/thread.
the fricks the infiltrated the industry in the early 2010's are talentless homosexuals that refuse to gain the skills and talent needed to head big projects.
combined with companies moronic inclination to use a few twitter posts instead of actual market research killed them too.
no, dumb homosexual. lefties got rid of competant white coders and replaced them with non white males and women. You got what you wanted. You won. Lefties won. All games are shit now, because the left won. You killed gaming.
STFU you fricking Black person
You're also part of what's wrong with gaming. A stupid, low IQ npc too much of a pussy to stand up for quality, settling for lowest effort.
Evil corporations didn't frick u their products on the based game design. They overexploit the product, but when the product is frick up from start, that's the devs fault.
Now go suck that Black person wiener you seem to love so much
There's a difference between hiring a black person who's qualified for the job and a company gayging up their games, jumping on the latest -isms that only liberal metro America cares about, pandering to every minority because it gets Blackrock points and making games sterile movies that hold your hand and have very limited gameplay.
its kind of a shame. so many IPs have gone to SHIT because of that. i try to stay away from conspiracy theory shit but there is no doubt in my mind that ESG/blackrock shit is real
not only that, the other problem is companies trying to copy successful games and diluting their own product as a result (2042 with its gay ass specialists and V's battle royale, which i think i tried once)
DICE is one of the most incompetent developers in history. they have a dedicated fanbase and continue to take dumps on said fanbases' chest.
Beware that it's steam numbers, games like BF3/BF4 are more populate Origin wise (almost all my friends and me are using the Origin client when playing those games)
yeah i know. i like using steam metrics for shit; battlefield didn't come onto steam until what, 2018? all those are relatively new players. its a good way to gauge a playerbase when a game launches through multiple launchers/companies and/or platforms
>its a good way to gauge a playerbase
I know, I do the same. I just wanted to give this info for the new players that may think that BF3/4 where on steam since day one didn't know why it was so low.
No? The guys who worked for DICE during their prime left after V. When they were developing 2042, NOBODY knew how the engine worked properly. >inb4 just learn xd
It takes a long time to comprehend what the guy meant by this when somebody writes code so you test to see what it does until you understand completely. Now imagine trying to uncover every single connection of that piece of code in the engine. And DICE wanted to release 2042 early.
It was so fricked that people thought of switching to Unreal Engine to compromise.
There literally are not white people to hire. We have a massive labor shortage. 9/10 applications my company gets for quantitative or programmer roles are Indian or Chinese. White people are too stupid or something now.
The difference is that games used to be made by like 10 dudes with a passion. Now they are giant companies with hundreds of employees with no direct connection to the game except that its their job to make it and make sure it makes money.
> with a passion
why do you think that is? first post anon was right. It is diversity/quota filling grifters getting hired. They have no passion for your hobby. To them it is a vehicle for pushing their ideology than making a game. The have to deliver what minimal quality they can though, to stayed hired for as long as possible so they can keep the grift going and their CV looks good for when they are inevitably let go.
Super Black persongays from sweden went into turbo israeli dick sucking mode and jerked off the money machine cummies into wallet >WOAH THESE KIDS LOVE FUTURISTIC STUFF SO MUCH LETS MAKE A CALL OF DOODY COPY DUDE
BF1 was pretty good.
BF5 had a pretty bad start, but it has redeemed itself (too bad the devs cut support for the game as it was turning around)
BF2042 sucks major shit and nothing short of a complete redo can fix it. its not just the hero shit, but nearly every aspect of the game is inferior to any past iteration.
I will forever be disappointed that they killed BF5 as soon as it was starting to become good, and then they said the reason for it was so that they could focus on making a better new BF title, and then they release 2042.
The last one is really bad and i guess the one before also. They spun out of control chasing COD and PUBG..failed..and they tried chasing Apex and failed
Metro meatgrinder was kino
Had so much fun roadkilling people with the MAV too
When you piss people off so badly that they start bringing out stingers on metro to shoot down a fricking MAV you know you've done well
Frick I miss BF3 so bad.
The magic of these battlefield maps (like Metro and Operation locker) is that results in a front line forming somewhere in the map. It fun as frick to try and push through, either with brute force or flanking. This shit never happens in Call of Duty where everyone just runs around and randomly shoots eachother.
COD map designers do everything they can to prevent you from feeling like there's any sense of tactics or strategy whatsoever. Like players will naturally make a game interesting and then the cod devs will decide that you've had too much fun, time to spawn on the other side of the map now.
Or in ground war they just spread the points too far away from each other. Ironically the only game mode with a push-pull feeling is the one with the bots which is gay and boring because of said bots.
I have friends who still play COD multiplayer and it absolutely baffles me. Spawn, shoot a couple dudes, die to a guy who spawned behind you, repeat until one team gets more kills but no one is actually paying attention to that because the whole point is just to stroke your ego with kill streaks. It feels like a relic of past multiplayer games that should be gone by now.
>muh call of dooty
they are nothing alike though.
Metro was great with 48 players, banned explosives / LMG's.
Blame the community and weirdos that prone with LMG's spamming down hallways / spam explosives.
They were raving about Exposure on BF2042 middle section as it was a meatgrinder and "reminded them of metro". Fricking weird homosexuals.
To be expected from the S OY community.
>the non-stop explosions from grenades going off in the hallway >that feel when you and another guy or 2 or 3 finally push through and wipe the enemy team turning the tide of the match
>pre nerf USAS flak spam fest >nade and rpg spam after its nerf anyway
It would have been more fun if there were less explosives.
Otherwise the map is really fun.
The only time Metro was ever fun was during the playable beta of BF3 where Rush Metro was the only option and everyone was a bumbling moron instead of a turboautist grinding the same sightlines over and over again.
Metro was the beginning of the end.
A garbage map for a moronic audience who lacks skill or patience to play the game for real.
This, not BC, was where Battlefield irreversibly turned into a console shooter which lead to its death.
>gather milsim Black folk and arcade shooter mouthbreathers together >shits itself multiple times
how is that possible that the first 5 spots in the scoreboard are farming the entire server, I believe that 99,9% of bf players are linked to a single AI that emulates the brain of a 12 IQ chimp
yes. I got it recently on a steam sale and have been playing non stop.
The garbage WW1 weapons are kino and the game has soul even though it still has some unfixed bugs that have existed since launch
EA happened. Pushing trends, wanting to compete with Call of Duty etc. trying to push for yearly releases..
Most OG devs left after BF4 and that travesty of a launch. Then again with BFV.
Also Frostbite engine. Honestly they should just move over to Unreal at this point but EA wouldn't want to pay royalties.
Which realistically there would be. A lot of the zoom zooms playing modern day battlefield haven't even played BC2. Even if DICE somehow sucked EA off well enough to let them make BC3 it'd be absolute shit because they themselves admitted they don't know why BC2 was so beloved (meaning they're moronic because its obvious).
>2142 Revive
Honestly some of the most fun I've had in years, while it lasted.
Damn near everyone who picked it up knew what they were doing. Fantastic trip down memory lane.
Franchise was never good, but the formula was unique. Now they keep trying to reinvent the wheel and frick up in every aspect. Also the playerbase in general has become complete dogshit, thanks in great part to targeting the console audience starting with Bad Company.
y'all that like BC2, come play Portal. Portal has upgraded graphics and the maps have destruction. It's just the shitty 2042 maps that don't have destruction. No idea why, lazy devs maybe.
Dunno if it was the best one. I played the shit out of it back in 2011/2012 and loved it to death. I will say it was the last good Battlefield. It had a good balance between customization and class structure, which was completely fricked by BF4 and every consequent Battlefield because the devs thought quantity automatically makes a game better.
I'm really done blaming DICE at this point. It's the players that killed this game. They are so goddamn stupid and sheep like. BF3 was the last great Battlefield, BF4 was the last fun one. But we have these stupid fricks pretending BF1 was good, go install that piece of shit and see how horrible it is withing 5 minutes of joining a game. BF died because they listened to the stupid people of their fanbase. Simple as that, the whole woke DICE thing doesn't make their maps, gunplay, and every aspect of their game bad. Listening to their inept playerbase did that.
It's both. EA pushing trends and deadlines. DICE being incompetant. Players not knowing what they want and being a mixture of 20 year old veterans, newbies, esports gays, consolegays, "influencer" gays padding the games / decisions even if they are bad.
Oldgays want BF2 again
Esport gays want BF3 again
Consolegays want BC2 or BF1 again
Influencers want money
It's both. EA pushing trends and deadlines. DICE being incompetant. Players not knowing what they want and being a mixture of 20 year old veterans, newbies, esports gays, consolegays, "influencer" gays padding the games / decisions even if they are bad.
Oldgays want BF2 again
Esport gays want BF3 again
Consolegays want BC2 or BF1 again
Influencers want money
This. However I have to insist that BF4 was peak battlefield.
bf1 was the beggining of the end of BF as a series. Frick all smelly disgusting Black folk who disagree. They should just remaster BF3 and forget anything else existed.
>Engineer should be the only class that has C4 when you think about it.
No. This is moronic. C4 is meant for traps and demolitions, which is support's role. C4-ing a vehicle is very high risk, meaning its not a dependable anti-vehicle weapon. Running C4 engie would be a direct nerf to the class. >The ghillie suit comes back but as a tool. You have to choose between that or a radio beacon
Why? What's the mechanical function of a ghillie suit? Just being visually less noticeable isn't enough of a reason to pick it over another gadget unless player characters are normally highly visible with colors that heavily contrast with the map. >Grenade launcher is standard for assault like in bad company or you can switch it out for a medkit to be more medic focused
This is what BF3 did except you swap having to unlock the medkit instead of the grenade launcher. >Also, could a commander mode work for a bad company game?
No, because commander mode favors bigger maps and BC2 maps were good because they were relatively small compared to other Battlefields.
>C4 is meant for traps and demolitions, which is support's role. C4-ing a vehicle is very high risk, meaning its not a dependable anti-vehicle weapon.
In theory but definitely not in practice. People c4 vehicles ALL the time. Giving other classes the ability to destroy vehicles is moronic. Only engineer should be able to do it. Irl, combat engineers are the ones that handle explosives. Im ok with support having claymore and mortars since they're more anti-personal than anti-vehicle.
Also I forgot to add that engineer should only be allowed to have smg. 2142 got it right with this. Its moronic giving engineers rifles since you make them the jack of all trades instead of anti-vehicle role
> People c4 vehicles ALL the time. Giving other classes the ability to destroy vehicles is moronic
Yes they did because high-risk high-reward strategies are fun, but by definition not dependable. How many wannabe jihadists got shot to pieces by a gunner lmg for every one that made it? Engineers aren't threatened by support (or recon) C4 because rocket launchers are still the best and safest way to take out an enemy vehicle. Playing on vehicle-rich maps is already shit as infantry, but especially as infantry that doesn't have anti-armor weapons. Recon is still pretty good for its intended purpose, medic/assault is the premier infantry fighting class and has the almighty paddles, but what does support have left? Claymores are highly situational (and unfun), mortars will get you insta-picked by enemy mortars or snipers, and ammo kits aren't nearly as useful on those maps as they are on medium-scale or infantry-focused maps because you're far more mobile and likely have less infantry surrounding you (plus increased vehicle presence means lower infantry survivability). Support needs that C4 to make it a viable class for vehicle-based maps within the BF3 class structure. It doesn't steal the engineer's spotlight, it merely allows it to remain viable.
Each studio has its own design philosophy and it can be hard to migrate, they end up having to make compromises or make design choices that can end up not being good. It is not a limitation on the engine but more about how it does certain things that can remove or taint a brand identity.
battlefield is a very difficult game to develop from a technical standpoint. frostbite engine has so much technical debt and implementing all the bf mechanics such as destruction etc. from the ground up in UE is also time consuming and expensive. so they're fricked on this front alone. to top it off, all the talent that made the previous games is gone. battlefield is pretty much dead. rip
I know this wasn't your whole argument but destruction is actually really easy to implement. Bad Company destruction was the best in the series and also basic as frick. The only thing that causes issues is levolution-scale destruction, but that was a shitty gimmick anyway.
>#1 complaint was flattening the maps, leaving no cover >huge complaint on various maps in BFV that did the same >2042 maps large, bare wastelands with no cover
Hey moron, BC2 levels of destruction is bad. BF3 did it the best.
You mean the occasional wall or fence? Yeah, no thanks. BC2 had the best destruction in the series, ask literally anyone who claims to like the destruction in battlefield. That said, you are right that they should've added more cover in certain sections, but that was only a real problem on a few specific points in a few specific maps, not some large-scale issue that affected every single match.
The new 2042 changes back to classes sucks ass. Vehicles are way more powerful now due to lack of rockets. Less people drop ammo. Less versatility. Less fun. Less teamwork.
The nostalgia homosexuals crying en masse won and they still wont play the game.
Can't believe they fricked with the ADS time of all barrel / extended mags in a game like 2042 with 128 players...
And didn't change the 200 round LMG's that basically play like AR's at this point.
And you could just double click to circumvent the dogshit animation time, so I am macroing it.
Fricking morons lmao.
>We are reverting it because it didn't meet our expectations
THEN WHY DID YOU RELEASE IT THEN YOU IDIOTS
Honestly the attachments have been so bad in this game. The on the fly swap is okay but there's honestly zero reason to change your barrel and grip because you just pick the best and never ever change it. And most ammo changes are done rarely as well.
You can flick to the underbarrel HE etc. super easy. A supressor if needed.
Flick to the other ammo types as well. I usually get close to running out before I die.
>open their website >cash shop on their home page >close website
I'm not playing that garbage.
I can understand the inclination to be turned off by that, but 95% of the premium squads they've added have been at best sidegrades to regular progression unlocks. They're blatantly milking whales for squads that aren't even good.
The only thing you should pay for is premium time to cut the grind in half. With premium it takes like a week to max a campaign out
BFV would be alright if it had mod tools that could make it less shit.
the problem with HLL is the lack of destruction and lack of modding/custom maps; makes things like vehicle driving hell because you can't run over fences and shit.
the problem with Enlisted is that it's a free-2-play game and thus has the constant balance issues that are intractable.
a better solution is something like "Foxhole" as far as setting is concerned.
make it sort of dieselpunk set in an alternative universe where you don't have wehraboos fricking shit up.
make it like France or BeNeLux vs Italy or Japan as far as weapons, mostly tankettes; bolt action rifles; magazine/strip-fed machineguns; etc. vehicles are mostly shitty tankettes / light armored vehicles that are nice, small, and weird; able to do a lot of damage but still relatively easy to take out if driven by idiots without infantry support.
it's got potential as far as "rough engine functionality" is concerned.
HLL seems like Red Orchestra: Darkest Hour ported to Unreal 4; which isn't really a step up;
Enlisted has the problem of being a Free 2 Play game;
If BFV had actual mod tools; ones that could reshape it; and it's maps; to play in an Red Orchestra fashion; I think you'd agree with me;
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Enlisted has the problem of being a Free 2 Play game
Is that a problem? Seems to do well for Warthunder.
Plus I like having all the children and third worlder fodder, makes it feel more like WW2 rather than everyone being a hardened twitchshooting autist.
