Responding to your concerns - Update 5.2

Comments

  • ColesFlexili
    179 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    The TTK, class- and teambalance, anti-cheat, rts, assignments, maps and servers clearly show that noone at DICE plays battlefield. 
    I wonder what they would say if someone messed up something they likeed for no justifiable reason...
    FIFA: "we decidet to replace the ball with a cube since new players experience problems in archieving goals."
  • SystemicProgress
    106 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    crusam7 said:
    You're not 100% honest you did not talk about the real cause of  the insta-death in bfv, the  NETCODE. i personnaly left bfv becouse his bad netcode, taking bullets after getting cover is too frustrating for me, unfair at all, 90% of my deaths are like this or insta death, i sent you many videos on twitter and reddit but no one answered, we are a lot to ask for a good netcode at least as it was on bf1, mostly on consoles becouse we have only a poor 30hz servers, continue to ignore us... for me no netcode improvement no bfv. i like the game i never complained about gung or others things but with this current netcode there is no competitive play.  Bellow some example :



    Just as a quick tip, as I had these issues in the past, check your network adapter settings.These can be optimized for better hit-reg / latency performance. For me, the net-code is way better from what it used to be.
  • SystemicProgress
    106 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    CrashCA said:
    Thanks for the communication, keep it up, please

    However, as others have stated, the two issues most in need of action:
    Functional balancer &
    Functional anti-cheat
    remain unaddressed.

    Absolutely true. A competitive fair play should be the basis for this game to be a success.      

    Otherwise,with addition of private servers in this patch, I am hoping to see these serve well as a mitigation towards an AC system. Keep this talk going. 


  • zetamen21
    27 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited December 2019
    Novice players anyway will be disappointed your terrible team balance by lose again and again and again. You don't fix exists problems with balance, netcode and anit-cheat but create new possible downgrade.

    Do you want new players like with Firestorm case? Good luck)
  • VincentNZ
    3885 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    First  THANKS to OP for the incredibly detailed post.  I have not played in months and I'm very excited to jump in and see how it plays.

    Secondly, I remain quite amazed  that people remain opposed to making the game more accessible to ALL players. and continue to ignore the fact that this game has been an utter disaster from a sales point of view.   This means there are things that are fundamentally wrong with the game. It also means that something must be done.  It is clear by the post that they have spent an excessive amount of time  and effort to make this a better game FOR EVERYBODY which includes past, present  AND future players.  Also, "All players" means possibly and likely thousands that do not come here. Furthermore, after implementing this change it is indeed likely they will do another free weekend or two to draw players in if for no other reason than to get more data and do another assessment. 
    It doesn't. It caters solely to players with one specific skillset: Mouse control via aiming and tracking. In a game with relatively low TTK, movement, reaction time, flanking and general cognitive skills play a bigger role than in a game with high TTK.
    It stands to reason. Imagine a regular occurence. You flank around a group of enemies at A Rotterdam, say three dudes at 15, 25 and 40m. So close to medium range engagements. You have an SMG and open fire. You will kill the first dude, before he can really react or with minimal damage and engage the second dude just when he aims at you. That is two kills in a small timeframe with the option for a third one either after a reload or with the sidearm. Good payout.
    With 5.2 you need +2 hits for each of those engagements, meaning 6-10 bullets extra for each enemy. Additionally each enemy can also inflict more damage to you, since reaction time is not as much a factor, diminishing the effectiveness of your flanking skill. So you simply can not kill more than 1-2 dudes and are worse off in every engagement.
    .
    The gunplay might not be optimal for everyone, but comparing it to other reasons this game has sold poorly or has a small playerbase is ridiculous. First of all, nobody knows the gunplay before, secondly this is a feature generally received well, and at the very worst it keeps as many people playing, as players leave because of it. The gunplay pulls people in at least as much as it pushes people out.
    Nobody is drawn to a game that releases delayed, needs 8 months to be feature complete (we are still missing vehicle customization) and lacks any community building features to keep people playing. No player wants to play eight weeks of live service without gameplay-related content, or a game where patches introduce as many bugs as they fix, or a game that keeps stuttering on any rig.
    Also who is going to play a game consistently that is one year old? The game has a 4€ entry barrier for months now, and the player numbers are mediocre still. Who is going to pick it up and keep playing it? Who is left? And do they actually want/need players playing or just to spend money on the shop, as the players they have now will likely not spend any more money on this game. Is that really worth to alienate the people that still play and wanted to continue playing? Or is all the negative feedback here really incentivizing people to play?
  • DingoKillr
    4348 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    VincentNZ wrote: »
    (Quote)

