I know, no new content BUT...

«1
Nutcrusherr
356 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
But you cant leave this game like that.
What we want: 
Ping limit, minimum a 100 but a 60 would be a nice middle ground.
Dealing with voldemorts(dont you dare close this thread.)
Fixing the stuck in death screen. Srsly, do i need to say more? How is this still an existing bug? Please enlighten me how the tech is not there yet to fix this...
Did you really just closed down servers so we have to wait in a queue of 7-10 to get in the game we play and the game we still play regardless of all your poopy behavior? Really dice you need to get your poop together cos this is like rock freakin bottom now. are you serious?
Give us normal private servers where we can set ping limit and all the other stuff, cos its clear to me that you wont help us dealing with all that and the voldemorts. Please have at least a bit of humanity, we paid for this product, we got like half of it, we would be still happy if everything was working in the way it was intended. its like buying a spoiled milk in the shop and we cant go back to return the product and get our money back cos we`re already banned from the shop. Fix this, we are the ones that keep buying your spoiled milk but we wont be here forever, okay? Please i freakin beg you to do the right thing, i love this piece of poop regardless, just do these fixes, its not even that hard, its not even that time consuming. Do The Right Thing!

Comments

  • LOLGotYerTags
    14288 postsMember, Moderator, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Moderator
    Correct,  no new content but iirc there WILL be quality of life bugfixes and some extra stuff for community games.
  • X_Sunslayer_X
    1437 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Correct,  no new content but iirc there WILL be quality of life bugfixes and some extra stuff for community games.


    i would not hold my breath on these implementations, there has been no new infos regarding any of these to my knowledge and since DICE is in summer vacation mode i wouldn't be surprised if they announced afterwords to delay everything indefinetly depending on how work on the next issue is well and truely underway
  • LOLGotYerTags
    14288 postsMember, Moderator, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Moderator
    Correct,  no new content but iirc there WILL be quality of life bugfixes and some extra stuff for community games.


    i would not hold my breath on these implementations, there has been no new infos regarding any of these to my knowledge and since DICE is in summer vacation mode i wouldn't be surprised if they announced afterwords to delay everything indefinetly depending on how work on the next issue is well and truely underway
    Generally,  I find the saying "no news is good news" 

    There has been no news stating that these features are NOT coming.

    In much the same light that there has NOT been any news relaying how far the additional community games features have been coming along.

    I'm going to hazard a guess that there hasn't been any news about it as the dev team responsible for community games are working flat out both on the implementation of the new features in BFV,  And also for the next title.
  • Magikf1ngers
    224 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Correct,  no new content but iirc there WILL be quality of life bugfixes and some extra stuff for community games.
    I'll say it again.  Don't hold your breath.  Abandoning games / fan bases by EA isn't limited to Battlefield.  They've said before that they were going to provide QOL updates, and things to keep the community engaged, but then they don't do it.  

    I don't believe anything coming out of EA when it comes to this type of thing.  
  • TFBisquit
    2282 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    There are still weekly missions, and occasionally you can earn boins with them.
    As for fixes, they've done that since the beginning and actually made things worse.
    But, if they can create some good playlists, with interesting maps, who knows.
  • GrizzGolf
    1392 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Man I wish they were some guns we had gotten we never did famous in WW2.
  • LOLGotYerTags
    14288 postsMember, Moderator, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Moderator
    I just want DLSS 2.0 to improve frames with RT enabled
  • Nutcrusherr
    356 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I just want DLSS 2.0 to improve frames with RT enabled

    Could not agree more. Its so much better then the previous version of it. Current one on bf5 makes it all blurry too.
  • talhaONE
    969 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Forget ping limit. Not every region has its own servers.
  • CrashCA
    1347 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited August 2
    And WHY is this ?

    Edit:  Definitely, rhetorical.  ;)
    Post edited by CrashCA on
  • Magikf1ngers
    224 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    CrashCA said:
    And WHY is this ?
    If this isn't a rhetorical question - 

    Because EA is cheap and greedy.  They won't allow RSPs so that people in those regions can set up their own servers instead of having the "community server" option that still routes everything through AWS / MS cloud services, and because they're closing servers down in low populated regions to save money on bandwidth.  

    So those people that bought the game in those regions feel entitled to come to play on the American and other servers that are still running because they paid for the game, same as we did.  I don't blame them for feeling that way, but it does b0rk the experience for all of us. 