1 year ago
Anonymous
war thunder also suffers from free2play;
air RB is unplayable.
1 year ago
Anonymous
No idea what that means as I don't actually play WT
1 year ago
Anonymous
remember just spraying the ju-87 with the IL-2A's 7.62's
Tried it, thought I liked it for a few days, then realized I wasn't actually having fun when I realized how shitty the grind was and how obtuse doing anything at all in that game is
Sure if you try to play Tunisia at 5 am you will see more bots than usual, but the reality is it's usually just complete shitter morons, not actual bots.
The whole game is structured around bots unless you specially play the outlier no bot game mode. And the game punishes you for trying to play more than one theatre due to the card system.
Not until they fix their fricking animations, add UI that doesn't make my eyes bleed and a proper modern warfare mod.
If they do all of these I'll even spend my GJN from War Thunder on Enlisted.
Late Cold War would be even better than Modern Warfare, especially with varied unicorn units, but it's an unpopular setting so I'll settle for Modern Warfare.
Just no Sci-Fi/WWII bullshit.
I want enlisted to be good but its just not that great. The gunplay doesn't feel good especially with automatic guns, its actually terrible and the game is kind of clunky in general. It's fun for a little bit but it has serious problems. My first few matches I was getting over 100 kills with a tank which was fun but infantry gameplay just isn't that good.
>My first few matches I was getting over 100 kills with a tank which was fun
Well I should hope so, your first three matches are against the AI and they can't use or fight vehicles.
Weird, there 100% were vehicles but I don't remember if they were actually killing things, I know they were at least moving. That explains why my kills dropped off by half though.
I want enlisted to be good but its just not that great. The gunplay doesn't feel good especially with automatic guns, its actually terrible and the game is kind of clunky in general. It's fun for a little bit but it has serious problems. My first few matches I was getting over 100 kills with a tank which was fun but infantry gameplay just isn't that good.
Yeah and I don't know how you thought you got a good impression of automatic weapons when you wouldn't have had anything close to resembling a high-tier weapon setup.
>you have to play 1000 hours to get to the good feeling guns
Uhh, probably not even going to try. The game is grindy as frick like war thunder. It's really not up for debate anyways, the gunplay needs a lot of polishing. You've never played another fps if you think otherwise.
1 year ago
Anonymous
It's like 70 matches to max a campaign. And you start getting nice weapons well before max level in a campaign.
Really wish they limit weapon attachments next game. Maybe do something how insurgency did it, or balance weapon attachments with perks.
I despised how you could get +4 upgrades for vehicles. You should only get 1 and you have to rely on your skill and your team to excel instead of having a gucci'd out vehicle. Ruined battlefield imo
Fricking around and making teammates mad on BF3 was the fricking best
>Spawn on Armored Shield >Hop in tank, immediately smash the helicopters >Kicked from server, receive multiple death threats and other obscene voice messages
>BF4 is a fun game covered in a large amount of hilariously bad bugs and netcode issues >Hand off game to DICE LA who slowly fixes it >Eventually they go mad with power and go beyond fixing bugs to changing things and frick the game up >Hardline comes out and has a bunch of new features and ideas, unfortunately it flops because the gaming community cannot understand that it's simply BF with a cops/robbers coat of paint and not a CS or Payday clone >Instead of following along with their setup and going near futuristic they try to juke CoD (????????) and make a WW1 game >BF1 is NOT fun, NOT balanced, and has more bugs than BF4 did at launch, instead of fixing bugs they slowly introduce more and the game never really hits it's stride
That's where the series died, 5 couldn't do enough to bring people back and 2042 was made by interns.
Hardline was good because the inherently goofy setting meshed well with BF4's gadget/attachment bloat.
BF4 was bad because the inherently serious setting didn't mesh well with BF4's gadget/attachment bloat (and shit map design).
I really liked the setting of BF1, that is to say >Hey what if it was WW1 but all the weapons and vehicles weren't complete shit and everything had a slick coat of paint?
Problem was it felt more like that star wars game they did where you just hipfire everything
BF1 was the highest selling game, ironically. Consolegays absolutely loved that game because of the graphics, 'immersion", cheese tactics and slow / low skill ceiling gameplay.
Everyone else stuck with the older games, and still do.
>has more bugs than BF4 did at launch
Wrong.
Regardless of what you think about BF1, it had the best and most polished launch in the franchise's history.
i just wish bf3 had populated nz/aus servers
bf4 is fun and all but i miss the maps
plus the bf3 had actually functional vehicle handling i don't know what the frick dice did with it in bf4
>tons of balance problems >Generals
Dude the frick are you on about, the Superweapons general is literally the least balanced thing in the entirety of the world, and don't even get me started on AURORAS. >Crashes
Can't deny but those have been fixed, unlike Generals. You can't even FIX the Generals bugs because the codebase was so rushed they literally scrapped the NAMESAKE MECHANIC before the closed beta began.
superweapon is one of the worst generals in the game, since her humvees (thing that america relies on the most) are more expensive than other usa's, and auroras are banned in most tournaments. strongest generals are air, stealth, toxin, and maybe china infantry. rest are trash.
1 year ago
Anonymous
I play casual with friends, and do not do any tournament balancing. EMP patriots are my bane because it stops tank rushes and infantry rushes are no good, not to mention it instantly invalidates any aircraft that isn't a support or the aurora. She also gets an even better aurora.
>thing that america relies on the most
I don't rely on those when I play any general, I rely on my airforce far more. >auroras are banned in most tournaments
I play casual with my friends. I do not like competitive, I think competitive balancing tends to ruin games. Infact, it actually DID for Command and Conquer 3, which is why I had to install a reversion mod because the GDI singleplayer campaign literally became impossible on hard mode.
>strongest generals are >air
I like air a lot but man, he was snubbed out of too much. All of the cool air stuff outside of the combat chinook either went to SW or was scrapped. >stealth
Disagree, can be invalidated by a wall of defenses, USA sneezing the wrong way, or listening outposts >Toxin
Until ambulances and nuclear shells/nuke cannons, true. Early game is key for toxin. >China infantry
Definitely had my fair share of problems with China infantry in play with my friends.
1 year ago
Anonymous
air is the strongest in the game because he gets lasers that block missiles on almost all of his jets/helicopters which makes it really hard to harass his eco early game. his support powers alone can win the game for you. stealth is also great but you cant go face to face with anyone else and expect to win. even vanilla china can kill stealth by spamming outposts + anything.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>which makes it really hard to harass his eco early game
Minigunners, or 6 rocket troops will overwhelm them. It's really overrated, at best it can frick with people with early defenses, but only in casual.
Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity departments meddling in hiring and firing practices, as required of most publicly traded companies by institutional investors
One more theory is that the games started to really go to shit once they were developed for x86 specifically, rather than the power, cell, and x86 architectures. engines and performance programming tricks took precedence over correct programming, which led to things like 2042's notoriously bad mouse interface
Battlefield was a PC gaming. It was amazing when it was PC only and then it got scaled back once it came out on consoles.
EA of course started to milk the franchise more and more, lot of the old talent left and new left wing morons came in and started to push women and minorities. When old fans started to fight back all Swedish moron Patrick Soderlund said "dont like new battlefield, dont buy it". ea fired him a few months later but the damage was done and BF5 sucked ass
>scaled back
DICE has always wanted the franchise to be playable on consoles since BF1942. http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/28480/battlefield-could-have-been-exclusive-to-gamecube
Battlefield had a unique niche. It wasn’t as arcadey and ADHD twitch spastic movement like COD, but it wasn’t a full blown military sim either. It had a great spot in the middle of that which a dedicated fanbase really enjoyed. Every since BF2 they have been trying more and more to appeal to the COD crowd and failing every time. It’s quite remarkable really, over a decade of ruining their franchise and they STILL can’t work out why people liked it in the first place.
Hired a bunch of homosexuals and women. People that hate guns in general and want to make their opinions heard, even if it has no fricking place in the game. MW2 hired gun professionals and modeled real guns, for example. You can't make a game about guns and not like guns to some degree.
>MW2 hired gun professionals and modeled real guns, for example.
You mean the team that designed thier weapon models on some airsoft toys and even left the bb sleeves in thier models? Lol
>WW2 game nobody asked for releases while everyone was still happy with the WW1 game >DICE releases hype trailers and promises 'old' battlefield is back with 2042 >its a steaming pile of shit that barely resembles an alpha build
dice diluted the playerbase with two steaming hot piles of garbge. simple as
To be honest, i am glad 2042 released as it did.
Imagine if they took an extra year to develop it, it wouldn't release in the state its in now.
It'd be less buggy, but it'd still have doubled down on the empty maps and shitty specialists. It took everyone hating it for them to finally change it. I'm glad it released as shit rather then them wasting time to release a polished shit.
A lot of people will probably defer to the "go woke go broke" argument but I think BF just failed to innovate on its gameplay formula. Even COD kind of reinvented itself.
I honestly don't care anymore.
If I have to eat shitty forced Black person trans woke shit in order to get a BF game that has GOOD gameplay then so be it.
Sadly 2042 had the first but not the second of that.
i had a lot of fun with in one the playtests, laughed my ass off when i was dragging an enemies corpse around while he was yelling at me to let him go. Is the proxy vc still in the game? definitely one of the highlights for me
not only is it still in the game but the default setting automatically turns on your mic when you die which is the most brilliant bit of player taunting from a dev I've seen in years
yeah thats hilarious, shame the playtests are so limited else i'd play more if they just did it the way dark & darker did it, just dedicate an entire weekend instead of 6 hours on seemingly random days
this was the best multiplayer series in the early 2010s but it feels totally Black personfied and it's like none of the same people develop the games anymore
they've been toning them down every month, lots of free cosmetics that cover their faces/unique features, they also cut down a lot of their voice lines and 'quips'
The problem with 2042 is the map design is ass. There are so many classic maps over the generations of the game, this has none.
The morons said they had the most people ever working on the game, but they spread themselves too thin. Portal was a great idea on paper but it should have been its own standalone game and not some half assed piece of shit that it turned out to be.
2042 was so fricking shite that I actually bought MW2 because I was itching for a FPS game. I haven't bought COD since like Black ops 2. Ill give them credit, MW2 has a lot of content and it seems like they actually gave a shit about making the game. I still hate COD but what other option do I have? Go outside??? frick off
>le classic maps
Aids, people think a straight line is the pinnacle of design. Meanwhile 2042 maps have more cover than previous wide open maps, but memes > reality.
The more cover doesn't change the fact they are still more open then before. No one wanted wide open maps. And 128 sized maps are stupid, its just the same levels of engagement spread across more areas.
These a BR maps salvaged into being BF maps that have no flow or entertaining design.
But what truly makes the maps sucks is thew guns. Everything in this game is a fricking laser. I get sniped by dudes with SMG's at massive ranges without them needing to stop firing. What's the point of open areas when you gun can perform just as good in them? You don't need to change your play style or anything.
The weapon as well made it suck. If you wanted to support your team with certain gadget you'd be fricked if that weapon didn't quite suit the map, it made it harder and put you at a disadvantage.
Now because any class can have the boring laser beams there's no incentive to ever do anything different and makes the open areas just plain dead space.
>Funny, people were screaming and shitting themselves and crying because the guns weren't laser beams at launch.
Yeah because no one wanted to stand in empty fields and pot shot each other for 10 minutes. They wanted lasers to deal with the open.
The cover doesn't matter because in between the cover is more empty space then any other map.
Most BF1's maps where designed that way because they had trenches, annoying and repetitive at times but was there for the theme.
The reason the maps your posting are better is that they are smaller. They are point of interest maps. Points with buildings, and empty space in between. The time taken to move from point to point in 2042 is MASSIVE compared to the older games. There was also far less verticality in those games compared to 2042. And I don't just mean buildings because yes the older games had those too. I mean shit like the sneaky mckay spots in Stranded, the new glaciers in Breakaway, the cranes Manifest, the boat on Discarded, the cliffs of Exposure and there's more as well. I don't recall you ever needing to be so worried about being shot by someone outside of your version whose massively above you.
They redesigned most of the maps and have improved them a fair bit, but once you try to play rush it really drives in how bad the initial design of the maps is and how them thinking that 64v64 requires HUGE open areas with nothing in them is just fricking moronic.
BF1 was so fricking good. >Guns near universally have that slight twinge of being old dogshit so there's lots of variety in picking what you like rather than just picking whatever dakkarifle has the best ttk >SSS tier A/V presentation that has to be experienced to be believed >Operations is a fricking awesome game mode >Awesome depictions of WW1 battles, weapons, locations, and vehicles to the point that even normies get into WW1 history thanks to this game >Generally pretty good maps, a solid bunch of garbage as with every BF game but the highs are very high >Overall lots of variety in the maps too, with classics like St Quentin, infantry maps like Nivelle, and oddballs like Legoland >Fort de Vaux is the only true successor to Operation Metro and I don't even think they were trying >Aerial gameplay the most fun in the series >God tier soundtrack >Campaign that actually gave the impression they were trying >Dose of wokeness like every shitty western AAA game but at least BF1, unlike BFV, was overrepresentation of reality rather than actual fan fiction >Bayonet charges give me stiffies
It really was great. I don't get the hate.
Only thing people hate is the random spread and the weapons in game, but other then that it was an amazing game.
the only valid complaints of BF1 are subjective gameplay shit like the gunplay and weapon spread. but even that is a purposeful mechanic that dictates class roles and their effective ranges of engagements. its not a game that allows you to laser people from across the map without consequence.
BF1 was so fricking good. >Guns near universally have that slight twinge of being old dogshit so there's lots of variety in picking what you like rather than just picking whatever dakkarifle has the best ttk >SSS tier A/V presentation that has to be experienced to be believed >Operations is a fricking awesome game mode >Awesome depictions of WW1 battles, weapons, locations, and vehicles to the point that even normies get into WW1 history thanks to this game >Generally pretty good maps, a solid bunch of garbage as with every BF game but the highs are very high >Overall lots of variety in the maps too, with classics like St Quentin, infantry maps like Nivelle, and oddballs like Legoland >Fort de Vaux is the only true successor to Operation Metro and I don't even think they were trying >Aerial gameplay the most fun in the series >God tier soundtrack >Campaign that actually gave the impression they were trying >Dose of wokeness like every shitty western AAA game but at least BF1, unlike BFV, was overrepresentation of reality rather than actual fan fiction >Bayonet charges give me stiffies
the atmosphere of BF1 is fricking triple A, only thing i hate is the weapon select with like >shotgung version A,B,C
>only gives a certain amount of vehicles per round >every class can kill vehicles >makes it so there's always a stalemate in the dogshit linear conquest maps because you can't make a hail mary in a tank to back cap >everyone goes sniper for the next 30 minutes
great game
operations is bullet hell: the game. at least in conquest you can kind of make a difference on your own if you have a team of glue eaters; back capping and what not. operations, you're fricked.
rush was better
I hate the Medic Assault merge.
