GOTY awards. And FWIW, they did this with BF1...no one was amped about WWI but it turned into a much better product because the vision was there.



    "When prone is your meta, you got a problem" is the best comment here.



    chuckandcotton wrote: »
    With BattleFront II and BFV there was a push to "listen to the community". Along with SJW aspects, terrible marketing, adding in BR for no needed reason, Its created a mess.



    Build it and they will come. There's a reason GOW won all top 3 GOTY awards. And FWIW, they did this with BF1...no one was amped about WWI but it turned into a much better product because the vision was there.



    "When prone is your meta, you got a problem" is the best comment here.



    Studios should engage and discuss things with the community. The funny thing with BFV’s development process is that Dice weren’t sufficiently discerning at first but now they’re just not listening and look at what’s happening



    Community : could you please add anti-hack software

    Dice :

    Community : could you please import BFI’s MMG meta and auto balancing??

    Dice :

    Community : could you please add more cover and verticality to the maps???

    Dice :

    Community : Dice could we please talk about a few things?

    Dice :



    clearly I'm not part of the community. none of those things are a priority to me at all. also some of these I never even heard anyone talk about. like what the actual.... is a bf1 mmg meta? there are no mmgs in bf1. what is this supposed to mean?

    more verticality on maps? not once have I heard anyone say this.



    I think this comment clearly shows the actual problem. lots of people think they speak on behalf of the community and that dice is just not listening. I rather think the community is super split up into many different groups that have completely different ideas of what battlefield should be all about. hence dice doesn't just not listen... they listened too much. they tried to please everyone and now ended up pleasing noone due to all the compromises they had to make.

    Parabellum MG, IMG 08/18, M1917 MG, probably missing a few but they where all in BF1. 

    those weren't classified as mmgs though. they were lmgs like all other guns for the support class. and even if those were mmgs I still don't understand what the bf1 mmg meta would be.

    It would be that MMGs are more powerful LMGs with more recoil. They’re all ADSable and are even grouped together under the label ‘LMG’ because their mechanics are identical
  • DRUNKMONKEY9821
    98 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Coming from a 4 and 1 player lol
  • StingX71
    828 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Billydoc1 wrote: »
    Things that are killing BF
    1.DICE who listen all CoD players,snipers
    2.DICE who listen players who love hardcore mode
    3.DICE who don't use the stable & good foundation & mechanics of previous titles & wish to rebuild everything from the start causing new bugs & issues
    4.DICE who make BF games more complicated with too many animations & mechanics.The game can be more simple.
    5.Results of the above>
    Too fast TTK/TTD with a bad netcode making gameplay very bad & no fun at all....spawn & die & repeat is not fun...not being able to react when you see an enemy is bad for the game.
    Bipoded mg users & snipers all over the place ruin the gameplay experience for those who PTFO.
    Sniper friendly mechanics>>> every big map has almost 30 snipers....it's so bad for both teams
    Attrition ruined aggresive & objective gameplay.Very bad choice for the BF franchise.
    & finally spotting needs to come back at least for an individual player & not for all ...making the minimap full of red dots lol
    ps: i love BF...i want BF to be successful...we love BF. The only FPS for me which i think is by far the BEST franchise.Keep it alive folks.DICE good luck & use properly all the feedback.
    What? Sniper friendly? Are we playing the same game?
    Because Recon in BFV is by far the worst ever in Battlefield history with ridiculous scope glint with the 3X scope while Assault do not. Slower overall speed and does less damage at torso hit without 1HK ability. Slower bullet velocity, higher bullet drop and drag, even the M95 with the straight pull bolt doesn't even let you scoping while rechamber. They're totally wrecked at close range and being mocked by Assault's SARs at medium to long range.
    I don't think he's saying that Snipers are OP. More that there's just too many people getting their arses kicked and reverting to Sniper to hide at the back and be generally useless. Playing Recon takes skill, being a Sniper does not.

    Skilled Recon are worth their weight in gold at the moment, unfortunately they seem to make up maybe 2% of the current Sniper population. If you end up with a sniper heavy team you're automatically at a disadvantage.

    Other games put a cap on how many Snipers are allowed on a team, I actually think that would be a good idea in terms of  V's gameplay.

    There's an argument that anyone should be allowed to play the game the way they like. But Dice made this game with extra emphasis on teamwork and 'tactical' gameplay, it's not BF1 where you could still carry and make a good fight of it even on a weak team. 
    V's design demands teamwork to succeed, hence the need for everyone to play their part.
    You summed it up nicely. I'm guilty of saying they're OP as well, but it's really the total number on a team.  Started with BF1 imho and ruined the experience for me and many others in my old clan.  They bailed on BF and didn't buy BFV. I'd like to see them get SMG's with some really cool gadgets.  Have a few that play in my new clan,  can't deny the power of respawn and the flare. When played right, it is a good addition to a squad. 