    Not only can it cause generalized server lag, but when they're pinging ~200 and the rest of everyone is at 80 or below, the lag can look deceptively like they're voldomorting, and it fosters the toxic environment that way because voldomorting is so rampant anyway (at least in the PC environment)

    As a gamer in this situation - it's just a complete no-win situation, whether it's us complaining because of the laggy players from different regions, whether it's people in other regions complaining because the servers in their area were shut down, or the toxic environment that's fed because of the lag.  

  • Nutcrusherr
    356 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    (Quote)
    If this isn't a rhetorical question - 

    Because EA is cheap and greedy.  They won't allow RSPs so that people in those regions can set up their own servers instead of having the "community server" option that still routes everything through AWS / MS cloud services, and because they're closing servers down in low populated regions to save money on bandwidth.  

    So those people that bought the game in those regions feel entitled to come to play on the American and other servers that are still running because they paid for the game, same as we did.  I don't blame them for feeling that way, but it does b0rk the experience for all of us. 

    Not only can it cause generalized server lag, but when they're pinging ~200 and the rest of everyone is at 80 or below, the lag can look deceptively like they're voldomorting, and it fosters the toxic environment that way because voldomorting is so rampant anyway (at least in the PC environment)

    As a gamer in this situation - it's just a complete no-win situation, whether it's us complaining because of the laggy players from different regions, whether it's people in other regions complaining because the servers in their area were shut down, or the toxic environment that's fed because of the lag.  

    I guess a good middle ground would be servers WITH ping limit and servers WITHOUT ping limit so that every one would be happy..
  • Loqtrall
    12465 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Fixes in a game that’s been on the market for nearly 2 years!
    Lost for words is an understatement.
    Never again dice.

    There were fixes going on in BF4 for nearly 3 entire years and the game was still largely in a poor state well after the 1 year mark. And everybody now coddles that game like they owe it their life.

    Bf5 hasn't even been out 2 years yet. Literally every game in this franchise has received updates and fixes as long as BF5 has so far. At this time after release in regards to past games in this franchise (just over 1 1/2 years after launch of any given toitle), the next game in the franchise hadn't even been released yet. It's not uncommon for BF games to receive fixes this long after launch at all.

    If that was really the "never again, DICE" moment, you wouldn't have played two BF titles total.
  • MOSSAD-RECRUITER
    409 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    The number one problem - do not talk about fight club - is not gonna be dealt with. Been like that since Battlefront.
  • X_Sunslayer_X
    1437 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Loqtrall said:
    Fixes in a game that’s been on the market for nearly 2 years!
    Lost for words is an understatement.
    Never again dice.

    There were fixes going on in BF4 for nearly 3 entire years and the game was still largely in a poor state well after the 1 year mark. And everybody now coddles that game like they owe it their life.

    Bf5 hasn't even been out 2 years yet. Literally every game in this franchise has received updates and fixes as long as BF5 has so far. At this time after release in regards to past games in this franchise (just over 1 1/2 years after launch of any given toitle), the next game in the franchise hadn't even been released yet. It's not uncommon for BF games to receive fixes this long after launch at all.

    If that was really the "never again, DICE" moment, you wouldn't have played two BF titles total.


    i do not think we will see any meaningful updates and fixes to BFV anymore. if they even bother with the promised Community games update or teaqm-balancer. DICE threw in the towel for BFV and we all know why
  • Magikf1ngers
    224 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    (Quote)
    If this isn't a rhetorical question - 

    Because EA is cheap and greedy.  They won't allow RSPs so that people in those regions can set up their own servers instead of having the "community server" option that still routes everything through AWS / MS cloud services, and because they're closing servers down in low populated regions to save money on bandwidth.  

    So those people that bought the game in those regions feel entitled to come to play on the American and other servers that are still running because they paid for the game, same as we did.  I don't blame them for feeling that way, but it does b0rk the experience for all of us. 

    Not only can it cause generalized server lag, but when they're pinging ~200 and the rest of everyone is at 80 or below, the lag can look deceptively like they're voldomorting, and it fosters the toxic environment that way because voldomorting is so rampant anyway (at least in the PC environment)

    As a gamer in this situation - it's just a complete no-win situation, whether it's us complaining because of the laggy players from different regions, whether it's people in other regions complaining because the servers in their area were shut down, or the toxic environment that's fed because of the lag.  

    I guess a good middle ground would be servers WITH ping limit and servers WITHOUT ping limit so that every one would be happy..
    I'd rather just have a games publisher that gave two steaming piles about their customer base and fans.
  • Magikf1ngers
    224 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Loqtrall said:
    Fixes in a game that’s been on the market for nearly 2 years!
    Lost for words is an understatement.
    Never again dice.