I think 5 classes:
Medic
-SMG
-Defibs
-Medkit
Assault
-best guns
-grenade launcher
-heavy armor (Like the older titles)
Engineer
-smg or shotgun
-at mine or rocket launcher
-repair tool
Recon
-sniper or dmr
-spotting scope or claymore
-spawning beacon
Support
-LMG or shotgun
-ammo crate
-c4 or mortar
>just make a battlefield 3/4
I still can't get over how this has been the most said thing since 1 was shown and they STILL don't even try.
I'm worried that the next BF will be a 2042 sequel as well
Well that’s a good thing because BF1 was such a bastardisation of WW1 that it may as well be set on another planet. Shit pisses me off to this day, they wanted to make a WW2 game but felt it’d be too boring so they just made a mockery of WW1 instead.
2042 is fun now.
Its a bad BF game, but it still feels like a BF game.
It needs some weapon tweaks and more of them, a better matchmaker/server browser and more content overall.
This whole 'classes ruined 2042' is stupid too. The buffs gadgets got in comparison make up for it.
no it isn't.
i gave it a shot, and admittedly kind of enjoyed it. but that was so fricking short lived. i can't be fricking bothered to boot it up. the only reason a gave that shit a shot was because i could play it for free. i would much rather play bf4, bf1 or bf5 then that shit.
the only thing i can say something positive about is the railgun tank.
That's what I mean by it needs more content. Games are to samsey as there's so few ways to do what you do.
Especially compared to the massive range of stuff 4 had.
It needs more then just that sure but it'd be a start.
They kept backing away from what made the series unique (huge fricking maps, being a disposable grunt, teamwork) in favor of making it more like CoD and class-based shooters. Which was stupid because EA already TRIED making their CoD clone in the form of the Medal of Honor reboot. And that failed.
Remember the Link Park tie-in with MoH: Warfighter?
>They GENUINELY thought that a shitty Tarklov clone would be the big selling point of 2042 >So big that they made an entire specialist system around it >And at some point they were even trying to make a BR game >Despite Firestorm already bombing
They're so fricking stupid.
And now Apex is dropping in popularity and their shitty attempts at mobile shooters got cancelled less than a year of release. They couldn't even make any fricking money off mobile customers. Expect Respawn to be gutted next if they don't turn it around.
Since BF4 Battlefield devs have been trend chasers not setters. They follow others because they themselves don't know what to do. To get 2042's battlepast to even work they stole some guy from CoD's team.
>get western team >lose because your whole team is sitting on your mountain sniping and your anti air is AFK >get eastern team >lose because your whole team is sitting on THEIR mountain sniping and your anti air is stuck under the pipes
DICE can't make a good game anymore, it's not even *DICE* though since that company is a revolving door of developers. A new Battlefield comes out, people hate it EA fires half the staff and replaces them with people that only worked on mobile games prior. Those people release a new Battlefield game people hate it EA fires half the staff and replaces them with Indians etc
Did that ceo that tried to imply disabled celtic women with katanas in ww2 is more historically accurate and told people not to buy it if they didn't like it get fired?
Do you think Battlefield will ever, ever attempt to curb the obscene dominance of snipers in any way?
Every BF game has been raped by the power of snipers since draw distance fog was removed.
Almost every map that allows open sniping is often loathed, like Galicia or Lupkow Pass in BF1.
homosexuals defend it as "realism" that running out in the open gets you sniped but in real life guns aren't nearly as easy to be accurate with and killing a sniper means he's gone, not that he's gone for 10 seconds before he's doing his shit again
How do you even do this? MORE bullet drop? Greater damage dropoff? Straight-up Recon/Scout player limits? My personal favorite is far far more severe bullet dropoff damage for non-headshots.
Only way to solve the sniper problem is to remove them, give users the option to opt out of servers with recon class enabled or long range scopes on rifles.
You can't really fix them. Yo can make them trash and then no one would use them.
If you give them something that requires skill, like only 1 hit headshot and tough bullet physics someone will still figure it out and win.
I think the game is bettert off without them. Or at least turn them into stuff like the NTW and be slow as frick but still usable in closeish range. Discouraging hill Black personing is a good thing.
you can make them utter garbage and people are still gonna be drawn to them because me go snipe on big map is such a common mindset among random shitters
This thread is bringing back a lot of nostalgia. Which BF games still have active servers? Is Hell Let Loose good? Im still playing Insurgency since I love the perfect balance of arcadey + realism, but I miss shooters with vehicles like BF
3 is on life support, has one full server in Germany at all times, one full server in america inconsistently
4 is "small niche community" tier, can still find games
1's deprecated anticheat has killed all official servers but customs are still going strong
BFV is actively alive
If you're willing to play old, janky games, Command and Conquer Renegade has some fun multiplayer.
You can play the mods like A Path Beyond which are infinitely more polished.
I tried Squad but just didn't like fighting at long range engagements
What I really want is a new Tribes game but that will literally never happen again ;_;
all they'd have to do is look at the last names of the uppermanagement and look at the shareholders and the names of their respective companies
i just checked EA and blockrock has nearly the biggest stake lmao. also they just sold $34,000,000 worth but it was only 1.6% of what their stake is, which is about 2 billion
Good god how many of these women do you think even played halo growing up
No fricking way more than 5-10 of them did beyond watching their brothers, if that
man I wish there was a game as good as RO2
firefights were pretty damn intense, I miss that
now its just cowadoody instarevive or milsim shit getting sniped from 2 miles away
BF3 has one server in EU apparently.
BF4 niche, all regions have at least 1 server.
BF1 full of cheaters / homosexuals. Few servers in each region
BFV full of cheaters. I believe it's just Asia that has "robot" servers that auto-kick / ban above certain parameters. Last I played the AU server it was full of chinks / cheaters.
Judging by the last game, I think everything went wrong: >shooting and movement feel off, they somehow literally fricked up the "FPS" part, even Portal feels like shit >hero shit when nobody cares about pajeet backstory in a 64v64 game >gun customization is pants on head moronic and most guns are trash >shitty gadgets, most of which remain unused >shit open maps, not a single close quarters map >they just updated it this week and completely revamped the class system, for the worst
Friendly reminder that Bad Company 2 was the best frostbite Battlefield. >better class balance >better map balance (no Metro-tier maps) >tactical (and useful!) destruction >vehicles are good without being OP (no Jets or Little Birds farming infantry kills) >hit detection was decent despite running on 30hz tickrate >all maps were free (no premium) >Rush and Conquest were the only gamemodes and maps were made SPECIFICALLY for these gamemodes >gunplay was fun and varied despite the arsenal being very limited >perks/class upgrades were useful and promoted teamplay >one good player could make a difference due to the 32 player limit
Battlefield fans are absolute morons for letting Venice Unleashed die. Literally none of the big-name "battlefield" youtubers said anything about VU when it launched.
I'd either forgotten my password, or had it changed in Origin. When I tried to log on VU, it wouldn't let me. That, along with the few populated servers that I remembered, and the lack of updates for the client, made me write it off as dead.
Cmon anon… you know there’s a huge difference between having thousands of players on a game and one server with 64 players on it. Namely that those 64 players are going to be absolutely cracked at the game and it likely won’t be much fun for you. I discovered this after trying to get into age of mythology when there were 100 people playing it on Voobly. Would not recommend, got fricking rekt.
Dead mean dead, I don't consider a game dead when at 13h00 EU time there is a shitloads of servers (knowing that not all servers are shown here, due to my filter list), so frick a tree anon
Anyone remember the supposed/perhaps rumored situation of the devs scoffing or laughing at the idea of CoD including a Battle Royale before the trailer of the entry with the ye olde lady with a prosthetic arm on the front lines? I could be jumbling situations and entries here. If I'm not, reality must have hit like a truck for them.
BFV sold less than 10 million. It failed to meet internal sales expectations and its failure was pinned on marketing and a failure to include a Battle Royale mode. EA faced their larges stock drop in over a decade by about 18 percent in that quarter, something which was attributed in part to the game's poor sales. The successor did not recover and was similarly regarded as disappointing in terms of sales while also having decisions that didn't resonate with players.
Yawn, repeat the memes. It had the most players ever like a year and a half after release, but people want to pretend it sold 0 copies after release. On the old PS stats website PS4 alone had 7 million players, and thats 1/3 platforms and that was several years ago.
Look how bad EA stock is hurting. Those poor poor EA execs.
1 year ago
Anonymous
You haven't answered anything I've said, all of which is easily sourced from EA themselves. PS trophy/player stats are useless because people can share copies or play them on other PSN accounts and it contributes to the number. That also doesn't differentiate between purchases and PS Plus owners, which makes the numbers even less reliable and less impressive. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder. I've never seen this kind of fanboyism before for BF. It's kind of baffling.
1 year ago
Anonymous
You didnt ask a question for me to answer. The baffling thing is how many times you homosexuals repeat the same shit millions of times. You can say it all you want, but the facts prove it wrong.
1 year ago
Anonymous
You're still deflecting.
>but the facts prove it wrong
Do you mean EA's own financial documentation where they mention that the game sold less than 10 million (7.3) and missed expectations by about a million units and that a lack of a Battle Royale was considered a contributing factor? >As Andrew discussed, the desire to make changes to Battlefield V led us to move its launch
into a more difficult window, and prioritizing the single-player campaign over battle royale also hurt sales. As a result, we sold 7.3 million units, about 1 million less than comprehended by our
Q3 guidance.
https://s22.q4cdn.com/894350492/files/doc_financials/2019/q3/Q3-FY19-Prepared-Remarks-FINAL.pdf
Or market observations on the massive dip that quarter, which BFV's failure to meet projections contributed to? >EA stock is facing its worst drop in more than a decade, with CEO Andrew Wilson warning that the "significant challenges" it faced during the third fiscal quarter would carry on through the fourth. This is in part due to Battlefield 5(opens in new tab)'s performance, which sold a million fewer copies than EA had anticipated. By Tuesday, the company's stock had declined by around 18 percent. As MarketWatch(opens in new tab) notes, it's the most significant decline of the millennium for EA, and brings it close to its largest ever decline, which was on December 17, 1999. It dropped by 25.5 percent. At the time of writing, it's started to rise slightly, fluctuating between 15 to 17 percent. In a conference call, Wilson also mentioned Battlefield 5's delay, and that its launch around the holidays meant that it was often discounted to ensure it could compete with the other games vying for the attention of holiday shoppers.
https://www.pcgamer.com/battlefield-5-did-not-meet-eas-sales-expectations/
Fanboy. Like, to an embarrassing degree.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Ok and? It's not the year 2018. Just because the EA exec is extremely greedy, doesnt mean that 7.3 million sales in like a month is bad... what fricking delusion.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>sold tens of millions
Incorrect. By an enormous margin. >The baffling thing is how many times you homosexuals repeat the same shit millions of times. You can say it all you want, but the facts prove it wrong.
The facts prove YOU wrong. >Just because the EA exec is extremely greedy, doesnt mean that 7.3 million sales in like a month is bad... what fricking delusion.
And now you move the goalpost. Get it together, acknowledge reality, and move on with it in mind.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Incorrect. By an enormous margin.
No, moron. THE YEAR IS NOT 2018. Time did not stop in 2018. Do you really think that they sold 0 games after 2018? Everyone saw you crying on Ganker and all 8 billion people on earth said, >NO! I wont buy Battlefield because of the SJW WOKE grandma with a prosthetic arm!!!!!
1 year ago
Anonymous
You call me a moron, but you're still flailing and picking at the weeds trying to find a point while ignoring every single refutation of your own BS and substantiation of my factual claims. No sales numbers were given beyond the initial report, meaning it met no milestones of note. They actively declined to provide the successor's sales numbers in an investor call where they even went so far as reminding people that Battlefield is less than 10% of their revenue to pat it down, which implies an even worse result.
Get. It. Together.
Acknowledging reality will not take away from your enjoyment of the game or make other people care more about it.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>they failed to give numbers therefore i can only base everything on my personal feelings and a single number from 2018.
ok
Meanwhile many stats pages have been available showing mass numbers of people, and BFV has more players than all the other BF games and 2042 numbers are constantly rising.
1 year ago
Anonymous
You might be ill.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Sorry that logic bothers you.
Just think for a few seconds.
2018 they sold 7 mil, ok? Not disputed.
At about 2020 the number of players was MASSIVELY higher than before.
Do you still think they only sold 7 million, or MAYBE that number... increased??
The current year is 2023. Maybe, just maybe, they sold 1 or 2 copies since 2018, and maybe 1 or 2 more copies since 2020.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Specific claims made. >Called out as lies. >ALL substantiated. >All ignored.
See
You might be ill.
Just acknowledge the facts. It won't hurt you or make your life worse.
Sorry that logic bothers you.
Just think for a few seconds.
2018 they sold 7 mil, ok? Not disputed.
At about 2020 the number of players was MASSIVELY higher than before.
Do you still think they only sold 7 million, or MAYBE that number... increased??
The current year is 2023. Maybe, just maybe, they sold 1 or 2 copies since 2018, and maybe 1 or 2 more copies since 2020.
They do not highlight or regard growth or notable increases in financial contribution coming from BFV in the future financial report. No one said it didn't sell any more afterward, but there are no indications of the game crossing sales milestones that'd have been regarded in investor calls and financial reports to bolster their position. You're being willfully obtuse due to fanboyism. I've given you the time of day in good faith inclusive of sources while you continue to cope and compound on the BS with asspull claims and moved goalposts. Keep your 4 extra copies and rub them together. Humoring an idiot is a waste of time, and you've proven your case as one multiple times over. Embarassing.
1 year ago
Anonymous
You just keep saying the same thing that was said in 2018. Sorry, sweaty, but time moves on.
1 year ago
Anonymous
The data and statements came in 2019 after their FY2019 Q3 ended. You can't even get that right.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Holy shit you're trying SO hard to twist it. They said by the end of 2018 it sold 7+ mil.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Holy shit you're trying SO hard to twist it. >You just keep saying the same thing that was said in 2018 >that was said in 2018 >said in 2018
>ELECTRONIC ARTS PREPARED COMMENTS FY19Q3 >February 5, 2019
1 year ago
Anonymous
Holy fricking moron. What is wrong with you? What are you trying to even argue?
In 2019, they said they sold 7.3 million by the end of 2018.
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/battlefield-5-fails-to-meet-sales-targets-and-ea-e/1100-6464832/
February 5, 2019
1 year ago
Anonymous
see
>Holy shit you're trying SO hard to twist it. >You just keep saying the same thing that was said in 2018 >that was said in 2018 >said in 2018
>ELECTRONIC ARTS PREPARED COMMENTS FY19Q3 >February 5, 2019
>Holy fricking moron. What is wrong with you? What are you trying to even argue?
Take a look in the mirror, look yourself in the eyes, and say this. You can't even admit the most basic shit or acknowledge yourself as even misspeaking at worst. Petty and pathetic.
1 year ago
Anonymous
It did suck but not much really happened because of it. They kind of just rolled with it. Now 2042 sucked ass. So much ass they reshuffled the entire staff and set up new studios because of it. AND did so poor Sony started railing on it to try and make CoD look good.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>posting the all time stock chart >thinking this means anything
homie stop pretending you know anything about investing.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>You have to buy and sell hourly!!
1 year ago
Anonymous
No one is still holding EA stock that they bought in 1994 anon. You are moronic.