    It doesn't. It caters solely to players with one specific skillset: Mouse control via aiming and tracking. In a game with relatively low TTK, movement, reaction time, flanking and general cognitive skills play a bigger role than in a game with high TTK.
    It stands to reason. Imagine a regular occurence. You flank around a group of enemies at A Rotterdam, say three dudes at 15, 25 and 40m. So close to medium range engagements. You have an SMG and open fire. You will kill the first dude, before he can really react or with minimal damage and engage the second dude just when he aims at you. That is two kills in a small timeframe with the option for a third one either after a reload or with the sidearm. Good payout.With 5.2 you need +2 hits for each of those engagements, meaning 6-10 bullets extra for each enemy. Additionally each enemy can also inflict more damage to you, since reaction time is not as much a factor, diminishing the effectiveness of your flanking skill. So you simply can not kill more than 1-2 dudes and are worse off in every engagement..The gunplay might not be optimal for everyone, but comparing it to other reasons this game has sold poorly or has a small playerbase is ridiculous. First of all, nobody knows the gunplay before, secondly this is a feature generally received well, and at the very worst it keeps as many people playing, as players leave because of it. The gunplay pulls people in at least as much as it pushes people out.Nobody is drawn to a game that releases delayed, needs 8 months to be feature complete (we are still missing vehicle customization) and lacks any community building features to keep people playing. No player wants to play eight weeks of live service without gameplay-related content, or a game where patches introduce as many bugs as they fix, or a game that keeps stuttering on any rig.Also who is going to play a game consistently that is one year old? The game has a 4€ entry barrier for months now, and the player numbers are mediocre still. Who is going to pick it up and keep playing it? Who is left? And do they actually want/need players playing or just to spend money on the shop, as the players they have now will likely not spend any more money on this game. Is that really worth to alienate the people that still play and wanted to continue playing? Or is all the negative feedback here really incentivizing people to play?

    Who is going to play a game after complete failure for months since launch until it was changed a year later. Hmm, cough BF4.
  • XRothbardX
    50 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited December 2019
    crusam7 said:
    You're not 100% honest you did not talk about the real cause of  the insta-death in bfv, the  NETCODE. i personnaly left bfv becouse his bad netcode, taking bullets after getting cover is too frustrating for me, unfair at all, 90% of my deaths are like this or insta death, i sent you many videos on twitter and reddit but no one answered, we are a lot to ask for a good netcode at least as it was on bf1, mostly on consoles becouse we have only a poor 30hz servers, continue to ignore us... for me no netcode improvement no bfv. i like the game i never complained about gung or others things but with this current netcode there is no competitive play.  Bellow some example :



    this is what i have been saying, we dont have an honest look at ttk in this game because of the necode issues. until they take a look at that we cant really say what guns need to be nerfed or buffed so, this whole change is just glossing over another issue. i suspect we will still have deaths around corners, behind cover, and one framers etc. so DICE please fix your net code before you just make a sweeping change that may just ruin the gun play and alienate your base audience. 
  • MK149
    23 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Course air top speed 435mph.
    Zero top speed 325mph in a dive.
    But yet the game says they are even... Amazing.
  • OskooI_007
    1308 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited December 2019
    Corsair's also had self-sealing fuel tanks wrapped in rubber. If a bullet passed though the fuel tank, the rubber would expand and plug the leak.
  • DingoKillr
    4348 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    crusam7 said:
    You're not 100% honest you did not talk about the real cause of  the insta-death in bfv, the  NETCODE. i personnaly left bfv becouse his bad netcode, taking bullets after getting cover is too frustrating for me, unfair at all, 90% of my deaths are like this or insta death, i sent you many videos on twitter and reddit but no one answered, we are a lot to ask for a good netcode at least as it was on bf1, mostly on consoles becouse we have only a poor 30hz servers, continue to ignore us... for me no netcode improvement no bfv. i like the game i never complained about gung or others things but with this current netcode there is no competitive play.  Bellow some example :

    this is what i have been saying, we dont have an honest look at ttk in this game because of the necode issues. until they take a look at that we cant really say what guns need to be nerfed or buffed so, this whole change is just glossing over another issue. i suspect we will still have deaths around corners, behind cover, and one framers etc. so DICE please fix your net code before you just make a sweeping change that may just ruin the gun play and alienate your base audience. 
    Guess you missed the past patches where DICE have made changes to what some call netcode. 
  • DingoKillr
    4348 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    VincentNZ wrote: »
    (Quote)

