BFV got skipped at the BF6 tease?

«134
Hawxxeye
7752 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
edited June 19
I just looked at that video  by westie.
There are short footage of BC2, BF4 and BF1 before transitioning to some BF6 soldier models while the spokesperson was talking about how "DICE sets the bar for audio and visual presentation" and several people are pointing out how BFV is hilariously missing from that presentation.
.
I am just sharing it for a chuckle.
.
PS:
I would be much more happier if DICE was trying to set the bar for gameplay excellency instead of audiovisual. This is not a a movie they are making but a game.
Perhaps they can be excused that they are addressing investors with the teaser who know jack of gameplay but still...

Comments

  • NightSkyn3t
    120 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Maybe they used BFV as a test subject for new things that will come in BF6
  • GRAW2ROBZ
    2636 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    The teaser for BF6 or whatever its called shows more then 64 players on screen.  Probably more like 100.  Probably same team.  So next gen the game could be 100vs100 for all we know.



  • GRAW2ROBZ
    2636 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye said:
    GRAW2ROBZ said:
    The teaser for BF6 or whatever its called shows more then 64 players on screen.  Probably more like 100.  Probably same team.  So next gen the game could be 100vs100 for all we know.


    You are correct about that. . But the question is: should they really be focusing on building a taller and more impressive tower on the same rotten foundations they used on BFV?

    Probably more like whose got the bigger one?  All the Battle Royales got tons of players.  ARK/ATLAS has tons of players.  COD finally got a bunch of players for Warzone.  People been suggesting more then 64 players for Battlefield in these forums for how many years already.  It's all about keeping up with the Joneses.  Or monkey see, monkey do. 
    .
    But back to your question for making it worse adding more players.  Yeah with destruction and old bugs from Frostbite carrying over to each newer installment of the series.  Out of region players or bad internet or lousy servers we could have bad hit markets or hitreg.  Also with graphics with tons of debris and junk and clutter and more players all over.
    .
    People will just complain I didn't see that guy but I got killed.  But next gen console should have fast loading times with SSD and more power under the hood.  But who knows.  Also that many players on a team.  Who know how many vehicles will be peppered out all over.
    .
    Could be hardly any and left eating dust while teammates race away while rest are hiking on foot for miles.  Probably need transport trucks of like two in the front and like 10+ ride in the back.  Then some fly boy in a jet or helicopter fires off a missile and pop goes the weasel a quick twelve kills.  There will always be something to complain about in a shooter.
  • bigiain
    384 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    100 players does feel like the sort of thing that will get people to fall for the hype again when the shiny new trailer finally appears. The only way I think it could actually make the game better is by padding out the numbers to make up for all the people that spend the game hiding. On smaller maps, it would be a mess.
  • trip1ex
    5228 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Yeah be nice if it was about gameplay and fps and balance and UX. ...the OMG we can put reflections in the eyeballs of your character is....not something I care for in a multiplayer game.
  • trip1ex
    5228 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    The super fast ssd loading in the next-gen consoles probably will lead to bigger maps and in turn more players.  
  • DingoKillr
    4351 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    People jumping to conclusions.

    It show guys running around in uniform.
    Let's ignore the uniforms and say it is BF6 increase numbers.

    It is a test bed remember DICE talked about a new AI maybe it testing that.
  • CPU_UK
    1098 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    People jumping to conclusions.

    It show guys running around in uniform.
    Let's ignore the uniforms and say it is BF6 increase numbers.

    It is a test bed remember DICE talked about a new AI maybe it testing that.

    Also remember that feature that DICE has never got to grips with, but has mentioned in the past- AI soldiers in large numbers.

  • research-kitchen
    412 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Have we already forgotten about all the problems with bf5 and how everyone got burned?  I'm really looking forward to the bf6 cheating mega thread.  
  • MarxistDictator
    5249 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    jroggs wrote: »
    Team balancing? Anti-cheat? Stable performance? Bug reduction? Content and support roadmaps? Community features?

    Pfft, nobody cares about boring stuff like that. Lookit this guy smile!

    Dice can’t make PC games anymore. Not sure why people bother with cheat field: drivers broken every update.
  • bran1986
    5913 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    bigiain said:
    100 players does feel like the sort of thing that will get people to fall for the hype again when the shiny new trailer finally appears. The only way I think it could actually make the game better is by padding out the numbers to make up for all the people that spend the game hiding. On smaller maps, it would be a mess.
    Until they figure out the netcode is god awful with 64 players. 
  • Hawxxeye
    7752 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    bran1986 said:
    bigiain said:
    100 players does feel like the sort of thing that will get people to fall for the hype again when the shiny new trailer finally appears. The only way I think it could actually make the game better is by padding out the numbers to make up for all the people that spend the game hiding. On smaller maps, it would be a mess.
    Until they figure out the netcode is god awful with 64 players. 
    This is what I was implying when I was talking about foundations. With the current issues we already have in BFV, I do not think that it will translate well on 100 player teams.
  • NuttysKunKs
    566 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Trouble I see with more than 64 players is that capping flags/ objectives becomes that much harder.

    You have over 50% more players able to spawn in and defend. There will be little reward flanking and taking objectives behind the frontlines when all of a sudden 15 players spawn to protect it...

    I see it being a cluttered mess that unfortunately won’t be realised until it’s too late.

    Although 5 man squads would be nice to see again.
  • GRAW2ROBZ
    2636 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    If it's 100vs100.  They would need new game modes.  I doubt conquest or rush or any modes we got now would work at all.  Probably have to be 1 life per round.  Then can leave to find a new match but get credit for win or loss once that previous match is done.  Kinda like World of tanks. 
    .
    Also would need more crafty thought out game modes like something like Socom Navy Seals had when Socom 3 came out with higher player counts of 16vs16 instead of 8vs8 on PS2.  They had convoy.  Had to drive the convoy from one side of the map to the other while other team had to destroy it.  Also one life per round be a quick fix or band aid for netcoding.  Just people wouldn't want to wait to see the match finish though.  Reason World of tanks lets you leave after you die and match still going on.  Yet get credit for that match though.
  • CT1924
    1350 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    (Quote)
    I really hope they didn't.

    Fortifications were nice, though.
  • VOLBANKER
    1718 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited June 20
    CT1924 said:
    (Quote)
    I really hope they didn't.

    Fortifications were nice, though.
    To me they are mostly annoying. For example there is always one genius who blocks the entrances to flag E from the road side in Rotterdam Conquest with fortifications. Then you can only enter it and exit from the water side. Super annoying!
Sign In or Register to comment.