You posted a downgrade made specifically for underpowered consoles in an era where PC was actually far more powerful than consoles, unlike today where they all play the same games and look 99% identical and all have crossplay.
>lets remove major features >lets remove vehicles >lets make all the maps smaller and narrower >lets make the first one only for consoles >lets make make singleplayer with shitty AI and quippy heroes
homosexual
Airplanes are just a way for a few players to dogfight above the map and not have any impact on the rest of the game beneath. Removing them was an improvement.
>You posted a downgrade made specifically for underpowered consoles in an era where PC was actually far more powerful than consoles, unlike today where they all play the same games and look 99% identical and all have crossplay.
Oh, when the game used to be more fun, I remember that. But babies cried and cried and cried and cried.
Remember when the hovercraft was actually useful?
Remember when a battlefield game actually had vehicles on the map?
Remember when everything in the game wasnt nerfed?
Remember when you could play the game how you wanted?
Remember when the specialists were all useful?
>Remember when the hovercraft was actually useful?
Flying was fun yes, the turret was not. >Remember when a battlefield game actually had vehicles on the map?
You mean when it had 5 air Black folk ruining the game, yeah it sucked >Remember when everything in the game wasn't nerfed?
You mean when when the SMG's dominated the entire game, yeah it sucked >Remember when you could play the game how you wanted?
You mean when when shitters like you spammed the op meta shit and whined when your precious easy wins got taken away? Or when you got aggro that you couldn't use the meta gadgets and do every role when the classes were restored?? >Remember when the specialists were all useful?
They still are?
I can't believe there's a moron trying to defend launch 2042 in its broken non fun state.
Enjoy camping with claymore on ziplines now. SO FUN.
I love 1 tank per map, wooo!
I love that all vehicles are 5x more powerful because people dont want to pick rocket launcher specialists because they suck dick and arent fun.
Was playing breakthrough last night and literally no one has a stinger to kill the 2 condors molesting everyone. No one was dropping ammo. 000 Angel crates.
Bf 2042 sucked almighty fat ass. That's what happened. Shit mechanics, shit graphics, shit destruction physics that they later nerfed, jaggy as fricking shit, still too few fricking players i thought we'd be up to fricking 500 by now and experience real war shit, they even nerfed the player count, no classes, too few fricking maps, the maps we have suck ass... it's just all bad.
>still too few fricking players i thought we'd be up to fricking 500 by now and experience real war shit
The older BF devs admitted that anything beyond 64p would suck. And they're right.
All they do is just make the maps larger to accommodate. So rather then more intense fights, its just more fights spread across a larger map. Requiring more maps to make and more unnecessary dev time for essentially the same overall experience. 128 isn't fun and was a mistake.
>128 isn't fun and was a mistake >tfw instantly reminded of MAG >go to google to pull up a MAG image >come across pic related
I haven't played Battlefield 2042, but have MAG. Just how bad is it in the former because in the latter it's just a clusterfrick of chaos where nothing gets done when player counts are that big.
is anyone else having fun with 2042? yeah its got a ton of problems but it scratches my itch, and i haven't played it to death like 4 and 1
also i can never get lobbies for V in the PNW, its a pain in the ass
>also i can never get lobbies for V in the PNW, its a pain in the ass
that's because most of the playerbase is located in china, barely any americans or euros play it
Beware that it's steam numbers, games like BF3/BF4 are more populate Origin wise (almost all my friends and me are using the Origin client when playing those games)
bc2 is just a cod campaign tbh, it doesn't have the charm of the original which didn't take itself very seriously (was basically an adaptation of three kings)
>BF3 was the fist to really embrace consoles
It didn't.
The consoles versions of BF3 are nowhere near on par with the PC version to begin with, unlike Bad Company.
It is, consoles numbers > PC numbers
https://battlefieldtracker.com/bf1/insights/population?days=-1
PC is hacker aids filled with bugs and overpriced, sorry chumps.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Salesnumbers just mean they went with what works for the masses not with what is a good game.
>main product
If that was the case, then the console versions of BF3 would be on par with PC.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Up until BF3 that was their main product but starting with that theu went with concolse direction and I don't blame them too much since easily that yelded more money.
Why are there no other FPS where I can be a mortar Black person?
Mortars in Bf3 and BF1 were fun >kill someone with mortar >they get mad and kill you back with their own >rest of the match is a mortar duel between you and this random dude on the other side of the map
This, I love doing this on Scene crossing because you can "glitch" a bit with the wall/building and become immune to mortar shell while still being able to use a mortar.
They wanted that CoD money so they made BFBC and kept wanting to chase it so they made every BF from 3 on a BC sequel while naming it BF, losing their players who wanted BF while CoD players kept playing CoD and people who wanted 'new thing' played the BCBF's they kept releasing.
i really hope DICE doesn't look to MW19/22's ground war for any sort of inspiration because that mode is absolute dog shit.
its the worst of both worlds.
I shit you not, i enjoyed the free beta of 2042.
You could ACTUALLY get a vehicle in it and play unlike BF3/4
That shit was so fun with the increased playercounts and map size >Spawn in a heli >Opposing team heli shoots you down instantly with a wireguided missile >Continues on his 60/0 kd rampage >60 seconds later repeat
The maps for BF4 and 3 were SHIT for air combat, they needed to be bigger >Spawn a jet >Fly for 5 seconds >O-oh you are out of the combat zone soldier, do a 360 or we will suicide you! >Turn >Fly for 5 seconds >repeat
Also the fact that the game was always balanced around shooting doritoes means that air vehicles were either completely broken vs ground targets or completely useless depending which mode you played
You either played the slow, shitty A10 to do any damage to ground vehicles
Or you play the F35 and basically do nothing but kill A10's or helos
Both get shot down from the other side of the map by anti air
The exact same thing that happened to every other western dev
Incompetent diversity hires
/thread.
the fricks the infiltrated the industry in the early 2010's are talentless homosexuals that refuse to gain the skills and talent needed to head big projects.
combined with companies moronic inclination to use a few twitter posts instead of actual market research killed them too.
Black people really live rent free in your heads.
The answer is corporate greed.
>the answer is people who want to make the most money with the least effort so they hire cheaper incompetent people
Same thing really
no, dumb homosexual. lefties got rid of competant white coders and replaced them with non white males and women. You got what you wanted. You won. Lefties won. All games are shit now, because the left won. You killed gaming.
>lefties
pretty bad way of describing them, they dont care about socialism anywhere near as much as their obsession with "bigotry"
It's fairly apt, considering what they're trying to do.
Natural social order and all that.
STFU you fricking Black person
You're also part of what's wrong with gaming. A stupid, low IQ npc too much of a pussy to stand up for quality, settling for lowest effort.
Evil corporations didn't frick u their products on the based game design. They overexploit the product, but when the product is frick up from start, that's the devs fault.
Now go suck that Black person wiener you seem to love so much
>black people
You mean Black folk?
What, do you like Black folk anon?
Are you that much of an npc?
What a fricking joke
>Black people
Black folk ain't people
>pandering to nignogs
The absolute state of muricans RN
Go back
There's a difference between hiring a black person who's qualified for the job and a company gayging up their games, jumping on the latest -isms that only liberal metro America cares about, pandering to every minority because it gets Blackrock points and making games sterile movies that hold your hand and have very limited gameplay.
its kind of a shame. so many IPs have gone to SHIT because of that. i try to stay away from conspiracy theory shit but there is no doubt in my mind that ESG/blackrock shit is real
not only that, the other problem is companies trying to copy successful games and diluting their own product as a result (2042 with its gay ass specialists and V's battle royale, which i think i tried once)
DICE is one of the most incompetent developers in history. they have a dedicated fanbase and continue to take dumps on said fanbases' chest.
yeah i know. i like using steam metrics for shit; battlefield didn't come onto steam until what, 2018? all those are relatively new players. its a good way to gauge a playerbase when a game launches through multiple launchers/companies and/or platforms
>its a good way to gauge a playerbase
I know, I do the same. I just wanted to give this info for the new players that may think that BF3/4 where on steam since day one didn't know why it was so low.
Black folk you mean?
I wish the problem was just Black folk because at least Black folk enjoy playing video games too. Women, soicucks and trannies are the real issue.
>enjoy playing video games
Meanwhile you just b***h about videogames
I want to go back, bros.
No? The guys who worked for DICE during their prime left after V. When they were developing 2042, NOBODY knew how the engine worked properly.
>inb4 just learn xd
It takes a long time to comprehend what the guy meant by this when somebody writes code so you test to see what it does until you understand completely. Now imagine trying to uncover every single connection of that piece of code in the engine. And DICE wanted to release 2042 early.
It was so fricked that people thought of switching to Unreal Engine to compromise.
>just learn bro!
Yes. That's what the last generation did.
There literally are not white people to hire. We have a massive labor shortage. 9/10 applications my company gets for quantitative or programmer roles are Indian or Chinese. White people are too stupid or something now.
The difference is that games used to be made by like 10 dudes with a passion. Now they are giant companies with hundreds of employees with no direct connection to the game except that its their job to make it and make sure it makes money.
> with a passion
why do you think that is? first post anon was right. It is diversity/quota filling grifters getting hired. They have no passion for your hobby. To them it is a vehicle for pushing their ideology than making a game. The have to deliver what minimal quality they can though, to stayed hired for as long as possible so they can keep the grift going and their CV looks good for when they are inevitably let go.
He said applicants, so your conspiraquota doesnt apply
maybe its the fact that there are almost 4 billion chinese and india people and only 700 million whites
LOL
the goyim still believe its all accidental
I mean every single franchise turned to shit, accidental because people are le dumb?
LOL
>every single franchise turned to shit
You got older. You long for being young. But youll just keep getting more decrepit.
Super Black persongays from sweden went into turbo israeli dick sucking mode and jerked off the money machine cummies into wallet
>WOAH THESE KIDS LOVE FUTURISTIC STUFF SO MUCH LETS MAKE A CALL OF DOODY COPY DUDE
indian outsourcing
delivered 3 lackluster games in a row
BF1 was pretty good.
BF5 had a pretty bad start, but it has redeemed itself (too bad the devs cut support for the game as it was turning around)
BF2042 sucks major shit and nothing short of a complete redo can fix it. its not just the hero shit, but nearly every aspect of the game is inferior to any past iteration.
I will forever be disappointed that they killed BF5 as soon as it was starting to become good, and then they said the reason for it was so that they could focus on making a better new BF title, and then they release 2042.
2. Battlefield 1 sold ridiculous numbers, and was an alright game.
>it sold a lot so it was a good game
The last one is really bad and i guess the one before also. They spun out of control chasing COD and PUBG..failed..and they tried chasing Apex and failed
Operation Metro....home....
mfw 24/7 metro, no rules pure chaos
I think I got like 70 revives on metro in b3 once in a 1k ticket game
Those were the good old days
i hated metro so much i couldn't stop playing on it
Metro meatgrinder was kino
Had so much fun roadkilling people with the MAV too
When you piss people off so badly that they start bringing out stingers on metro to shoot down a fricking MAV you know you've done well
Frick I miss BF3 so bad.
For me, it was Operation Locker
Frick yeah. Metro meatgrinder was great, just give me that chinese LMG and go prone for great victory and extreme rectal devastation in the chat.
The magic of these battlefield maps (like Metro and Operation locker) is that results in a front line forming somewhere in the map. It fun as frick to try and push through, either with brute force or flanking. This shit never happens in Call of Duty where everyone just runs around and randomly shoots eachother.
COD map designers do everything they can to prevent you from feeling like there's any sense of tactics or strategy whatsoever. Like players will naturally make a game interesting and then the cod devs will decide that you've had too much fun, time to spawn on the other side of the map now.
Or in ground war they just spread the points too far away from each other. Ironically the only game mode with a push-pull feeling is the one with the bots which is gay and boring because of said bots.
I have friends who still play COD multiplayer and it absolutely baffles me. Spawn, shoot a couple dudes, die to a guy who spawned behind you, repeat until one team gets more kills but no one is actually paying attention to that because the whole point is just to stroke your ego with kill streaks. It feels like a relic of past multiplayer games that should be gone by now.
>Nooo you cant just sit in a corner bouncing a grenade launcher grenade from a safe position allday!!!!!!
>I WILL BAN YOU FOR THIS!!!!
I miss it so much, bros :'(
It’s weird how one of the worst maps they’ve ever made is one of the most popular. Just play fricking COD if you like that shit.
>COD
BF gays throughout the series will always prefer to play on infantry clusterfrick maps just to avoid vehicle prostitutes
This. The only people that like vehicles are the gays that use them for big killstreaks
>muh call of dooty
they are nothing alike though.
Metro was great with 48 players, banned explosives / LMG's.
Blame the community and weirdos that prone with LMG's spamming down hallways / spam explosives.
They were raving about Exposure on BF2042 middle section as it was a meatgrinder and "reminded them of metro". Fricking weird homosexuals.
To be expected from the S OY community.
Metro was so much fun just a never ending meat grinder with amazing boots on the ground gameplay
>the non-stop explosions from grenades going off in the hallway
>that feel when you and another guy or 2 or 3 finally push through and wipe the enemy team turning the tide of the match
>pre nerf USAS flak spam fest
>nade and rpg spam after its nerf anyway
It would have been more fun if there were less explosives.
Otherwise the map is really fun.
The only time Metro was ever fun was during the playable beta of BF3 where Rush Metro was the only option and everyone was a bumbling moron instead of a turboautist grinding the same sightlines over and over again.
>playable beta of BF3 where Rush Metro was the only option
kino, thanks for the memories
Hell yeah I too was there
Metro was the beginning of the end.
A garbage map for a moronic audience who lacks skill or patience to play the game for real.
This, not BC, was where Battlefield irreversibly turned into a console shooter which lead to its death.
Shit take
So you enjoy what Battlefield has become? I understand.
I enjoyed Battlefield 3, not the modern woke shit with tons of missing features and terrible lack of polish
Fantastic take
That shit gave me PTSD nightmares paying 27/4 mode. The beta was also fricking hilarious to glitch around.
Metro and Locker conquest, pure adhd-chaos shitfest. Fun times
>gather milsim Black folk and arcade shooter mouthbreathers together
>shits itself multiple times
how is that possible that the first 5 spots in the scoreboard are farming the entire server, I believe that 99,9% of bf players are linked to a single AI that emulates the brain of a 12 IQ chimp
Me when I recall my memories playing Battlefield 3
no shooter will ever come close...what a curse
I had more fun trolling the battlelog forums than playing that shitty game
Had a lot of knife kills there
Knifing was botched in BF4
everything was, bf4 was a step down in every way from bf3 besides maybe the netcode
and it actually had a fricking menu screen
And BF3 was a step down in every way from BFBC2
BC2 is not a Battlefield game.
>t. gay with 400 hours in BC2
Well then BF3 sure as frick isn’t a battlefield game. That’s when the series basically gave up and became COD.
Last game I was impressed with technology tbh. The gun sounds and graphics were on point (-shitty blue filter).
I miss playing BF3 with /bfg/.
I miss the BF3 comp scene. There were 100+ teams competing, shit was awesome.
