BF1 better than BFV?

Comments

  • disposalist
    8956 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    edited May 8
    It makes no sense that a bullet flies past you and you start missing all your shots on a target that is basically in point blank range.
    But it makes sense that soldiers stand up into a hail of bullets and calmly pull off marksman shots? That they just stand up at all, never mind then pull off aimed shots?

    It makes sense that soldiers take a bullet and it has no effect on their aim whatsoever?        

    No, realism is not a good *sole* basis for design in a game, but nonsense isn't a good basis if you want something that feels visceral and immersive either.

    To have no flinch or suppression is to remove massively important and meaningful tactics from combat.

    No suppressive fire and no advantage from landing your shots first either? Talk about making no sense.
  • Ronin9572
    1310 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    I had a big comment disappear last night and it hasn't come back *sigh*

    Basically, some players want their big KDs to totally reflect their established twitch and aim and muscle memory and anything that introduces the opportunity for noobs or bad luck or both to impact that is evil.

    Others, like me, want some fun that feels good and that includes noobs being dangerous and bad luck getting you killed. In war, you have to anticipate randomness, bad aim, bad luck, etc. and mitigate those factors. It makes for more interesting and tactical thinking. Not everything is down to your trigger finger.

    That's why BF1 is better. It is a good compromise between fun and skill, challenge and accessibility. Skill wins out in the end, but there's a lot of excitement overcoming the chaos in the meantime.

    This exactly! It's so hard to balance between a hardcore vet and a 1st time shooter noob! That's why BF1 shined and BFV failed. Ppl need to understand if games are too hard ppl won't buy it. Low sales equals little content in this day and age with these "live service" games.
  • CSO7777
    1845 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    It makes no sense that a bullet flies past you and you start missing all your shots on a target that is basically in point blank range.
    But it makes sense that soldiers stand up into a hail of bullets and calmly pull off marksman shots? That they just stand up at all, never mind then pull off aimed shots?

    It makes sense that soldiers take a bullet and it has no effect on their aim whatsoever?        

    No, realism is not a good *sole* basis for design in a game, but nonsense isn't a good basis if you want something that feels visceral and immersive either.

    To have no flinch or suppression is to remove massively important and meaningful tactics from combat.

    No suppressive fire and no advantage from landing your shots first either? Talk about making no sense.
    I would rather have some flinching instead of suppression, this will probably make 'spray and pray' gamestyles more relevant in CQC, but flinching at least could make sense visually, unlike suppression that introduces RBD (and you don't hit even when aiming perfectly).
  • disposalist
    8956 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    CSO7777 said:
    It makes no sense that a bullet flies past you and you start missing all your shots on a target that is basically in point blank range.
    But it makes sense that soldiers stand up into a hail of bullets and calmly pull off marksman shots? That they just stand up at all, never mind then pull off aimed shots?

    It makes sense that soldiers take a bullet and it has no effect on their aim whatsoever?        

    No, realism is not a good *sole* basis for design in a game, but nonsense isn't a good basis if you want something that feels visceral and immersive either.

    To have no flinch or suppression is to remove massively important and meaningful tactics from combat.

    No suppressive fire and no advantage from landing your shots first either? Talk about making no sense.
    I would rather have some flinching instead of suppression, this will probably make 'spray and pray' gamestyles more relevant in CQC, but flinching at least could make sense visually, unlike suppression that introduces RBD (and you don't hit even when aiming perfectly).
    I have to admit the added randomness on top of flinch and visual effects in BF1 was a little too much for suppression, but nothing at all in BF5 is not the answer. As with lots of things in BF5, I think certain players complained how much BF1 had changed things, and so they swung back way too far for BF5.

    Or indeed automatic 3D spotting when you suppress in BF5 if you have the right LMG perk! Lol. I couldn't believe what I was seeing when that first happened in BF5.
  • MarxistDictator
    5249 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Other games have a better solution: getting flinched. This doesn’t really exist in battlefield since the worst thing you can do when trying to kill a sniper is be accurate. The flinch is nothing vs the induced inaccuracy of suppression (missing). In games like Counterstrike in those split moments you can’t dawdle your aim or it will be thrown off by getting shot. Too bad we don’t believe in gunplay, just nerf wars.
  • CSO7777
    1845 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    After having played some more BF1, my biggest single issue with BF1 is the awful balance. Almost none of the games I have played, have been even remotely balanced. BFV is unbalanced, but BF1 is way worse and spawn-traps happens a lot in BF1. No other BF-game I have played, has balance as bad as BF1.

    And that gives the same problem as in BFV, the game is not fun to play much of the time.
  • Trokey66
    9107 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    CSO7777 wrote: »
    After having played some more BF1, my biggest single issue with BF1 is the awful balance. Almost none of the games I have played, have been even remotely balanced. BFV is unbalanced, but BF1 is way worse and spawn-traps happens a lot in BF1. No other BF-game I have played, has balance as bad as BF1.

    And that gives the same problem as in BFV, the game is not fun to play much of the time.

    I've just played 4 rounds and they all end with less than 100 ticket difference.

    Just bad luck?
  • SixTouge
    367 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    CSO7777 wrote: »
    After having played some more BF1, my biggest single issue with BF1 is the awful balance. Almost none of the games I have played, have been even remotely balanced. BFV is unbalanced, but BF1 is way worse and spawn-traps happens a lot in BF1. No other BF-game I have played, has balance as bad as BF1.