    Use to seek out limited sniper servers on BF4, but we lost that option with BF1. 
  • The_BERG_366
    2780 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    y_j_es_i wrote: »
    y_j_es_i wrote: »
    With BattleFront II and BFV there was a push to "listen to the community". Along with SJW aspects, terrible marketing, adding in BR for no needed reason, Its created a mess.

    Build it and they will come. There's a reason GOW won all top 3 GOTY awards. And FWIW, they did this with BF1...no one was amped about WWI but it turned into a much better product because the vision was there.

    "When prone is your meta, you got a problem" is the best comment here.
    With BattleFront II and BFV there was a push to "listen to the community". Along with SJW aspects, terrible marketing, adding in BR for no needed reason, Its created a mess.

    Build it and they will come. There's a reason GOW won all top 3 GOTY awards. And FWIW, they did this with BF1...no one was amped about WWI but it turned into a much better product because the vision was there.

    "When prone is your meta, you got a problem" is the best comment here.

    Studios should engage and discuss things with the community. The funny thing with BFV’s development process is that Dice weren’t sufficiently discerning at first but now they’re just not listening and look at what’s happening

    Community : could you please add anti-hack software
    Dice :
    Community : could you please import BFI’s MMG meta and auto balancing??
    Dice :
    Community : could you please add more cover and verticality to the maps???
    Dice :
    Community : Dice could we please talk about a few things?
    Dice :

    clearly I'm not part of the community. none of those things are a priority to me at all. also some of these I never even heard anyone talk about. like what the actual.... is a bf1 mmg meta? there are no mmgs in bf1. what is this supposed to mean?
    more verticality on maps? not once have I heard anyone say this.

    I think this comment clearly shows the actual problem. lots of people think they speak on behalf of the community and that dice is just not listening. I rather think the community is super split up into many different groups that have completely different ideas of what battlefield should be all about. hence dice doesn't just not listen... they listened too much. they tried to please everyone and now ended up pleasing noone due to all the compromises they had to make.

    Verticality’s part of the call for more cover. There’s a limit to how many random bits of cover you can have a times and another way to reduce the number of places with extensive open ground is to have more verticality. It’s only become a thing on the forums fairly recently tho I’ve been asking for it since December

    In BF1 MMGs could be used in the same way as LMGs just with more recoil

    Well tbh an issue we have is that a lot of people will ask for various things they want but won’t be able to suggest any specific ways of making it happen.

    E.g.
    we want more vehicle focused maps!
    What like panzerstorm?
    No but kinda. Panzerstorm’s big but boring.
    So what would you like?
    Like what we had in BF4
    Yeh BF4 was great but what specifically?
    Um uh. Just make it more like BF4’s!
    How exactly?
    Just make it like Bf4’s! REEEEEE!!!

    The suggestions above are specific ways of making things better

    what are you talking about? there were no MMGS in bf1 still. you speak about this purely fictional weapon class that supposedly had more recoil than the other lmgs while also being more power full (I assumed that based on your second comment).
    based on the name "mmg" the mmgs of bf1 would probabaly be the mg15, mg14, lmg08/18 and m1917. but those guns aren't at all characterised by the attributes you mention (more powerfull but more recoil). the most powerfull lmg in bf1 was the Burton, which isn't on this list. furtherly the mg15 and especially the m1917 are low recoil guns with low rof.
    so if you want to give a name to this suggestion (mmg being always able to ads but have much greater recoil) then you should for sure not chose "bf1 mmg meta". Firstly in bf1 there were no guns called mmgs and the ones that are most fitting to the name don't fit your description at all....
  • Masqerader
    641 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 2019
    Dice actually thinks this game has competitive e-sports chance... it doesn't. no bf game ever has
  • The_BERG_366
    2780 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Masqerader wrote: »
    Dice actually thinks this game has competitive e-sports chance... it doesn't. no bf game ever has

    who are you replying to? this doesn't make any sense just like that
  • Choongangchong
    70 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I agree with point Op makes.
    However he is also just describing human nature. Some people just needs to show some attitude to feel good about themselves. Often it results in trying to push others down. The funny thing is that these people are rarely the players you want to learn from. The last 15 years I have been playing the BF franchise with some of my countries best players and some have been at the top tier in Europe and even the world. Not one of them have ever talked or posted with this kind of attitude. They just play the game, adapt to every change and pwn everyone without making a big fuzz about it. Yes, there is a few of those who just have a big ego but most of the times the "elitists" are wannabes who just want to top a leader board. And if you change how they grind their way to the top they start with the elitist attitude because they have no great arguments other wise and they are, unlike the true skilled layers, able to adapt to the new situation to keep their place on the leader board.
    I see many are mentioning COD and other shooters but I think this is more a MMO mentality thing where people are used to grind to achieve something. And in grinding its all about finding the most efficient way to reach your goal and its always and outrage if that mechanism is changed. Instead of grinding for better gear to show of you instead are grinding for best KD, or most kills in bomber, most revives etc. 
    And as usually these people think that as long as you have a high enough KD your opinions matter more than others. I have seen some of these forum elitist in game only trying to boost their KD. Camping with mg/sniper far from danger. Only flying when there are no good pilot on the opposite team. Always leave the server if they are not on a team that is steam rolling the other team etc. 