Air superiority servers / competitive.
How far we have fallen.
>I miss the BF3 comp scene
Gay.
No, that was the BF2 comp scene.
I played BF1 with them. Fun time. They were regaling me of the glory days of playing BF3 with some newbie named moot. Apparently he created funnyjunk.
bf3 and bf1 were their last good game. Bf4 was just 3.5. Operation Metro was pure autistic kino. You had to experience it.
>bf1
>good
you need to play BF1 Breach of San Quentin man. Operations is a great gamemode
Yes
if you dont like for the reason i didnt liked it either then dont worry it was fixed a while ago https://www.nexusmods.com/battlefield1/mods/50
Yes
>bf1 is good
>posts a song and a pre-game speech
anything.... relevant to the gameplay?
Fine I’ll spoon feed you
>slow skilless gameplay
>cheese everywhere (gas grenades, grenade spam, sweet spot snipers)
yeah looks great anon.
Just like every battlefield game
>just like every battlefield game
imagine being this bad at video games
Better than you boyo
totally bro. that's why you can't recognize which Battlefield games required skill.
None of them
t.playing since 1942
>being shit at video games for 20 years
why am I surprised.. this is Ganker after all.
Still amazingly better than you
u still can play it
Is there any point to buying BF1 today?
I only really enjoyed 1942 and Bad Company 2, while also playing a little BF2 and BF3.
just get 2042 and play portal.
2042 classes + team deathmatch + battle of the bulge is peak kino
portal sucks ass, the gun feel is botched, animations are bad and choppy, they tactical reload weapons, it's awful
yes. I got it recently on a steam sale and have been playing non stop.
The garbage WW1 weapons are kino and the game has soul even though it still has some unfixed bugs that have existed since launch
EA happened. Pushing trends, wanting to compete with Call of Duty etc. trying to push for yearly releases..
Most OG devs left after BF4 and that travesty of a launch. Then again with BFV.
Also Frostbite engine. Honestly they should just move over to Unreal at this point but EA wouldn't want to pay royalties.
>We will never get Bad Company 3
Feels bad bros...
They made 2042 instead of BC3. They thought there would be a "lack of interest" of BC3, according to Tom Henderson (leaker).
Which realistically there would be. A lot of the zoom zooms playing modern day battlefield haven't even played BC2. Even if DICE somehow sucked EA off well enough to let them make BC3 it'd be absolute shit because they themselves admitted they don't know why BC2 was so beloved (meaning they're moronic because its obvious).
Thank god they didn't, it's been going so well since then
>we want the call of duty audience
>but it's years too late
No game like 2142.
That was a great game.
>"enemy walker spotted!"
>"alright, you're good to go!"
>"cheers!"
>2142 Revive
Honestly some of the most fun I've had in years, while it lasted.
Damn near everyone who picked it up knew what they were doing. Fantastic trip down memory lane.
AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH I CANT FRICKING TAKE IT ANYMORE PLEASE GOD GIVE ME TITAN MODE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!
I swear Titans were bigger than that
what i thought 2042 was going to be. i know 2142 got low reviews but by god... the number of hours i sunk into it... so many good memories
Franchise was never good, but the formula was unique. Now they keep trying to reinvent the wheel and frick up in every aspect. Also the playerbase in general has become complete dogshit, thanks in great part to targeting the console audience starting with Bad Company.
You're an absolute homosexual if you think this.
Bad Company 2 was peak multiplayer FPS in its day.
Not a single game compared to it.
The only people who unironically believe this were kids who migrated from cowadooty.
Never played CoD.
Name one multiplayer shooter released in 2010 that was as good as BC2.
>bad company 2 was peak fps
Name one MP shooter that came out in the same year and was as good as BC2, samegay.
shut up samegayging frogBlack person
kek moron
y'all that like BC2, come play Portal. Portal has upgraded graphics and the maps have destruction. It's just the shitty 2042 maps that don't have destruction. No idea why, lazy devs maybe.
Arica Harbour is so fricking overrated holy frick.
fixed your pic homosexual
>y'all
didn't know people this moronic existed
bc2 was great in its own way but it was not battlefield and certainly not peak.
peak was battlefield 2.
BF3 is still the best battlefield.
Dunno if it was the best one. I played the shit out of it back in 2011/2012 and loved it to death. I will say it was the last good Battlefield. It had a good balance between customization and class structure, which was completely fricked by BF4 and every consequent Battlefield because the devs thought quantity automatically makes a game better.
Bad Company 2 kino
Battlefield 2 was the peak military sandbox game in the franchise and now it's over.
>START FIGHTING OR I'LL FIND SOMEONE WHO CAN!
>text you can hear
It lives through Forgotten Hope 2 and Project Reality
NO STIGLA
NO SHOTGUN
NO CAMPING
NO C4
NO RPG ON SOLDIERS
NO CLAYMORES
Home 🙂
Though no shotgun servers were massive homosexuals.
Lemme use my viking 870 god damnit.
>kill server admin duo in attack heli with jet
>less than 5 seconds pass before being kicked
how's the current state of 2042? Not played since kaunch
*PING*
i remember downloading the patch which added us marines to 1942
NO CARL GUSTAV AGAINST INFANTRY
I'm still enjoy playing battlefield 4 tho
I'm really done blaming DICE at this point. It's the players that killed this game. They are so goddamn stupid and sheep like. BF3 was the last great Battlefield, BF4 was the last fun one. But we have these stupid fricks pretending BF1 was good, go install that piece of shit and see how horrible it is withing 5 minutes of joining a game. BF died because they listened to the stupid people of their fanbase. Simple as that, the whole woke DICE thing doesn't make their maps, gunplay, and every aspect of their game bad. Listening to their inept playerbase did that.
I still have my single best K/D from BF1 though.
Was 67 - 0 in one game if I remember rightly.
Felt like a god.
It's both. EA pushing trends and deadlines. DICE being incompetant. Players not knowing what they want and being a mixture of 20 year old veterans, newbies, esports gays, consolegays, "influencer" gays padding the games / decisions even if they are bad.
Oldgays want BF2 again
Esport gays want BF3 again
Consolegays want BC2 or BF1 again
Influencers want money
>But we have these stupid fricks pretending BF1 was good
yeah, BF1 is perfect
This. However I have to insist that BF4 was peak battlefield.
Imagine being such a drooling fricking moron that you don't think that Battlefield 1 isn't, at LEAST, a worthy franchise entry.
You stupid c**t. You rat weasel frickboy piss baby stupid c**t ass b***h Black person
homosexual
this
bf1 was the beggining of the end of BF as a series. Frick all smelly disgusting Black folk who disagree. They should just remaster BF3 and forget anything else existed.
What does Ganker think of my rebalanced classes for Battlefield?
Engineer should be the only class that has C4 when you think about it.
The ghillie suit comes back but as a tool. You have to choose between that or a radio beacon
Grenade launcher is standard for assault like in bad company or you can switch it out for a medkit to be more medic focused
Also, could a commander mode work for a bad company game?
>Engineer should be the only class that has C4 when you think about it.
No. This is moronic. C4 is meant for traps and demolitions, which is support's role. C4-ing a vehicle is very high risk, meaning its not a dependable anti-vehicle weapon. Running C4 engie would be a direct nerf to the class.
>The ghillie suit comes back but as a tool. You have to choose between that or a radio beacon
Why? What's the mechanical function of a ghillie suit? Just being visually less noticeable isn't enough of a reason to pick it over another gadget unless player characters are normally highly visible with colors that heavily contrast with the map.
>Grenade launcher is standard for assault like in bad company or you can switch it out for a medkit to be more medic focused
This is what BF3 did except you swap having to unlock the medkit instead of the grenade launcher.
>Also, could a commander mode work for a bad company game?
No, because commander mode favors bigger maps and BC2 maps were good because they were relatively small compared to other Battlefields.
Sorry to shit on your parade, Anon. Try again.
>C4 is meant for traps and demolitions, which is support's role. C4-ing a vehicle is very high risk, meaning its not a dependable anti-vehicle weapon.
In theory but definitely not in practice. People c4 vehicles ALL the time. Giving other classes the ability to destroy vehicles is moronic. Only engineer should be able to do it. Irl, combat engineers are the ones that handle explosives. Im ok with support having claymore and mortars since they're more anti-personal than anti-vehicle.
Also I forgot to add that engineer should only be allowed to have smg. 2142 got it right with this. Its moronic giving engineers rifles since you make them the jack of all trades instead of anti-vehicle role
> People c4 vehicles ALL the time. Giving other classes the ability to destroy vehicles is moronic
Yes they did because high-risk high-reward strategies are fun, but by definition not dependable. How many wannabe jihadists got shot to pieces by a gunner lmg for every one that made it? Engineers aren't threatened by support (or recon) C4 because rocket launchers are still the best and safest way to take out an enemy vehicle. Playing on vehicle-rich maps is already shit as infantry, but especially as infantry that doesn't have anti-armor weapons. Recon is still pretty good for its intended purpose, medic/assault is the premier infantry fighting class and has the almighty paddles, but what does support have left? Claymores are highly situational (and unfun), mortars will get you insta-picked by enemy mortars or snipers, and ammo kits aren't nearly as useful on those maps as they are on medium-scale or infantry-focused maps because you're far more mobile and likely have less infantry surrounding you (plus increased vehicle presence means lower infantry survivability). Support needs that C4 to make it a viable class for vehicle-based maps within the BF3 class structure. It doesn't steal the engineer's spotlight, it merely allows it to remain viable.
>inhouse engine
>new hires come in
>absolutely clueless
>can't design a game for shit
next battlefield will be unreal engine or some garbage
Is there something wrong with Unreal Engine 5?
Each studio has its own design philosophy and it can be hard to migrate, they end up having to make compromises or make design choices that can end up not being good. It is not a limitation on the engine but more about how it does certain things that can remove or taint a brand identity.
>bc2 vietnam
dear god it was soul
After Bad Company 2 they started making CoD games
All the talent left after BF1.
>in over 13 years Dice still hasn't managed to make a map as good as Harvest Day
>Harvest Day
Harvest day was such an underrated map. For me my all time favorite battlefield maps
>End of the line
>Harvest Day
>Oasis
>Heavy Metal
>Strike at Karkand
>Caspian Border
>Seine Crossing
>Operation riverside
>Armored Shield
Soul
battlefield is a very difficult game to develop from a technical standpoint. frostbite engine has so much technical debt and implementing all the bf mechanics such as destruction etc. from the ground up in UE is also time consuming and expensive. so they're fricked on this front alone. to top it off, all the talent that made the previous games is gone. battlefield is pretty much dead. rip
I know this wasn't your whole argument but destruction is actually really easy to implement. Bad Company destruction was the best in the series and also basic as frick. The only thing that causes issues is levolution-scale destruction, but that was a shitty gimmick anyway.
>#1 complaint was flattening the maps, leaving no cover
>huge complaint on various maps in BFV that did the same
>2042 maps large, bare wastelands with no cover
Hey moron, BC2 levels of destruction is bad. BF3 did it the best.
You mean the occasional wall or fence? Yeah, no thanks. BC2 had the best destruction in the series, ask literally anyone who claims to like the destruction in battlefield. That said, you are right that they should've added more cover in certain sections, but that was only a real problem on a few specific points in a few specific maps, not some large-scale issue that affected every single match.
The new 2042 changes back to classes sucks ass. Vehicles are way more powerful now due to lack of rockets. Less people drop ammo. Less versatility. Less fun. Less teamwork.
The nostalgia homosexuals crying en masse won and they still wont play the game.
>What happened to this franchise?
Corporate greed. Just like the rest of the goddamn industry.
Can't believe they fricked with the ADS time of all barrel / extended mags in a game like 2042 with 128 players...
And didn't change the 200 round LMG's that basically play like AR's at this point.
And you could just double click to circumvent the dogshit animation time, so I am macroing it.
Fricking morons lmao.
>We are reverting it because it didn't meet our expectations
THEN WHY DID YOU RELEASE IT THEN YOU IDIOTS
Honestly the attachments have been so bad in this game. The on the fly swap is okay but there's honestly zero reason to change your barrel and grip because you just pick the best and never ever change it. And most ammo changes are done rarely as well.
You can flick to the underbarrel HE etc. super easy. A supressor if needed.
Flick to the other ammo types as well. I usually get close to running out before I die.
You guys should play Enlisted, it's the closest thing to a Battlefield/RO2 successor around
>Enlisted
>Battlefield/RO2 successor
lmao
>garbage milsim
Frick off lmao.
I think it fits very comfortably between milsim autism and arcade shooter
No one is playing your dead game Ivan, frick off already.
I don't want something between Milsim and Arcade.
I don't want any milsim at all.
Well have fun with healthbars on your tanks then lmao
>open their website
>cash shop on their home page
>close website
I'm not playing that garbage.
>enlisted
>from the same team that made troony thunder
no thanks homosexual
>all the vehicle autism from wt with none of the other homosexualry
You should give it a shot.
>t. no argument
Too busy playing Hell Let Loose, sorry gay.
You guys get doors to open yet?
I can understand the inclination to be turned off by that, but 95% of the premium squads they've added have been at best sidegrades to regular progression unlocks. They're blatantly milking whales for squads that aren't even good.
The only thing you should pay for is premium time to cut the grind in half. With premium it takes like a week to max a campaign out
enlisted and HLL are both lame;
BFV would be alright if it had mod tools that could make it less shit.
the problem with HLL is the lack of destruction and lack of modding/custom maps; makes things like vehicle driving hell because you can't run over fences and shit.
the problem with Enlisted is that it's a free-2-play game and thus has the constant balance issues that are intractable.
a better solution is something like "Foxhole" as far as setting is concerned.
make it sort of dieselpunk set in an alternative universe where you don't have wehraboos fricking shit up.
make it like France or BeNeLux vs Italy or Japan as far as weapons, mostly tankettes; bolt action rifles; magazine/strip-fed machineguns; etc. vehicles are mostly shitty tankettes / light armored vehicles that are nice, small, and weird; able to do a lot of damage but still relatively easy to take out if driven by idiots without infantry support.
>enlisted and HLL are both lame
>BFV would be alright if
it's got potential as far as "rough engine functionality" is concerned.
HLL seems like Red Orchestra: Darkest Hour ported to Unreal 4; which isn't really a step up;
Enlisted has the problem of being a Free 2 Play game;
If BFV had actual mod tools; ones that could reshape it; and it's maps; to play in an Red Orchestra fashion; I think you'd agree with me;
>Enlisted has the problem of being a Free 2 Play game
Is that a problem? Seems to do well for Warthunder.
Plus I like having all the children and third worlder fodder, makes it feel more like WW2 rather than everyone being a hardened twitchshooting autist.
war thunder also suffers from free2play;
air RB is unplayable.
No idea what that means as I don't actually play WT
remember just spraying the ju-87 with the IL-2A's 7.62's
Tried it, thought I liked it for a few days, then realized I wasn't actually having fun when I realized how shitty the grind was and how obtuse doing anything at all in that game is
If you think the grind in this is bad then I don't know what to tell you.
This game has one of the shittiest progression systems, it's chink Spyware, and is mostly bots. It's pretty awful.