    There were fixes going on in BF4 for nearly 3 entire years and the game was still largely in a poor state well after the 1 year mark. And everybody now coddles that game like they owe it their life.

    Bf5 hasn't even been out 2 years yet. Literally every game in this franchise has received updates and fixes as long as BF5 has so far. At this time after release in regards to past games in this franchise (just over 1 1/2 years after launch of any given toitle), the next game in the franchise hadn't even been released yet. It's not uncommon for BF games to receive fixes this long after launch at all.

    If that was really the "never again, DICE" moment, you wouldn't have played two BF titles total.
    TL:DR

    Liking BF4 once the major issues were fixed doesn't mean anyone's forgotten the problems.

    What it DOES mean is that BF4 marked the end of an era when EA / DICE cared about their customer base, and when the customer base demanded better instead of throwing money at them.  

    BF:V has been abandoned, plain and simple.  You and others can buy into the "Quality of Life" fixes promised, but that's not going to happen.  It never does.  Titanfall 2 is a huge example of that.  A hit franchise riddled with issues, a few months of trying to fix those issues, then endless nerfs and "balance fixes" that never worked, and (at least in my experience) one of the first games to have microtransactions for cosmetics.  

    About six or eight months into it, the big controversy around SW: BFII and the pay to win microtransactions erupted.  There was a huge, vocal protest about the gambling aspect of it, etc - but what EA learned is that even with the public outcry, people kept spending money on them. Not two months later, they announced the end of content at the 12-month mark but promised QOL updates.  

    They released one update in December / January (the year mark was October), and then radio silence.  They promised Titanfall 3, teased it, strung along the fans - then abandoned it suddenly with the release of Apex Legends, trying to coddle the TF fanbase by saying that AL is in the "Titanfall Universe".  

    Now - not nearly as deep into the life of BF:V, EA has forced DICE to abandon BF:V.  We didn't get nearly the content that was insinuated, and supposedly "Quality of Life" updates are still going to come.  

    It remains to be seen whether or not they continue with quality of life updates.  I have zero confidence in that.  The pattern with NFS: Payback, Titanfall, and now BF:V is too similar. Compared to what Battlefield support has been in the past, this is a complete abandonment of the game.  

    BF4 was a disaster when it released.  Network issues were the biggest problem, but there were others.  But to DICE's  credit, they kept plugging at it until the game because one of the best in the franchise.  

    Compare that to BF: V that - at least at launch - seemed to be promised that it was going to be bigger than 4, and better than all.  They released some (admittedly awesome) game play trailers, and what single-player content we got was short but fun.  Then you get deeper into the game and see that features from earlier versions have been abandoned.  Ability to team switch, RSP, any sort of team balance at all, zero anti-Voldemort protection.  However - the microtransactions truck right along, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ modes like Firestorm were added (no offense to those that like it and still play it, but it was a BR mode, and Battlefield isn't a BR game) - instead of fixes of genuine issues.  Game balance is constantly in flux with the new EA brand of "nerf it then buff it without testing it" approach to gameplay balance.  

    So - you want to know why BF:4 is remembered so fondly - that's why.  It was the last real title where DICE showed some integrity, and EA allowed them to.  

    (I haven't mentioned BF:1 for two simple reasons - out of respect for the vast majority of you that like it even though I don't, and because I disliked it enough that I didn't spend nearly the time in it that I did other Battlefield franchises, so I don't feel I have room to speak on it.) 
  • CrashCA
    1347 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Magikf1ngers

    Well reasoned always, 
    Answer to my rethorical post was spot on
  • Loqtrall
    12465 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited August 3
    (Quote)
    TL:DR

    Liking BF4 once the major issues were fixed doesn't mean anyone's forgotten the problems.

    What it DOES mean is that BF4 marked the end of an era when EA / DICE cared about their customer base, and when the customer base demanded better instead of throwing money at them.  

    BF:V has been abandoned, plain and simple.  You and others can buy into the "Quality of Life" fixes promised, but that's not going to happen.  It never does.  Titanfall 2 is a huge example of that.  A hit franchise riddled with issues, a few months of trying to fix those issues, then endless nerfs and "balance fixes" that never worked, and (at least in my experience) one of the first games to have microtransactions for cosmetics.  

    About six or eight months into it, the big controversy around SW: BFII and the pay to win microtransactions erupted.  There was a huge, vocal protest about the gambling aspect of it, etc - but what EA learned is that even with the public outcry, people kept spending money on them. Not two months later, they announced the end of content at the 12-month mark but promised QOL updates.  

