Weekly Debrief

CoD Modern Warfare Beta compared to BF V

«1345
SithMetal71
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?

Comments

  • misisipiRivrRat
    849 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    NLBartmaN said:
    The biggest difference: cod works (smooth)!

    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 played it last night and plan on getting some more time in this weekend. I agree 100% on the footsteps. You can hear them. Done very well.
  • ackers75
    2446 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I will put it this way.....
    I would hang my head in shame if I was working for dice!
  • TFBisquit
    1715 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Well, Lets not be all too pessimistic. Last patch had some fixes and changes that promise more improvements. A beta can be great, but the total package will have to proof if its fun overall.
    Only reviews give insights to that, and that’s around launch.
  • ackers75
    2446 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    TFBisquit wrote: »
    Well, Lets not be all too pessimistic. Last patch had some fixes and changes that promise more improvements. A beta can be great, but the total package will have to proof if its fun overall.
    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?

  • ElliotLH
    8557 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    No idea as I haven't been able to download the Xbox open beta (probably got my times wrong or something).
  • BtheReaper49
    288 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    @NLBartmaN & @BaronVonGoon both hit the nail on the head.
    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!
  • NLBartmaN
    3468 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member

    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.
    For me, the Netcode is ten times better: when on a server that matchmaked with as little as ping difference possible (the 0 ms on top of the screen while matchmaking) there is no dying in cover, all bullets that hit count, players are instantly on my screen and on the place they are, foosteps are there, etc

    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.
  • VincentNZ
    3195 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    NLBartmaN said:

    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.
    For me, the Netcode is ten times better: when on a server that matchmaked with as little as ping difference possible (the 0 ms on top of the screen while matchmaking) there is no dying in cover, all bullets that hit count, players are instantly on my screen and on the place they are, foosteps are there, etc

    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 would like to point out that both Alphas and the Beta of BFV played pretty smooth from a gameplay perspective, it was with the added mumbo-jumbo that the issues started. And many "netcode" issues can be explained by stutters caused by several layers of assignment tracking, 64p increasing the chance of out of region players impacting the server performance, and 40% of the playerbase playing on a quadcore suboptimal for this game.
    If BFV was just 32p Conquest on a good rig today with nothing else going on besides raw gameplay, we would see quite the difference.
  • NLBartmaN
    3468 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    VincentNZ said:

    I would like to point out that both Alphas and the Beta of BFV played pretty smooth from a gameplay perspective, it was with the added mumbo-jumbo that the issues started. And many "netcode" issues can be explained by stutters caused by several layers of assignment tracking, 64p increasing the chance of out of region players impacting the server performance, and 40% of the playerbase playing on a quadcore suboptimal for this game.
    If BFV was just 32p Conquest on a good rig today with nothing else going on besides raw gameplay, we would see quite the difference.
    The issues started when UK servers were removed ...

    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.
  • yamurbina
    17 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    It’s more fast paced, but it feels nice to get your bullets register properly.
    TBH visually, BFV looks like an actual beta to CODMW beta.

    So far so good, probably my next game. Will see.
  • xBCxSEALxTEAMx6
    1451 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    I find BFV boring and broken so I uninstalled. MW on the other hand is fun and worth trying. The gunplay is sooo satisfying. The maps while none stand out gameplay wise are sooo much better designed than BFV maps. BFV maps are open fields with geometry, that's all. COD maps are urban with alleyways, love that. Also, it's a beta and I haven't seen any bugs, go figure.

    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.

    Right, that's a great point. I mean it's always been my contention that you could have fast ttk with 64 players, BUT you need respawn like MW has.

    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.
  • Art3misJinx
    127 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Don't be too quick to praise the new cod.
    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.
  • xBCxSEALxTEAMx6
    1451 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Don't be too quick to praise the new cod.
    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.

    I think COD is...COD. But i hate to say it, it's just much better than this game. It's just much less frustrating to play. No prone camping (that i've seen), no bleed out and 15 second respawn. No visibility issue.  It's just fun, where as BF V is just a frustrating hardcore ttk meatgrinder mess that really does cause it's own issues in how the game is designed as compared to it's glory past.. 

    So, i personally feel the new COD will end up like...COD WW2 in the end. I think the amount of folks wanting a 'modern warfare" based game was a bit overhyped, and believe their next title in the Cold War vietnam era like BO 1 will be more successful.

    That being said though, the hype within itself will grow them the most sales they likely ever posted, more than COD WW2, and BO4, and it will impact this game tremendously.

    If i were DICE, and this may not go down well, i'd 'delay" the Pacific outside the MW release window, or that's going to be a flat dud. In addition, if i were DICE, i'd learn a bit in how to run a meatgrinder like mode (which is what they went too on many of their modes), and end the bleed out and lower the respawn times. 
  • azelenkin0306
    563 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I guess I’ve played some other beta. Is it good? Maybe, at least they’re close to BF3 level in terms of Combined Warfare.

    Jesus, BFV is really that bad, so people see this crap as the alternative?
  • ragnarok013
    3345 postsMember, Moderator, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Moderator
    I guess I’ve played some other beta. Is it good? Maybe, at least they’re close to BF3 level in terms of Combined Warfare.

    Jesus, BFV is really that bad, so people see this crap as the alternative?
    azelenkin0306 I disagree, it's nowhere near BF3 in terms of anything but flags. In terms of combined arms warfare IMO even BF5 isn't near BF3 but I prefer BF5's fleshed out class system and deeper teamplay over what I see in MW's beta.

  • THECOMMANDER66
    98 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Still Call of Doo Kie
Sign In or Register to comment.