Sure if you try to play Tunisia at 5 am you will see more bots than usual, but the reality is it's usually just complete shitter morons, not actual bots.
The whole game is structured around bots unless you specially play the outlier no bot game mode. And the game punishes you for trying to play more than one theatre due to the card system.
I'm aware that players command squads of bots, the claim that the game is mostly bots implies a lack of players.
Not until they fix their fricking animations, add UI that doesn't make my eyes bleed and a proper modern warfare mod.
If they do all of these I'll even spend my GJN from War Thunder on Enlisted.
>modern warfare
mega cringe, I hope the game never goes beyond the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan time wise.
Late Cold War would be even better than Modern Warfare, especially with varied unicorn units, but it's an unpopular setting so I'll settle for Modern Warfare.
Just no Sci-Fi/WWII bullshit.
>but it's an unpopular setting
Not among the people actually playing enlisted
Not among the people CURRENTLY playing enlisted, obviously Gaijin won't be satisfied with existing playerbase.
I want enlisted to be good but its just not that great. The gunplay doesn't feel good especially with automatic guns, its actually terrible and the game is kind of clunky in general. It's fun for a little bit but it has serious problems. My first few matches I was getting over 100 kills with a tank which was fun but infantry gameplay just isn't that good.
>My first few matches I was getting over 100 kills with a tank which was fun
Well I should hope so, your first three matches are against the AI and they can't use or fight vehicles.
Weird, there 100% were vehicles but I don't remember if they were actually killing things, I know they were at least moving. That explains why my kills dropped off by half though.
Yeah and I don't know how you thought you got a good impression of automatic weapons when you wouldn't have had anything close to resembling a high-tier weapon setup.
>you have to play 1000 hours to get to the good feeling guns
Uhh, probably not even going to try. The game is grindy as frick like war thunder. It's really not up for debate anyways, the gunplay needs a lot of polishing. You've never played another fps if you think otherwise.
It's like 70 matches to max a campaign. And you start getting nice weapons well before max level in a campaign.
Really wish they limit weapon attachments next game. Maybe do something how insurgency did it, or balance weapon attachments with perks.
I despised how you could get +4 upgrades for vehicles. You should only get 1 and you have to rely on your skill and your team to excel instead of having a gucci'd out vehicle. Ruined battlefield imo
P4F...
Home...
It was surprisingly good, actually
wish someone brought it back the way they brought battlefield heroes back
Fricking around and making teammates mad on BF3 was the fricking best
>Spawn on Armored Shield
>Hop in tank, immediately smash the helicopters
>Kicked from server, receive multiple death threats and other obscene voice messages
The original developers got mindbroken by Trump and then EA hired inexperienced university graduates to replace them.
Really wish there was a pricate BFBC2 server or something; that game was fricking nuts.
The sounds were some of the best in the business too.
I just wanted 2042 to be Battlefield 4 again but without the "attachments hidden in loot boxes and guns locked behind dead DLC" cancer
Swedes gonna Swede
>BF4 is a fun game covered in a large amount of hilariously bad bugs and netcode issues
>Hand off game to DICE LA who slowly fixes it
>Eventually they go mad with power and go beyond fixing bugs to changing things and frick the game up
>Hardline comes out and has a bunch of new features and ideas, unfortunately it flops because the gaming community cannot understand that it's simply BF with a cops/robbers coat of paint and not a CS or Payday clone
>Instead of following along with their setup and going near futuristic they try to juke CoD (????????) and make a WW1 game
>BF1 is NOT fun, NOT balanced, and has more bugs than BF4 did at launch, instead of fixing bugs they slowly introduce more and the game never really hits it's stride
That's where the series died, 5 couldn't do enough to bring people back and 2042 was made by interns.
Hardline was good because the inherently goofy setting meshed well with BF4's gadget/attachment bloat.
BF4 was bad because the inherently serious setting didn't mesh well with BF4's gadget/attachment bloat (and shit map design).
I really liked the setting of BF1, that is to say
>Hey what if it was WW1 but all the weapons and vehicles weren't complete shit and everything had a slick coat of paint?
Problem was it felt more like that star wars game they did where you just hipfire everything
BF1 was the highest selling game, ironically. Consolegays absolutely loved that game because of the graphics, 'immersion", cheese tactics and slow / low skill ceiling gameplay.
Everyone else stuck with the older games, and still do.
>has more bugs than BF4 did at launch
Wrong.
Regardless of what you think about BF1, it had the best and most polished launch in the franchise's history.
i just wish bf3 had populated nz/aus servers
bf4 is fun and all but i miss the maps
plus the bf3 had actually functional vehicle handling i don't know what the frick dice did with it in bf4
Liberals ruined it like they ruin everything.
I miss when BF was an actual CoD competitor for people who didn't want 5v5 "we want the eSports audience" bullshit
ctrl+f "mods", "mod tools",
none
reminder bf2 is shit
>bf2 is shit
After patch 1.2, I agree.
trash game
I should've used my reaction image on you.
YR is one of the best RTS games, and that's even with it being rushed.
>tons of balance problems
>crashes all the time on things newer than windows xp
generals is better
>tons of balance problems
>Generals
Dude the frick are you on about, the Superweapons general is literally the least balanced thing in the entirety of the world, and don't even get me started on AURORAS.
>Crashes
Can't deny but those have been fixed, unlike Generals. You can't even FIX the Generals bugs because the codebase was so rushed they literally scrapped the NAMESAKE MECHANIC before the closed beta began.
On an aside, I love both games dearly.
t. only plays against ai
superweapon is one of the worst generals in the game, since her humvees (thing that america relies on the most) are more expensive than other usa's, and auroras are banned in most tournaments. strongest generals are air, stealth, toxin, and maybe china infantry. rest are trash.
I play casual with friends, and do not do any tournament balancing. EMP patriots are my bane because it stops tank rushes and infantry rushes are no good, not to mention it instantly invalidates any aircraft that isn't a support or the aurora. She also gets an even better aurora.
>thing that america relies on the most
I don't rely on those when I play any general, I rely on my airforce far more.
>auroras are banned in most tournaments
I play casual with my friends. I do not like competitive, I think competitive balancing tends to ruin games.
Infact, it actually DID for Command and Conquer 3, which is why I had to install a reversion mod because the GDI singleplayer campaign literally became impossible on hard mode.
>strongest generals are
>air
I like air a lot but man, he was snubbed out of too much. All of the cool air stuff outside of the combat chinook either went to SW or was scrapped.
>stealth
Disagree, can be invalidated by a wall of defenses, USA sneezing the wrong way, or listening outposts
>Toxin
Until ambulances and nuclear shells/nuke cannons, true. Early game is key for toxin.
>China infantry
Definitely had my fair share of problems with China infantry in play with my friends.
air is the strongest in the game because he gets lasers that block missiles on almost all of his jets/helicopters which makes it really hard to harass his eco early game. his support powers alone can win the game for you. stealth is also great but you cant go face to face with anyone else and expect to win. even vanilla china can kill stealth by spamming outposts + anything.
>which makes it really hard to harass his eco early game
Minigunners, or 6 rocket troops will overwhelm them. It's really overrated, at best it can frick with people with early defenses, but only in casual.
free carpet bomber at rank 3
Despite directly advertising fun jank like c4 jumps they've all but removed everything they possibly could have
They forgot why people loved Bad Company 2. They really need to make Bad Company 3. Bring back the gameplay and progression we all love!
Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity departments meddling in hiring and firing practices, as required of most publicly traded companies by institutional investors
One more theory is that the games started to really go to shit once they were developed for x86 specifically, rather than the power, cell, and x86 architectures. engines and performance programming tricks took precedence over correct programming, which led to things like 2042's notoriously bad mouse interface
are you.........FRICKING moronic
Battlefield was a PC gaming. It was amazing when it was PC only and then it got scaled back once it came out on consoles.
EA of course started to milk the franchise more and more, lot of the old talent left and new left wing morons came in and started to push women and minorities. When old fans started to fight back all Swedish moron Patrick Soderlund said "dont like new battlefield, dont buy it". ea fired him a few months later but the damage was done and BF5 sucked ass
>Battlefield was a PC gaming
Definitely something a pc fanboy moron would say
>scaled back
DICE has always wanted the franchise to be playable on consoles since BF1942. http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/28480/battlefield-could-have-been-exclusive-to-gamecube
Battlefield had a unique niche. It wasn’t as arcadey and ADHD twitch spastic movement like COD, but it wasn’t a full blown military sim either. It had a great spot in the middle of that which a dedicated fanbase really enjoyed. Every since BF2 they have been trying more and more to appeal to the COD crowd and failing every time. It’s quite remarkable really, over a decade of ruining their franchise and they STILL can’t work out why people liked it in the first place.
DICE went woke and said "Don't like it? Don't buy it!" So I didn't.
Hired a bunch of homosexuals and women. People that hate guns in general and want to make their opinions heard, even if it has no fricking place in the game. MW2 hired gun professionals and modeled real guns, for example. You can't make a game about guns and not like guns to some degree.
>MW2 hired gun professionals and modeled real guns, for example.
You mean the team that designed thier weapon models on some airsoft toys and even left the bb sleeves in thier models? Lol
>WW2 game nobody asked for releases while everyone was still happy with the WW1 game
>DICE releases hype trailers and promises 'old' battlefield is back with 2042
>its a steaming pile of shit that barely resembles an alpha build
dice diluted the playerbase with two steaming hot piles of garbge. simple as
To be honest, i am glad 2042 released as it did.
Imagine if they took an extra year to develop it, it wouldn't release in the state its in now.
It'd be less buggy, but it'd still have doubled down on the empty maps and shitty specialists. It took everyone hating it for them to finally change it. I'm glad it released as shit rather then them wasting time to release a polished shit.
This is the only military shootan with good music
A lot of people will probably defer to the "go woke go broke" argument but I think BF just failed to innovate on its gameplay formula. Even COD kind of reinvented itself.
What was the last good Battlefield game?
The series lost me after Bad Company 2. 3 was fun for a while but I couldn't get into 4.
V unironically if you can overlook the shitty politics
I honestly don't care anymore.
If I have to eat shitty forced Black person trans woke shit in order to get a BF game that has GOOD gameplay then so be it.
Sadly 2042 had the first but not the second of that.
BF1. for the sovl
5 is garbage. It feels like modern warfare with ww2 skinned weapons than a ww1 game.
4, people who say 1 and 5 are consolekids who never played 3 or 4.
Modern Combat
It lives on as a game called Battlebit which is significantly better than every single FPS game made in the past 15 years
i had a lot of fun with in one the playtests, laughed my ass off when i was dragging an enemies corpse around while he was yelling at me to let him go. Is the proxy vc still in the game? definitely one of the highlights for me
not only is it still in the game but the default setting automatically turns on your mic when you die which is the most brilliant bit of player taunting from a dev I've seen in years
yeah thats hilarious, shame the playtests are so limited else i'd play more if they just did it the way dark & darker did it, just dedicate an entire weekend instead of 6 hours on seemingly random days
Am I the only one who loved Capture the Flag in BF3? I had the most fun playing that shit along with Rush, of course. Motorcycles were so fun.
tried to compete with cod
this was the best multiplayer series in the early 2010s but it feels totally Black personfied and it's like none of the same people develop the games anymore
Battlefield is fricking dead
the last old time was fired by EA when BF2042 flopped, think it was Oskar Gabrielson
EA then brought in a female executive from Ubisoft that ran the live service schemes. BF is fricked
This makes me sad.... company want money
they sell shitty skins instead of going for how soldiers look like nowadays
Another thread were people insist BF1 is the crap but never explain why
The best BF is 2042 before the most recent class changes.
Now that classes are back did they get rid of all the garbage character designs?
they've been toning them down every month, lots of free cosmetics that cover their faces/unique features, they also cut down a lot of their voice lines and 'quips'
The problem with 2042 is the map design is ass. There are so many classic maps over the generations of the game, this has none.
The morons said they had the most people ever working on the game, but they spread themselves too thin. Portal was a great idea on paper but it should have been its own standalone game and not some half assed piece of shit that it turned out to be.
2042 was so fricking shite that I actually bought MW2 because I was itching for a FPS game. I haven't bought COD since like Black ops 2. Ill give them credit, MW2 has a lot of content and it seems like they actually gave a shit about making the game. I still hate COD but what other option do I have? Go outside??? frick off
>le classic maps
Aids, people think a straight line is the pinnacle of design. Meanwhile 2042 maps have more cover than previous wide open maps, but memes > reality.
>reality is my opinions not your opinions
Sad
Reality is based on evidence. 2042 has more cover than maps like Golmud, which is a popular BF map, and many BF1 maps.
The more cover doesn't change the fact they are still more open then before. No one wanted wide open maps. And 128 sized maps are stupid, its just the same levels of engagement spread across more areas.
These a BR maps salvaged into being BF maps that have no flow or entertaining design.
But what truly makes the maps sucks is thew guns. Everything in this game is a fricking laser. I get sniped by dudes with SMG's at massive ranges without them needing to stop firing. What's the point of open areas when you gun can perform just as good in them? You don't need to change your play style or anything.
The weapon as well made it suck. If you wanted to support your team with certain gadget you'd be fricked if that weapon didn't quite suit the map, it made it harder and put you at a disadvantage.
Now because any class can have the boring laser beams there's no incentive to ever do anything different and makes the open areas just plain dead space.
Funny, people were screaming and shitting themselves and crying because the guns werent laser beams at launch.
Crying.
No.
Matter.
What.
Also, "cover doesnt matter"?? frick off
>Funny, people were screaming and shitting themselves and crying because the guns weren't laser beams at launch.
Yeah because no one wanted to stand in empty fields and pot shot each other for 10 minutes. They wanted lasers to deal with the open.
The cover doesn't matter because in between the cover is more empty space then any other map.
Most BF1's maps where designed that way because they had trenches, annoying and repetitive at times but was there for the theme.
The reason the maps your posting are better is that they are smaller. They are point of interest maps. Points with buildings, and empty space in between. The time taken to move from point to point in 2042 is MASSIVE compared to the older games. There was also far less verticality in those games compared to 2042. And I don't just mean buildings because yes the older games had those too. I mean shit like the sneaky mckay spots in Stranded, the new glaciers in Breakaway, the cranes Manifest, the boat on Discarded, the cliffs of Exposure and there's more as well. I don't recall you ever needing to be so worried about being shot by someone outside of your version whose massively above you.
They redesigned most of the maps and have improved them a fair bit, but once you try to play rush it really drives in how bad the initial design of the maps is and how them thinking that 64v64 requires HUGE open areas with nothing in them is just fricking moronic.
BF1 was so fricking good.