    It doesn't. It caters solely to players with one specific skillset: Mouse control via aiming and tracking. In a game with relatively low TTK, movement, reaction time, flanking and general cognitive skills play a bigger role than in a game with high TTK.
    It stands to reason. Imagine a regular occurence. You flank around a group of enemies at A Rotterdam, say three dudes at 15, 25 and 40m. So close to medium range engagements. You have an SMG and open fire. You will kill the first dude, before he can really react or with minimal damage and engage the second dude just when he aims at you. That is two kills in a small timeframe with the option for a third one either after a reload or with the sidearm. Good payout.With 5.2 you need +2 hits for each of those engagements, meaning 6-10 bullets extra for each enemy. Additionally each enemy can also inflict more damage to you, since reaction time is not as much a factor, diminishing the effectiveness of your flanking skill. So you simply can not kill more than 1-2 dudes and are worse off in every engagement..The gunplay might not be optimal for everyone, but comparing it to other reasons this game has sold poorly or has a small playerbase is ridiculous. First of all, nobody knows the gunplay before, secondly this is a feature generally received well, and at the very worst it keeps as many people playing, as players leave because of it. The gunplay pulls people in at least as much as it pushes people out.Nobody is drawn to a game that releases delayed, needs 8 months to be feature complete (we are still missing vehicle customization) and lacks any community building features to keep people playing. No player wants to play eight weeks of live service without gameplay-related content, or a game where patches introduce as many bugs as they fix, or a game that keeps stuttering on any rig.Also who is going to play a game consistently that is one year old? The game has a 4€ entry barrier for months now, and the player numbers are mediocre still. Who is going to pick it up and keep playing it? Who is left? And do they actually want/need players playing or just to spend money on the shop, as the players they have now will likely not spend any more money on this game. Is that really worth to alienate the people that still play and wanted to continue playing? Or is all the negative feedback here really incentivizing people to play?

    Who is going to play a game after complete failure for months since launch until it was changed a year later. Hmm, cough BF4.
    BF4 was a solid game from a game play standpoint and that's why people stuck around and lots of people still play it to this day. BF4 also had rather large technical issues such as triggering the levolution on Shanghai crashing the server. Players seem to have far more patience waiting on fixes for technical issues in a fun game as opposed to enduring unenjoyable gameplay hoping it'll get better in the future.
    Are yes solid game play. Let's not forget Battlenonsense nice video about dying around corners back then too. 
    But your ignoreing the drop in players which happens in every game however there was a increase in players after DICE had made changes to weapons.  Which was the point I was making that could happen to BFV too.
  • BURGERKRIEG
    1065 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    This addresses the points made by lots of people on the forum. To me it shows that their concerns are being taken seriously. 

    It also shows that DICE are making changes because they need to, in direct response to the written feedback and player behaviour data collected from the game.


  • GRAW2ROBZ
    2634 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
  • OskooI_007
    1308 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    GRAW2ROBZ wrote: »

    Awesome! I hope it plays like a completely different game.
  • Celsi_GER
    861 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited December 2019
    Short version of a lot of corporate blabla:
    You make the game easier to play for new players (who will then PAY to buy the game and hopefully not return it)
    On the other side you ruin weapon behavior for existing players (who have already PAYED for the game) who struggled hard to get accustomed to their favorite weapon. Same intentions for the changes in spotting system.
    Then you issue a lot of sanctimonious blabla to give the impression that you do this only for community's sake although nobody asked for it and even after your blabla was issued a majority still is against it.
    While there is a HUGE cheater problem existing which would really deserve your attention (but does not seem to receive it).

    Do you really think you could takes us for fools?
    I won't forget this when it comes to buying... NOT buying the next BF title.
  • CrashCA
    1362 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    And still no info on RSP
    guess it is coming SOON™
  • rv112
    185 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    #NOTMYTTK!
  • Celsi_GER
    861 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    #NOTMYTTK
  • SuperiorByGender
    3239 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Can you explain why everything you've mentioned regarding recoil is missing from the patch notes?
Sign In or Register to comment.