CoD Modern Warfare Beta compared to BF V
120 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
forget https://forums.battlefield.com/en-us/discussion/194210/bfv-compare-too-cod-mw#latest
want a simple answer, while playing CoD Beta is it better than BF V in current state?
want a simple answer, while playing CoD Beta is it better than BF V in current state?
0
- 75 Battlefield V - Announcements
- 24.3K Battlefield V - General Discussion
- 809 Battlefield V - Firestorm Discussion
- 4.3K Battlefield V - PC Community
- 1.7K Battlefield V - PlayStation Community
- 1.4K Battlefield V - Xbox Community
- 1.2K Battlefield V - Platoon Recruitment
- 35 Battlefield V - Bugs & Issues
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
It feels so good my bullets register and I can see and hear enemies.
Also being quick matched with players with around the same ping is just perfect.
Most games are also very close because of skill based matchmaking and the teams have the same number of players when the game starts.
So it basically is a lot less frustrating.
There is your answer.
The reason:
Dice totally has the wrong priorities, all skilled devs left the company or are busy with a different game and EA/Dice put this game at lowest costs as possible after the horrible reveal trailer and poor sales.
I would hang my head in shame if I was working for dice!
Only reviews give insights to that, and that’s around launch.
Reviews are meaningless.
Remember battlefield 4
Broken beyond belief yet how many reviewers mentioned it?
I have to be honest:
1) The netcode is not as good as BFV. Its ok but not as good. One thing that youll find less annoying is that there is no ttk/ttd desync. Killing and dying take the same time. Respawning is so fast that you never have to sit in the redeploy screen cursing the developers for their awful netcode, you're right back in the action. Its very fluid, love this part of the game. Also, it's a beta so netcode can still be optimized further.
2) The graphics are good. Not as good as BFV. But they don't have to be. Dice wants a game that is pretty to look at and looks good for trailers but is completely unplayable. Infinity Ward wants a game that is fluid and engaging.
Its worth playing. Especially if you think BFV is a piece of junk.
Game plays smooth, pings and matchmaking seem to work very smooth, and the guns feel really solid. Like you have a real weapon in your hands - the reverb from the weapons is amazing!! And the TTK/TTD is really not that bad. And I hate twitchy fast TTD. As BaronvonGoon stated, the fast TTK/TTD is ok because you're right back in the action. No 9-10 second respawns like in BF. The last few installments of CoD had insanely fast TTD so I didn't even bother with them. MW seems a little bit more tempered.
And I actually feel myself being MORE tactical in MW because there are more buildings, doorways and corners to cover. It's not completely run and gun. In fact if you run and gun you may be on the bad side of things often.
In BFV I feel myself running more because the maps are so big and wide open that you have to move faster to get from point A to point B. Even when using trenches, etc. I just feel like a sitting duck in BF5 way too often.
Looking forward to the larger gamemodes this weekend.
I hope Dice learns from this. It goes to show that competition is a good thing!
Only thing that could use some work is the spawning, but the devs already mentioned that as point of attention (and they fixed all other complaints/issues within hours or days , so I have faith that will be fixed too ...)
And the spawning is not close to being as bad as in BF V.
I have ALL assignmnets done or removed, OOR players should not be able to join the same server (use ping matching like CoD and/or ping limits) and I play on console (but this game is not optimized for console like BF1 is).
16/32 player modes play just as bad since the removal of UK servers.
It is the game (and servers), nothing more and nothing less.
TBH visually, BFV looks like an actual beta to CODMW beta.
So far so good, probably my next game. Will see.
You could have meatgrinder like play, if you repsawn in one second.
Another thing i personally noticed, is relatively no prone campers, and that's the reason. BF has to end the bleed out altogether by pressing a button, and to go to a one or two second respawn. That will eliminate the prone campers, the bipod excuses, sniper spam, and much of the frustration in their game. The fact is, at least for me, MW is just a much more fun game to play, and this coming from a person who really isn't into COD much at all.
Also. going to @NL Bartman, i think he's exactly correct, a 32 player conquest on BFV, i absilutely think would eliminate many of the netcode ttk issues on this game.In short, if BF has been trying to become COD, which they have, it will never work unless they have the quick respawn COD has.
Last years black ops 4 was praised by tons of people before launch and during beta. Many people said it had potential to be the best cod to date.
Now it's practically hated by everyone in the cod community and seen as one of the worst games in the franchise.
I'm not saying mw is going to be the same. But don't judge a book by it's cover. Especially not when they bring back stopping power.
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/store/most-played/games/xbox
So, MW is a hurricane forthcoming, and unless DICE does something very quickly in regards to it's awful gameplay, MW may end what's left of this game, Pacific or not.
Jesus, BFV is really that bad, so people see this crap as the alternative?