>Guns near universally have that slight twinge of being old dogshit so there's lots of variety in picking what you like rather than just picking whatever dakkarifle has the best ttk
>SSS tier A/V presentation that has to be experienced to be believed
>Operations is a fricking awesome game mode
>Awesome depictions of WW1 battles, weapons, locations, and vehicles to the point that even normies get into WW1 history thanks to this game
>Generally pretty good maps, a solid bunch of garbage as with every BF game but the highs are very high
>Overall lots of variety in the maps too, with classics like St Quentin, infantry maps like Nivelle, and oddballs like Legoland
>Fort de Vaux is the only true successor to Operation Metro and I don't even think they were trying
>Aerial gameplay the most fun in the series
>God tier soundtrack
>Campaign that actually gave the impression they were trying
>Dose of wokeness like every shitty western AAA game but at least BF1, unlike BFV, was overrepresentation of reality rather than actual fan fiction
>Bayonet charges give me stiffies
It really was great. I don't get the hate.
Only thing people hate is the random spread and the weapons in game, but other then that it was an amazing game.
facts
the only valid complaints of BF1 are subjective gameplay shit like the gunplay and weapon spread. but even that is a purposeful mechanic that dictates class roles and their effective ranges of engagements. its not a game that allows you to laser people from across the map without consequence.
the atmosphere of BF1 is fricking triple A, only thing i hate is the weapon select with like
>shotgung version A,B,C
As a german myself the german voice lines in BF1 are so fricking good
stuff like this is the actual textbook definition of SOVL
Damn! If only other developers would put in that much effort for VA
American speech is better then the germutt shit.
>only gives a certain amount of vehicles per round
>every class can kill vehicles
>makes it so there's always a stalemate in the dogshit linear conquest maps because you can't make a hail mary in a tank to back cap
>everyone goes sniper for the next 30 minutes
great game
The first 3 points are good though?
Running/sitting around the bullethell front line every game is gay. Operations is the only playable game mode
operations is bullet hell: the game. at least in conquest you can kind of make a difference on your own if you have a team of glue eaters; back capping and what not. operations, you're fricked.
rush was better
>linear conquest maps are good design
codgays please have a nice day
Murdered in the name of ESG.
I hate the Medic Assault merge.
I think 5 classes:
Medic
-SMG
-Defibs
-Medkit
Assault
-best guns
-grenade launcher
-heavy armor (Like the older titles)
Engineer
-smg or shotgun
-at mine or rocket launcher
-repair tool
Recon
-sniper or dmr
-spotting scope or claymore
-spawning beacon
Support
-LMG or shotgun
-ammo crate
-c4 or mortar
Shit taste?
Pure kino
one of like two good base 4 maps
i would like to pretend i like BF1 but i am not into WW1
just make a battlefield 3/4 with modern graphics already
>just make a battlefield 3/4
I still can't get over how this has been the most said thing since 1 was shown and they STILL don't even try.
I'm worried that the next BF will be a 2042 sequel as well
Well that’s a good thing because BF1 was such a bastardisation of WW1 that it may as well be set on another planet. Shit pisses me off to this day, they wanted to make a WW2 game but felt it’d be too boring so they just made a mockery of WW1 instead.
>just make a shit game again but with prettier graphics
uhhhhhhh yeah how about no, actually innovate dumb frick
2042 is fun now.
Its a bad BF game, but it still feels like a BF game.
It needs some weapon tweaks and more of them, a better matchmaker/server browser and more content overall.
This whole 'classes ruined 2042' is stupid too. The buffs gadgets got in comparison make up for it.
no it isn't.
i gave it a shot, and admittedly kind of enjoyed it. but that was so fricking short lived. i can't be fricking bothered to boot it up. the only reason a gave that shit a shot was because i could play it for free. i would much rather play bf4, bf1 or bf5 then that shit.
the only thing i can say something positive about is the railgun tank.
That's what I mean by it needs more content. Games are to samsey as there's so few ways to do what you do.
Especially compared to the massive range of stuff 4 had.
It needs more then just that sure but it'd be a start.
they tried to push woke shit to people who don't care about woke shit
They kept backing away from what made the series unique (huge fricking maps, being a disposable grunt, teamwork) in favor of making it more like CoD and class-based shooters. Which was stupid because EA already TRIED making their CoD clone in the form of the Medal of Honor reboot. And that failed.
Remember the Link Park tie-in with MoH: Warfighter?
>They GENUINELY thought that a shitty Tarklov clone would be the big selling point of 2042
>So big that they made an entire specialist system around it
>And at some point they were even trying to make a BR game
>Despite Firestorm already bombing
They're so fricking stupid.
And now Apex is dropping in popularity and their shitty attempts at mobile shooters got cancelled less than a year of release. They couldn't even make any fricking money off mobile customers. Expect Respawn to be gutted next if they don't turn it around.
Since BF4 Battlefield devs have been trend chasers not setters. They follow others because they themselves don't know what to do. To get 2042's battlepast to even work they stole some guy from CoD's team.
Low test men
Women
Death knell trannies
Reminder that Conquest is outdated and trash.
Breakthrough is the superior gamemode.
>Reminder that Conquest Head-on is outdated and trash.
ftfy
Pure kino
more active players then 2042 for a very good reason.
>get western team
>lose because your whole team is sitting on your mountain sniping and your anti air is AFK
>get eastern team
>lose because your whole team is sitting on THEIR mountain sniping and your anti air is stuck under the pipes
Once they added suppression mechanics and blinding flashlights it was the beginning of the end
DICE can't make a good game anymore, it's not even *DICE* though since that company is a revolving door of developers. A new Battlefield comes out, people hate it EA fires half the staff and replaces them with people that only worked on mobile games prior. Those people release a new Battlefield game people hate it EA fires half the staff and replaces them with Indians etc
If only that were true. Most of the people fired are the code monkeys, they higher ups making the poor choices are still there
Yeah, they're firing the half that actually matters.
Not*
Shit how did I make a mistake like that.
Telling your core audience to go frick themselves isn't a very good business practice
Did that ceo that tried to imply disabled celtic women with katanas in ww2 is more historically accurate and told people not to buy it if they didn't like it get fired?
went woke
went broke
went broke
went woke
then croaked
Do you think Battlefield will ever, ever attempt to curb the obscene dominance of snipers in any way?
Every BF game has been raped by the power of snipers since draw distance fog was removed.
Almost every map that allows open sniping is often loathed, like Galicia or Lupkow Pass in BF1.
homosexuals defend it as "realism" that running out in the open gets you sniped but in real life guns aren't nearly as easy to be accurate with and killing a sniper means he's gone, not that he's gone for 10 seconds before he's doing his shit again
How do you even do this? MORE bullet drop? Greater damage dropoff? Straight-up Recon/Scout player limits? My personal favorite is far far more severe bullet dropoff damage for non-headshots.
snipers could easily be nerfed
>no sprinting or jumping
>can only be fired while deployed
Only way to solve the sniper problem is to remove them, give users the option to opt out of servers with recon class enabled or long range scopes on rifles.
You can't really fix them. Yo can make them trash and then no one would use them.
If you give them something that requires skill, like only 1 hit headshot and tough bullet physics someone will still figure it out and win.
I think the game is bettert off without them. Or at least turn them into stuff like the NTW and be slow as frick but still usable in closeish range. Discouraging hill Black personing is a good thing.
you can make them utter garbage and people are still gonna be drawn to them because me go snipe on big map is such a common mindset among random shitters
Galicia is awful in bf1. I don't mind Lupkow since there's hills you can hide behind.
Best way to curb the dominance of snipers is by not building open maps
This thread is bringing back a lot of nostalgia. Which BF games still have active servers? Is Hell Let Loose good? Im still playing Insurgency since I love the perfect balance of arcadey + realism, but I miss shooters with vehicles like BF
3 is on life support, has one full server in Germany at all times, one full server in america inconsistently
4 is "small niche community" tier, can still find games
1's deprecated anticheat has killed all official servers but customs are still going strong
BFV is actively alive
>HLL
>Inusrgency
You don't like Battlefield if you like those games, or you play Battlefield completely wrong.
God damn I want a combat shooter with vehicles SO BAD but everything is trash right now
RIP Battlefield and Halo 🙁
Is Hell Let Loose any good?
If you're willing to play old, janky games, Command and Conquer Renegade has some fun multiplayer.
You can play the mods like A Path Beyond which are infinitely more polished.
>Command and Conquer Renegade
Normal or X? Last I checked X only had one server going.
Normal. The remake isn't that dead but it isn't great either.
You can get the MP servers for Renegade on CnCNet or going to W3DHub.
Squad and Hell Let Loose are probably the best Battlefield-like games at the moment. Battlebit is decent too but it's not out yet.
2042 is also pretty decent now. FNB is good and the weekly official Portal modes have been good the last couple of weeks.
I tried Squad but just didn't like fighting at long range engagements
What I really want is a new Tribes game but that will literally never happen again ;_;
>*all franchises you love were exploited and ran into the ground*
>its the diversity
>its the greed
>its the trannies
you are all so pathetic
Unironically this
all they'd have to do is look at the last names of the uppermanagement and look at the shareholders and the names of their respective companies
i just checked EA and blockrock has nearly the biggest stake lmao. also they just sold $34,000,000 worth but it was only 1.6% of what their stake is, which is about 2 billion
Damn that pic of women sure has a lot of men in it kek
Good god how many of these women do you think even played halo growing up
No fricking way more than 5-10 of them did beyond watching their brothers, if that
For me its the NTR-50
Imagine needing to aim with a sniper when you can just get body shots lmao
So you're a homosexual?
man I wish there was a game as good as RO2
firefights were pretty damn intense, I miss that
now its just cowadoody instarevive or milsim shit getting sniped from 2 miles away
zoomers who suck off BF1 have no fricking standards
200+ hours of BF3
playing on a shitty laptop back when it came out
close quarters maps lagged somehow
frick me
come home, white man.
The "original" Insurgency is much better. Sandstorm suffers from the same issue as BF2042: wide open maps.
They wanted the console audience, got it, then stopped caring and abandoning ship when EA wanted cod numbers.
Give me the current state of (PC versions of) :
- Battlefield 3
- Battlefield 4
- Battlefield 1
- Battlefield V
- Battlefield Hardline
BF3 has one server in EU apparently.
BF4 niche, all regions have at least 1 server.
BF1 full of cheaters / homosexuals. Few servers in each region
BFV full of cheaters. I believe it's just Asia that has "robot" servers that auto-kick / ban above certain parameters. Last I played the AU server it was full of chinks / cheaters.
Shit, I wanted to play BF4.
Is there chance to get less cheater servers in BF1/BF5?
No idea. I don't play those bad games. Only if friends boot them up which is usually around sale time to farm all the newbies.
Yes, difference between 4 and 1/5 is that 4 runs on community servers with jannies on them so cheaters get banned.
last time I played bf1 it had plenty of community servers with jannies banning cheaters
BF3 = dead
BF4 = pretty decently alive
BF1/V = Trannies
Trannies
Judging by the last game, I think everything went wrong:
>shooting and movement feel off, they somehow literally fricked up the "FPS" part, even Portal feels like shit
>hero shit when nobody cares about pajeet backstory in a 64v64 game
>gun customization is pants on head moronic and most guns are trash
>shitty gadgets, most of which remain unused
>shit open maps, not a single close quarters map
>they just updated it this week and completely revamped the class system, for the worst
Friendly reminder that Bad Company 2 was the best frostbite Battlefield.
>better class balance
>better map balance (no Metro-tier maps)
>tactical (and useful!) destruction
>vehicles are good without being OP (no Jets or Little Birds farming infantry kills)
>hit detection was decent despite running on 30hz tickrate
>all maps were free (no premium)
>Rush and Conquest were the only gamemodes and maps were made SPECIFICALLY for these gamemodes
>gunplay was fun and varied despite the arsenal being very limited
>perks/class upgrades were useful and promoted teamplay
>one good player could make a difference due to the 32 player limit
>metadoom
>no metabattlefield
Battlefield fans are absolute morons for letting Venice Unleashed die. Literally none of the big-name "battlefield" youtubers said anything about VU when it launched.
>when it launched.
And here's why. VU launched way too late.
I'd either forgotten my password, or had it changed in Origin. When I tried to log on VU, it wouldn't let me. That, along with the few populated servers that I remembered, and the lack of updates for the client, made me write it off as dead.
nu bf fans are moron console gays brainwashed to think making mods are impossible or bad
https://www.videogamer.com/news/battlefield-3-is-too-complex-for-mod-support/
I thought most of the BF diehards move to Squad?
This happened.
https://imgur.com/a/aS9753s
Apologies for imgur my ISP is banned from posting images.
Instead of crying about how bad the new games are, why don't you all just go and play BF3/4/1? They still have plenty of active servers.
>DUDE LOOK A FEW DOZEN PEOPLE STILL PLAY THING THAT USED TO BE PLAYED BY MILLIONS, THAT MEANS IT'S NOT DEAD AND YOU CAN'T COMPLAIN!
Autism
Why do you need millions playing if only 64 are needed for a conquest server?
Cmon anon… you know there’s a huge difference between having thousands of players on a game and one server with 64 players on it. Namely that those 64 players are going to be absolutely cracked at the game and it likely won’t be much fun for you. I discovered this after trying to get into age of mythology when there were 100 people playing it on Voobly. Would not recommend, got fricking rekt.
>Variety of active Rush, CL, TDM and Domination servers
Why do you need More?
Dead mean dead, I don't consider a game dead when at 13h00 EU time there is a shitloads of servers (knowing that not all servers are shown here, due to my filter list), so frick a tree anon
Because I have thousands of hours on all of them. Post-peak , these games play like ass now as everyone knows all the cheese.
BF4 is better than BF3 because 3's assault (US) is black.
Took a screenshot of the server list of BF3, still a lot available, it's far from being dead
if you actually look at the player list for each server you'll notice they are either populated by bots or spoofed and actually empty
The frick you are talking about, this is not BF4.
nice cherrypicking moron
It wasn't cherrypicked, I literally took the first server on the list
it died due to the talented devs retiring or leaving DICE
next question
anti white male wokeness
sauce?
Anyone remember the supposed/perhaps rumored situation of the devs scoffing or laughing at the idea of CoD including a Battle Royale before the trailer of the entry with the ye olde lady with a prosthetic arm on the front lines? I could be jumbling situations and entries here. If I'm not, reality must have hit like a truck for them.
>reality must have hit like a truck for them.
Yes making hundreds upon hundreds of millions and EA still being rich as God's God, must really hurt.
That ended up being the last entry and it was widely sharted on for being a mess so far as I remember, so yeah, it must have really hurt.
BFV had the prosthetic arm lady, is still being played, sold tens of millions, and they made another game after it.
BFV sold less than 10 million. It failed to meet internal sales expectations and its failure was pinned on marketing and a failure to include a Battle Royale mode. EA faced their larges stock drop in over a decade by about 18 percent in that quarter, something which was attributed in part to the game's poor sales. The successor did not recover and was similarly regarded as disappointing in terms of sales while also having decisions that didn't resonate with players.
*The successor's sales were disappointing enough that they refused to reveal the sales numbers in their investor's call.
Yawn, repeat the memes. It had the most players ever like a year and a half after release, but people want to pretend it sold 0 copies after release. On the old PS stats website PS4 alone had 7 million players, and thats 1/3 platforms and that was several years ago.
Look how bad EA stock is hurting. Those poor poor EA execs.