    And that gives the same problem as in BFV, the game is not fun to play much of the time.

    I've just played 4 rounds and they all end with less than 100 ticket difference.

    Just bad luck?

    It could be, I've definitely had those kind of nights too. I think the big difference is the "spawn traps" that happen in BF1. I can say after logging loads of time on BF4, BF1 and BFV, when it goes bad in BF1 it goes brutally bad beyond anything I'd see in 4 and 5. That said, V has super lopsided games (maybe worse in terms of score), but the difference is that you almost never feel like you can't even move.
  • spamhead88
    4 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    After playing months of BFV - I've played about a week or BF1 and loving it versus hating BFV. Being an older gamer - BFV is so much reflexes and twitch gunning - BF1 allows you to be good if you can do that but also be good if you find a strategic place to snipe for a minute. My K/D are much closer to even on BF1 after just 1 week than they will ever be in BFV. I am actually excited to play Battlefield again since I can contribute to my team. I spent most of BFV attempting not to got shot and capping a couple of flags. Maybe the next one will be the perfect mix - hopefully not another game to compete with COD (I almost think that was in the back of EA's mind with BFV)...
  • disposalist
    8956 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Other games have a better solution: getting flinched. This doesn’t really exist in battlefield since the worst thing you can do when trying to kill a sniper is be accurate. The flinch is nothing vs the induced inaccuracy of suppression (missing). In games like Counterstrike in those split moments you can’t dawdle your aim or it will be thrown off by getting shot. Too bad we don’t believe in gunplay, just nerf wars.
    Except with those random deviation mechanics that people moan about, hitting an sniper with an LMG also means you missed several times too.

    I agree the flinch from being hit should be more impressive, but that is whether or not suppression is there.

    I can't count the number of times I've fired an LMG at a sniper and put several hits *and* misses on them and *still* been head-shotted in return, so perhaps both need amping up?...
  • Lahoo_Eckbert
    1319 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    It makes no sense that a bullet flies past you and you start missing all your shots on a target that is basically in point blank range.
    But it makes sense that soldiers stand up into a hail of bullets and calmly pull off marksman shots? That they just stand up at all, never mind then pull off aimed shots?

    It makes sense that soldiers take a bullet and it has no effect on their aim whatsoever?        

    No, realism is not a good *sole* basis for design in a game, but nonsense isn't a good basis if you want something that feels visceral and immersive either.

    To have no flinch or suppression is to remove massively important and meaningful tactics from combat.

    No suppressive fire and no advantage from landing your shots first either? Talk about making no sense.
    Then you shouldn't play a game where people can get 360 no scope kills and get revived after taking a bullet to their face with a syringe. BF apart from its visuals is not a realistic shooter. Most games are nonsense in that regard.

    As for supressive fire, again, seldom people use it for tactical purposes. It usually(like 90% of the time) is someone spraying and praying, and you are being punished for it. Makes 0 sense from a gameplay standpoint.

  • BruteHorse
    5 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    BFV is nothing new... same thing on repeat, but worse... its not bad i mean, love all BF games... but BF1 has my biggest acquired taste, HORSES!! :)
  • Narfiam
    198 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited May 12
    BF1 is way better. I gave BFV a chance despite the bad beginning and bad vibes it give to me when released, but now is still an unfixable fail and a failed game and I'm done.
    I haven't played BF1 sinve BFV release and I'm considering seriously to come back to BF1 and keep BFV in the trunk of (bad) memories.
    Some days ago I watched a random gameplay of BF1 to remember the game a bit more and I had the feeling of watching a more modern and atmospheric game than BFV despite being two years older.
  • B0ng0_Banger
    1161 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Not even close. Imo, BF1 is a 9/10, BF5 is a 6/10 at most.
  • DC_E63
    16 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    I've never even played BFV.  I first got BF1 shortly after BFV was released.  Based on what people have been saying about BFV, I don't think I'll ever get it. 
  • opsis_1
    255 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    BF1 is an experience. BFV is a chore.
  • CSO7777
    1845 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    opsis_1 said:
    BF1 is an experience. BFV is a chore.
    I would say that BF1 is bad in many ways, but like BF4 (which is also bad and very frustrating) it is still fun to play and the fun makes up for the bad parts, most of the time.

    BFV has too little 'fun' left.

    Somehow Dice has forgotten the 'fun'-factor, BF1 is less fun than BF4 and BFV is much less fun than BF1.
  • Trokey66
    9107 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    CSO7777 wrote: »
    (Quote)
    I would say that BF1 is bad in many ways, but like BF4 (which is also bad and very frustrating) it is still fun to play and the fun makes up for the bad parts, most of the time.

    BFV has too little 'fun' left.

    Somehow Dice has forgotten the 'fun'-factor, BF1 is less fun than BF4 and BFV is much less fun than BF1.

    If you would replace 'bad' with 'still has issues' then I would totally agree.
  • SixTouge
    367 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    opsis_1 wrote: »
    BF1 is an experience.

    This is really BF1's defining feature, they really captured something special with that game. Others that came before or after, may have done certain things better, but none really, for me, can claim to be an "experience".

    As for V being a chore, I enjoy it, I think it's a good game, but it's just that, not an experience.
Sign In or Register to comment.