    Dice actually thinks this game has competitive e-sports chance... it doesn't. no bf game ever has
    You apparently wasnt around when bf42, bf vietnam and bf2 was popular. The e-sports in those game was loud and kicking ; )



    And regarding snipers.... lol
    The only thing I wish about recon is that it wasnt available to new players before they were at least rank 4 on the other 3 classes.
    Reason is that sniping seem to be the go to class for new players because they think they will die less, but the thing is they do not know the game good enough to be efficient as a recon. They just end up as the bush wookies we all "hate" with 4-3 in KD and 1500 score and becomes one of the bigger reasons recons are generally hated. It doesnt help that its normal to have over 40% recon players on each team in many game modes when most of them fall in the bush wooki category. 
    Now if you see players who have played for a while and that knows the game well play a recon, then you will welcome them with open arms. Always spot flares at the right time, spawn beacons put in good positions and utilizing the stopping power of the sniper rifles in a great way can make recon the one of the stronger classes in this game. But that means you have to stop being a bush wookie, you need to know the strengths and weaknesses of the other classes and you need to know each map very well. A new player will naturally not have this knowledge and hence my wish to have this class unlock when players have played the other classes for a while. 

    tldr; im just waiting for all the flack from "elitists" and recons. I promise I wont read it
  • mf_shro0m
    2348 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    y_j_es_i wrote: »
    y_j_es_i wrote: »
    With BattleFront II and BFV there was a push to "listen to the community". Along with SJW aspects, terrible marketing, adding in BR for no needed reason, Its created a mess.

    Build it and they will come. There's a reason GOW won all top 3 GOTY awards. And FWIW, they did this with BF1...no one was amped about WWI but it turned into a much better product because the vision was there.

    "When prone is your meta, you got a problem" is the best comment here.
    With BattleFront II and BFV there was a push to "listen to the community". Along with SJW aspects, terrible marketing, adding in BR for no needed reason, Its created a mess.

    Build it and they will come. There's a reason GOW won all top 3 GOTY awards. And FWIW, they did this with BF1...no one was amped about WWI but it turned into a much better product because the vision was there.

    "When prone is your meta, you got a problem" is the best comment here.

    Studios should engage and discuss things with the community. The funny thing with BFV’s development process is that Dice weren’t sufficiently discerning at first but now they’re just not listening and look at what’s happening

    Community : could you please add anti-hack software
    Dice :
    Community : could you please import BFI’s MMG meta and auto balancing??
    Dice :
    Community : could you please add more cover and verticality to the maps???
    Dice :
    Community : Dice could we please talk about a few things?
    Dice :

    clearly I'm not part of the community. none of those things are a priority to me at all. also some of these I never even heard anyone talk about. like what the actual.... is a bf1 mmg meta? there are no mmgs in bf1. what is this supposed to mean?
    more verticality on maps? not once have I heard anyone say this.

    I think this comment clearly shows the actual problem. lots of people think they speak on behalf of the community and that dice is just not listening. I rather think the community is super split up into many different groups that have completely different ideas of what battlefield should be all about. hence dice doesn't just not listen... they listened too much. they tried to please everyone and now ended up pleasing noone due to all the compromises they had to make.

    Verticality’s part of the call for more cover. There’s a limit to how many random bits of cover you can have a times and another way to reduce the number of places with extensive open ground is to have more verticality. It’s only become a thing on the forums fairly recently tho I’ve been asking for it since December

    In BF1 MMGs could be used in the same way as LMGs just with more recoil

    Well tbh an issue we have is that a lot of people will ask for various things they want but won’t be able to suggest any specific ways of making it happen.

    E.g.
    we want more vehicle focused maps!
    What like panzerstorm?
    No but kinda. Panzerstorm’s big but boring.
    So what would you like?
    Like what we had in BF4
    Yeh BF4 was great but what specifically?
    Um uh. Just make it more like BF4’s!
    How exactly?
    Just make it like Bf4’s! REEEEEE!!!

    The suggestions above are specific ways of making things better

    what are you talking about? there were no MMGS in bf1 still. you speak about this purely fictional weapon class that supposedly had more recoil than the other lmgs while also being more power full (I assumed that based on your second comment).
    based on the name "mmg" the mmgs of bf1 would probabaly be the mg15, mg14, lmg08/18 and m1917. but those guns aren't at all characterised by the attributes you mention (more powerfull but more recoil). the most powerfull lmg in bf1 was the Burton, which isn't on this list. furtherly the mg15 and especially the m1917 are low recoil guns with low rof.
    so if you want to give a name to this suggestion (mmg being always able to ads but have much greater recoil) then you should for sure not chose "bf1 mmg meta". Firstly in bf1 there were no guns called mmgs and the ones that are most fitting to the name don't fit your description at all....

    Let me summarise it this way. In BFI MMGs are used like LMGs

    Done. Simple

    I can’t believe you’re actually making such a big deal out of this
Sign In or Register to comment.