You haven't answered anything I've said, all of which is easily sourced from EA themselves. PS trophy/player stats are useless because people can share copies or play them on other PSN accounts and it contributes to the number. That also doesn't differentiate between purchases and PS Plus owners, which makes the numbers even less reliable and less impressive. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder. I've never seen this kind of fanboyism before for BF. It's kind of baffling.
You didnt ask a question for me to answer. The baffling thing is how many times you homosexuals repeat the same shit millions of times. You can say it all you want, but the facts prove it wrong.
You're still deflecting.
>but the facts prove it wrong
Do you mean EA's own financial documentation where they mention that the game sold less than 10 million (7.3) and missed expectations by about a million units and that a lack of a Battle Royale was considered a contributing factor?
>As Andrew discussed, the desire to make changes to Battlefield V led us to move its launch
into a more difficult window, and prioritizing the single-player campaign over battle royale also hurt sales. As a result, we sold 7.3 million units, about 1 million less than comprehended by our
Q3 guidance.
https://s22.q4cdn.com/894350492/files/doc_financials/2019/q3/Q3-FY19-Prepared-Remarks-FINAL.pdf
Or market observations on the massive dip that quarter, which BFV's failure to meet projections contributed to?
>EA stock is facing its worst drop in more than a decade, with CEO Andrew Wilson warning that the "significant challenges" it faced during the third fiscal quarter would carry on through the fourth. This is in part due to Battlefield 5(opens in new tab)'s performance, which sold a million fewer copies than EA had anticipated. By Tuesday, the company's stock had declined by around 18 percent. As MarketWatch(opens in new tab) notes, it's the most significant decline of the millennium for EA, and brings it close to its largest ever decline, which was on December 17, 1999. It dropped by 25.5 percent. At the time of writing, it's started to rise slightly, fluctuating between 15 to 17 percent. In a conference call, Wilson also mentioned Battlefield 5's delay, and that its launch around the holidays meant that it was often discounted to ensure it could compete with the other games vying for the attention of holiday shoppers.
https://www.pcgamer.com/battlefield-5-did-not-meet-eas-sales-expectations/
Fanboy. Like, to an embarrassing degree.
Ok and? It's not the year 2018. Just because the EA exec is extremely greedy, doesnt mean that 7.3 million sales in like a month is bad... what fricking delusion.
>sold tens of millions
Incorrect. By an enormous margin.
>The baffling thing is how many times you homosexuals repeat the same shit millions of times. You can say it all you want, but the facts prove it wrong.
The facts prove YOU wrong.
>Just because the EA exec is extremely greedy, doesnt mean that 7.3 million sales in like a month is bad... what fricking delusion.
And now you move the goalpost. Get it together, acknowledge reality, and move on with it in mind.
>Incorrect. By an enormous margin.
No, moron. THE YEAR IS NOT 2018. Time did not stop in 2018. Do you really think that they sold 0 games after 2018? Everyone saw you crying on Ganker and all 8 billion people on earth said,
>NO! I wont buy Battlefield because of the SJW WOKE grandma with a prosthetic arm!!!!!
You call me a moron, but you're still flailing and picking at the weeds trying to find a point while ignoring every single refutation of your own BS and substantiation of my factual claims. No sales numbers were given beyond the initial report, meaning it met no milestones of note. They actively declined to provide the successor's sales numbers in an investor call where they even went so far as reminding people that Battlefield is less than 10% of their revenue to pat it down, which implies an even worse result.
Get. It. Together.
Acknowledging reality will not take away from your enjoyment of the game or make other people care more about it.
>they failed to give numbers therefore i can only base everything on my personal feelings and a single number from 2018.
ok
Meanwhile many stats pages have been available showing mass numbers of people, and BFV has more players than all the other BF games and 2042 numbers are constantly rising.
You might be ill.
Sorry that logic bothers you.
Just think for a few seconds.
2018 they sold 7 mil, ok? Not disputed.
At about 2020 the number of players was MASSIVELY higher than before.
Do you still think they only sold 7 million, or MAYBE that number... increased??
The current year is 2023. Maybe, just maybe, they sold 1 or 2 copies since 2018, and maybe 1 or 2 more copies since 2020.
>Specific claims made.
>Called out as lies.
>ALL substantiated.
>All ignored.
See
Just acknowledge the facts. It won't hurt you or make your life worse.
They do not highlight or regard growth or notable increases in financial contribution coming from BFV in the future financial report. No one said it didn't sell any more afterward, but there are no indications of the game crossing sales milestones that'd have been regarded in investor calls and financial reports to bolster their position. You're being willfully obtuse due to fanboyism. I've given you the time of day in good faith inclusive of sources while you continue to cope and compound on the BS with asspull claims and moved goalposts. Keep your 4 extra copies and rub them together. Humoring an idiot is a waste of time, and you've proven your case as one multiple times over. Embarassing.
You just keep saying the same thing that was said in 2018. Sorry, sweaty, but time moves on.
The data and statements came in 2019 after their FY2019 Q3 ended. You can't even get that right.
Holy shit you're trying SO hard to twist it. They said by the end of 2018 it sold 7+ mil.
>Holy shit you're trying SO hard to twist it.
>You just keep saying the same thing that was said in 2018
>that was said in 2018
>said in 2018
>ELECTRONIC ARTS PREPARED COMMENTS FY19Q3
>February 5, 2019
Holy fricking moron. What is wrong with you? What are you trying to even argue?
In 2019, they said they sold 7.3 million by the end of 2018.
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/battlefield-5-fails-to-meet-sales-targets-and-ea-e/1100-6464832/
February 5, 2019
see
>Holy fricking moron. What is wrong with you? What are you trying to even argue?
Take a look in the mirror, look yourself in the eyes, and say this. You can't even admit the most basic shit or acknowledge yourself as even misspeaking at worst. Petty and pathetic.
It did suck but not much really happened because of it. They kind of just rolled with it. Now 2042 sucked ass. So much ass they reshuffled the entire staff and set up new studios because of it. AND did so poor Sony started railing on it to try and make CoD look good.
>posting the all time stock chart
>thinking this means anything
homie stop pretending you know anything about investing.
>You have to buy and sell hourly!!
No one is still holding EA stock that they bought in 1994 anon. You are moronic.
I forgot to mention but I am transgender (mtf) btw
never, EVER, leave sw*des close to a computer
is there any reason to get into battlefield in current year? what's the best tactical shooter for now?
Build a time machine and go back one month before the 2042 class update to play the best fps on the market.
>What happened to this franchise
All talent left after 1, simple as.
BFV is back to being the best FPS game ever made.
only good BF games are bad company 1 and 2. dont reply unless you agree
give us BC3
based, /thread
Nope, BFV
Bad Company was always, and will always be baby trash.
you just posted extreme cringe
You posted a downgrade made specifically for underpowered consoles in an era where PC was actually far more powerful than consoles, unlike today where they all play the same games and look 99% identical and all have crossplay.
Worst take in the whole thread and that’s saying something
>lets remove major features
>lets remove vehicles
>lets make all the maps smaller and narrower
>lets make the first one only for consoles
>lets make make singleplayer with shitty AI and quippy heroes
homosexual
Remove vehicles?
no airplanes, less vehicles per map
Airplanes are just a way for a few players to dogfight above the map and not have any impact on the rest of the game beneath. Removing them was an improvement.
>You posted a downgrade made specifically for underpowered consoles in an era where PC was actually far more powerful than consoles, unlike today where they all play the same games and look 99% identical and all have crossplay.
Correct.
>Correct.
That's right.
>That's right.
Yep.
>There was a time where breakthrough was 128p and there was rooftop objectives
God damn how did they let that into the final game?
Oh, when the game used to be more fun, I remember that. But babies cried and cried and cried and cried.
Remember when the hovercraft was actually useful?
Remember when a battlefield game actually had vehicles on the map?
Remember when everything in the game wasnt nerfed?
Remember when you could play the game how you wanted?
Remember when the specialists were all useful?
>Remember when the hovercraft was actually useful?
Flying was fun yes, the turret was not.
>Remember when a battlefield game actually had vehicles on the map?
You mean when it had 5 air Black folk ruining the game, yeah it sucked
>Remember when everything in the game wasn't nerfed?
You mean when when the SMG's dominated the entire game, yeah it sucked
>Remember when you could play the game how you wanted?
You mean when when shitters like you spammed the op meta shit and whined when your precious easy wins got taken away? Or when you got aggro that you couldn't use the meta gadgets and do every role when the classes were restored??
>Remember when the specialists were all useful?
They still are?
I can't believe there's a moron trying to defend launch 2042 in its broken non fun state.
Enjoy camping with claymore on ziplines now. SO FUN.
I love 1 tank per map, wooo!
I love that all vehicles are 5x more powerful because people dont want to pick rocket launcher specialists because they suck dick and arent fun.
Was playing breakthrough last night and literally no one has a stinger to kill the 2 condors molesting everyone. No one was dropping ammo. 000 Angel crates.
Fricking aids.
all downhill since battlefield 2
*battlefield bad company 2
arguably battlefield vietnam is the best one, at least the most soulful
Is the BF4 playerbase still alive?
>What happened to this franchise?
Iunno. I stopped giving a shit about Battlefield when everybody left Bad Company 2.
Bf 2042 sucked almighty fat ass. That's what happened. Shit mechanics, shit graphics, shit destruction physics that they later nerfed, jaggy as fricking shit, still too few fricking players i thought we'd be up to fricking 500 by now and experience real war shit, they even nerfed the player count, no classes, too few fricking maps, the maps we have suck ass... it's just all bad.
>still too few fricking players i thought we'd be up to fricking 500 by now and experience real war shit
The older BF devs admitted that anything beyond 64p would suck. And they're right.
All they do is just make the maps larger to accommodate. So rather then more intense fights, its just more fights spread across a larger map. Requiring more maps to make and more unnecessary dev time for essentially the same overall experience. 128 isn't fun and was a mistake.
>128 isn't fun and was a mistake
>tfw instantly reminded of MAG
>go to google to pull up a MAG image
>come across pic related
I haven't played Battlefield 2042, but have MAG. Just how bad is it in the former because in the latter it's just a clusterfrick of chaos where nothing gets done when player counts are that big.
Planetside 2 was ultra fun and it had the most players of any game ever made
There are two kinds of people. People who never played MAG, and people who call it "LAG".
profit over soul
simple as that
When are they going to permanently remove vehicles?
shiiiieet, they have multiple modes that do that for many games now.
>bf4
>it's a little bird shitter going 140/2 episode again
>dead franchise
lol
lmao even
is anyone else having fun with 2042? yeah its got a ton of problems but it scratches my itch, and i haven't played it to death like 4 and 1
also i can never get lobbies for V in the PNW, its a pain in the ass
>also i can never get lobbies for V in the PNW, its a pain in the ass
that's because most of the playerbase is located in china, barely any americans or euros play it
Yeah 2042's not bad. It needs work but it does feel BF like now.
I'd love to play 1 instead but its dead on my console and region
Beware that it's steam numbers, games like BF3/BF4 are more populate Origin wise (almost all my friends and me are using the Origin client when playing those games)
I just want a gory halo style battlefield made with as much attention to detail as battlefront
Which single player campaigns are worth playing from this franchise?
I'd avoid anything pozzed.
only bad company 1
Interesting. Does it emulate well?
What went wrong with bc2?
bc2 is just a cod campaign tbh, it doesn't have the charm of the original which didn't take itself very seriously (was basically an adaptation of three kings)
You posted the answer to your question.
No he did not.
BF3 was the fist to really embrace consoles. BAd company was finw since it was just a console spin-off but they lost their way.
>BF3 was the fist to really embrace consoles
It didn't.
The consoles versions of BF3 are nowhere near on par with the PC version to begin with, unlike Bad Company.
>nowhere near on par
they have the exact same gameplay on the same maps you dumb fricking underaged homosexual
That's what I said, Bad Company was a console spinoff but starting with and including BF3 they thought that was their main product.
It is, consoles numbers > PC numbers
https://battlefieldtracker.com/bf1/insights/population?days=-1
PC is hacker aids filled with bugs and overpriced, sorry chumps.
Salesnumbers just mean they went with what works for the masses not with what is a good game.
Except they are extraordinarily good games 8^)
>main product
If that was the case, then the console versions of BF3 would be on par with PC.
Up until BF3 that was their main product but starting with that theu went with concolse direction and I don't blame them too much since easily that yelded more money.
Can't believe they made BF music worse then THIS
you must be underage because everyone made fun of the shitty electronic farts theme for bf3
>39:22
played bad company, bf3, bf4, bf1 and now currently downloading bf5. They can still recover from the last bf, people will buy it anyways.
best song
Why are there no other FPS where I can be a mortar Black person?
Mortars in Bf3 and BF1 were fun
>kill someone with mortar
>they get mad and kill you back with their own
>rest of the match is a mortar duel between you and this random dude on the other side of the map
>Why are there no other FPS where I can be a mortar Black person?
wolfenstein: enemy territory
project reality
squad
arma 3
This, I love doing this on Scene crossing because you can "glitch" a bit with the wall/building and become immune to mortar shell while still being able to use a mortar.
DUN DUN DUN DUN DUN DUNNN DUNNNN
IM GONNA FIGHT EM ALL
A SEVEN NATION ARMY COULDNT HOLD ME BACK
BF5 was underrated
>spotting scope homosexual
you'll get what's coming to you once I sneak around in the smoke
you have to find me first heehoo
Battlefield 5 was alright in both gameplay and presentation but they intentionally fricked with the TTK for some godawful reason
that was just for a few patches, then they mostly reverted it
For me it was camping on the ammo crate and spamming spotting flares
They wanted that CoD money so they made BFBC and kept wanting to chase it so they made every BF from 3 on a BC sequel while naming it BF, losing their players who wanted BF while CoD players kept playing CoD and people who wanted 'new thing' played the BCBF's they kept releasing.
i really hope DICE doesn't look to MW19/22's ground war for any sort of inspiration because that mode is absolute dog shit.
its the worst of both worlds.
>been having trouble finding BF1 servers with good ping
>check my filter
>it was set to hide full servers
well that explains a lot of things
Is there a Ganker server for BF1 and 4?
I shit you not, i enjoyed the free beta of 2042.
You could ACTUALLY get a vehicle in it and play unlike BF3/4
That shit was so fun with the increased playercounts and map size
>Spawn in a heli
>Opposing team heli shoots you down instantly with a wireguided missile
>Continues on his 60/0 kd rampage
>60 seconds later repeat
The maps for BF4 and 3 were SHIT for air combat, they needed to be bigger
>Spawn a jet
>Fly for 5 seconds
>O-oh you are out of the combat zone soldier, do a 360 or we will suicide you!
>Turn
>Fly for 5 seconds
>repeat
Also the fact that the game was always balanced around shooting doritoes means that air vehicles were either completely broken vs ground targets or completely useless depending which mode you played
You either played the slow, shitty A10 to do any damage to ground vehicles
Or you play the F35 and basically do nothing but kill A10's or helos
Both get shot down from the other side of the map by anti air
>Spawn in a heli
>Opposing team heli shoots you down instantly with a wireguided missile
Obviously meant this travesty was for Siege of Shanghai
say what you will about 2042 but at least i don't have to deal with little bird autists anymore.