    They released one update in December / January (the year mark was October), and then radio silence.  They promised Titanfall 3, teased it, strung along the fans - then abandoned it suddenly with the release of Apex Legends, trying to coddle the TF fanbase by saying that AL is in the "Titanfall Universe".  

    Now - not nearly as deep into the life of BF:V, EA has forced DICE to abandon BF:V.  We didn't get nearly the content that was insinuated, and supposedly "Quality of Life" updates are still going to come.  

    It remains to be seen whether or not they continue with quality of life updates.  I have zero confidence in that.  The pattern with NFS: Payback, Titanfall, and now BF:V is too similar. Compared to what Battlefield support has been in the past, this is a complete abandonment of the game.  

    BF4 was a disaster when it released.  Network issues were the biggest problem, but there were others.  But to DICE's  credit, they kept plugging at it until the game because one of the best in the franchise.  

    Compare that to BF: V that - at least at launch - seemed to be promised that it was going to be bigger than 4, and better than all.  They released some (admittedly awesome) game play trailers, and what single-player content we got was short but fun.  Then you get deeper into the game and see that features from earlier versions have been abandoned.  Ability to team switch, RSP, any sort of team balance at all, zero anti-Voldemort protection.  However - the microtransactions truck right along, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ modes like Firestorm were added (no offense to those that like it and still play it, but it was a BR mode, and Battlefield isn't a BR game) - instead of fixes of genuine issues.  Game balance is constantly in flux with the new EA brand of "nerf it then buff it without testing it" approach to gameplay balance.  

    So - you want to know why BF:4 is remembered so fondly - that's why.  It was the last real title where DICE showed some integrity, and EA allowed them to.  

    (I haven't mentioned BF:1 for two simple reasons - out of respect for the vast majority of you that like it even though I don't, and because I disliked it enough that I didn't spend nearly the time in it that I did other Battlefield franchises, so I don't feel I have room to speak on it.) 

    There's a lot that's ill-informed about this post so hold on for a lengthy retort:

    For starters - plenty among the community have either forgotten BF4s troubled history and it being legitimately the worst launch state a BF game has ever been in, or are part of the countless myriad of BF4 players who started playing the game well after the brunt of its issues were addressed. There are even people still getting into the game for the first time, 7 years after release.

    I've seen experienced players in this community with thousands of hours in BF4 (won't name any names) claim false info about how "Bf4 wasn't that bad at launch" or "how it was perfectly fine 6 months after launch", and have corrected them with evidence only to see them immediately change their tune and adjust what they were saying after spending who knows how long spreading misinformation.

    Secondly, BF4 was definitely not the last time DICE cared about the customer base. BF1, despite your experience levels with it or your refusal to speak on it, is literally the best selling game in the history of the franchise and marked a high point for BF. DICE improved that game over the course of a year and a half with multiple qol changes and additions that plenty supported.

    That's not to mention when DICE literally bent over backward for the community in regards to BF5, and removed countless cosmetics and options from BF5 between beta and release solely because of complaints. They've constantly shifted their vision for the game over the course of its life cycle to address complaints made by the community - like adding distance haze and rim lighting because of visibility complaints, adding more authentic cosmetics, adding custom servers despite insisting they had no plans for it, adjusting the effect of attrition because of complaints, adjusting the rate of resupplies because of complaints, adjusting the balance and functionality of flares and spotting/getting spotted in general, improving the first person combat roll animation, etc, etc, etc.

    Moving on - BF5 hasn't been abandoned at all. It was supported with content additions as long or LONGER than almost every other game in this franchise. I say "almost every other game", because Bf4 had an extended lifespan because of Hardline's complete flop, and after getting all its planned content in under 1 year after launch, BF4 got 3 maps, 5 weapons, and no major QoL improvements over the course of 2 more years. Every other BF title was supported with content for a year and a half or less. Because other than the upcoming title, EVERY title in this franchise has been released less than 2 years apart from one another.

    And that includes the fact that BF5 has already received updates and multiple cosmetic additions since the "last content update" in June, and community managers have recently (as of the most recent patch) confirmed that the improvements to community games coming later this year is still in the works.

    How anyone could consider that "abandoned" is beyond me. The last patch was centered around squashing bugs, ffs.

    Insisting future QoL updates "just aren't going to happen" based on the work of two entirely different games made by two entirely different studios is just asinine, imo. That's pretty baseless in terms of predicting what DICE is going to do with their games in the future, which they've never outright abandoned before the release of a sequel.

    And as a side note, TF2 was not even remotely the first game with cosmetics as mtx. Just in terms of other live service shooters off the top of my head, Halo 5, Overwatch, and Rainbow Six Siege beat it to the punch. And in terms of non live service shooters they've been around much longer. Even BF4 had loot box mtx that included cosmetic and weapon attachment unlocks, and that game was released in 2013.

    But I digress:

    How could you say EA only learned that despite public outcry, people will still buy what's being complained about? EA and DICE DELAYED content for SWBF2 and completely overhauled its content delivery and economy to appease the mass complaints they received and no doubt appease the Disney overlords that controlled the development of that game and every other SW property. They most definitely didn't sit and do nothing about it.

    But on the topic of support for TF2 - the update your referencing wherein Respawn insisted there would be no more major additions but would be QoL updates was released in August 2017, not October. There were 3 more updates after that with changes to balance and fixes for issues with the last ending in December of 2017. I fail to see how that is Respawn not delivering on their promise of future updates and improvements beyond the August 2017 additions.

    Respawn also never teased Titanfall 3 nor did they promise news about it. They said "more Titanfall in 2019", and Apex Legends is directly tied to TF in more ways than just lore and the universe in which the game takes place - whether you like Apex or not (I adored TF2 and can't stand Apex, myself).

    And "not nearly as deep into the life of BF5"? That "last major content addition" announcement happened over one and a half years after BF5s release.

    And in what way did we not get "nearly the content that was insinuated"? What content was insinuated?

    Because, I'm not sure if you're aware, but aside from maps (of which BF5 is only lacking in terms of by a total of 7), BF5 has LEGITIMATELY received the most post launch dlc weapons, vehicles, melee weapons, cosmetics, and overall features a BF game has ever gotten - in the entire history of this franchise - whether paid expansions, premium, live service, or whatever.

    That's 13 maps, 44 weapons, 22 vehicles, 2 factions, 8 gadgets, 3 grenades, over a dozen melee weapons, 2 battle pickup weapons, countless weapon/player/vehicle cosmetics, 2 squad reinforcements, 11 elite characters, an entirely separate battle royale mode with its own huge map and standalone vehicles, the only coop mode outside of BF3, the only practice range outside of BF4, the highest rank increase in BF, community games for free for the first time in BF even though there were initially no plans for it, and the ONLY single player DLC BF has ever gotten.

    This leads me to the portion of your comment wherein you claim "the micro transactions trucked right along". Because BF5 has legitimately the least forms of paid content and mtx out of any BF game in the past 10 years. Unlike BF3, 4, Hardline, and 1 - there are no battle packs in this game, they didn't add kit boosters until over one year after launch, they didn't even have paid currency mtx in BF5 until months after launch, and unlike other live service games there isn't a myriad of content locked behind a "battle pass" seasonal pay wall. The only mtx this game has are cosmetic or time skips, and they are incredibly few compared to all the other content we've gotten.

    And we STILL got 24 more weapons than BF4. We still got 18 more vehicles than Bf4. We still got more cosmetic customization and general features than any other BF game. We still got all that content in a year and a half. If BF5 got 7 more maps it would legitimately have the most overall post launch content a BF game has ever gotten - hell, it'd be up there with the most post launch content an FPS game has received in under 2 years, whether paid or free content.

    You even say pretty illogical things like "Firestorm was added instead of those resources being put toward bug fixes", despite Firestorm being handled by an entirely separate studio and being added MONTHS after the launch of the game. What's next, you imply that if Firestorm was abandoned by an entirely separate studio altogether, it'd somehow free up resources at DICE in terms of bug fixing and coding?

    And you ignore that sweeping weapon changes that were not that popular happened in BF3, BF4, and BF1. Hell, there were even TWO ttk changes and a botched attempt at ammo balance changes in BF1 that were all received negatively by the community despite being tested by many in the CTE, and much like BF5s canceled 5v5 mode BF1 had a comp mode called Incursions that was also canned because of a lack of popularity - and that game is still revered by countless people in this community.

    I don't see how what you've said is at all an indicator that DICE will more than likely go back on the QoL updates theyve outlined for release later this year. DICE didn't just abandon this game and have no history of doing it in other games either. SWBF2 has also received updates since the "Intended vision for SWBF2 has been completed" announcement back in April.

    I'd understand if DICE had actually exhibited behavior in past games wherein they completely abandoned games and inexplicably went back on proposed future improvements to a game well before the release of a sequel/successor. But that's just not the case at all and there's nothing pointing to that regardless of what completely different devs at completely different studios did with completely different games.
Sign In or Register to comment.