Battlefield V
- Thread starter Rangers
- Start date
I would like to see DICE do an artistic take on a Battlefield game (WW1 or WW2, it doesn't matter). Like from a photographers or film crew perspective. Something that's completely black and white, with that gritty, washed, semi-degraded film look.
I'm interested in Battle Royale. I used to love Conquest, but now it feels like an empty game mode. There are too many players and no real inter-squad communication, so you don't really feel like you can secure a victory in a meaningful way. Most people just end up playing for K
, so you see a million snipers lying prone a mile from the objectives. I think the Rush game mode was small enough that you were able to make a meaningful impact on the games outcome. I'm hoping the new objective modes will bring that same kind of feeling to the larger games. The kill-die-spawn loop feels outdated a bit, without a larger context to what you're doing.
What happened with the incursions e-sports mode for Battlefield 1? They were doing alpha testing for quite a while. I guess it never panned out? A smaller e-sports mode would be a great addition.
, so you see a million snipers lying prone a mile from the objectives. I think the Rush game mode was small enough that you were able to make a meaningful impact on the games outcome. I'm hoping the new objective modes will bring that same kind of feeling to the larger games. The kill-die-spawn loop feels outdated a bit, without a larger context to what you're doing.What happened with the incursions e-sports mode for Battlefield 1? They were doing alpha testing for quite a while. I guess it never panned out? A smaller e-sports mode would be a great addition.
Svensk Viking
Regular
I like seeing comments about the game feeling more like Bad Company 2 than the other Battlefields, eager to try the Beta tomorrow now
I'm not feeling it. I was heavy into BF2, BFBC2, BF3, BF4 but BF1 and BFV haven't really worked for me.
1) tanks are too scarce for me, I love driving tanks in BF and it's just too difficult/tedious to get a tank. You either have to wait for a long time or get lucky.
2) the in-your-face non-stop action isn't doing it for me. I've been playing a lot of PUGB - I've been riding that train since early access and 1.0 release through today - and BFV just isn't as tense as PUBG. It feels more important to survive in PUBG, while in BFV it's just a grind.
3) Spawn-die-spawn-die. In PUBG, you can spawn-die-spawn-die but it is always a different server, maybe different map, different drop, different weapons. In BFV, you can of course change class, change weapon, but the customization has to be grinded, the weapon system is not as deep and the attachments are cosmetic only except for sights. You can earn upgrades on a weapon but they are always bonuses so it isn't a trade-off really. Just grind and get all bonuses.
For some positives: The graphics are good, the audio is excellent, the gunplay feels nice.
I'm left with feeling that the BF ship has sailed for me. If there's an open beta for the BR mode for BFV, I will try it, but I don't think I will buy the game just to try the BR mode.
Edit: oh and by the way, for all the "EA/DICE called me uneducated and I don't want women/cyborgs/leprechauns in my WW2 game" people out there, the action is so in your face you won't notice any of it, but you can actually in the game options turn off other people's customizations. I don't think it removes women, but 50+% of the globe's (UH OH flath-earther trigger warning) population deserves to be in a game about a conflict spanning the entire globe (UH OH flath-earther trigger warning AGAIN)
1) tanks are too scarce for me, I love driving tanks in BF and it's just too difficult/tedious to get a tank. You either have to wait for a long time or get lucky.
2) the in-your-face non-stop action isn't doing it for me. I've been playing a lot of PUGB - I've been riding that train since early access and 1.0 release through today - and BFV just isn't as tense as PUBG. It feels more important to survive in PUBG, while in BFV it's just a grind.
3) Spawn-die-spawn-die. In PUBG, you can spawn-die-spawn-die but it is always a different server, maybe different map, different drop, different weapons. In BFV, you can of course change class, change weapon, but the customization has to be grinded, the weapon system is not as deep and the attachments are cosmetic only except for sights. You can earn upgrades on a weapon but they are always bonuses so it isn't a trade-off really. Just grind and get all bonuses.
For some positives: The graphics are good, the audio is excellent, the gunplay feels nice.
I'm left with feeling that the BF ship has sailed for me. If there's an open beta for the BR mode for BFV, I will try it, but I don't think I will buy the game just to try the BR mode.
Edit: oh and by the way, for all the "EA/DICE called me uneducated and I don't want women/cyborgs/leprechauns in my WW2 game" people out there, the action is so in your face you won't notice any of it, but you can actually in the game options turn off other people's customizations. I don't think it removes women, but 50+% of the globe's (UH OH flath-earther trigger warning) population deserves to be in a game about a conflict spanning the entire globe (UH OH flath-earther trigger warning AGAIN)
Last edited:
I played my first game on Rotterdam. It was kind of ... weird. For some reason it seemed to lack the chaos of other BF games. It was oddly quiet, even though the server was full. The gun I was using felt really good. Maybe I just played an off game, but the intensity wasn't there.
Yeah the clipping whites thing may be related to the HDR tuner not working or even saving it's settings (no matter what you set it appears to revert to 1,000), it's especially obvious in replay clips I've saved it's like Rotterdam was transported to the middle of the Sahara it was so overbright. The lack of vehicles is most likely a side effect of the maps they've chosen, Rotterdam is clearly an infantry centred map and the Grand Operation only allows vehicles to spawn on the final set of flags for the defenders. I'm pretty happy overall thus far and I am expecially delighted they have largely eliminated 3D spotting, that was so goddamn annoying from the very moment it was introduced
Back to the gameplay ...
Anyone else find that sound rolls off too quickly? I swear I hear a lot of bullets flying past me and the people shooting are fairly close range, but I can barely hear their gun firing. I also encountered a tank driving over a chain-link fence, at maybe 30 feet, and I could barely hear the fence falling and the tank didn't make any sound at all until I walked about 5-10 feet closer.
I've tried both 3D sound for headphones and the regular headphone setting. Haven't done much other experimentation. I have pretty nice headphones, I might try out one of the speaker settings and see if it sounds any different. I don't think it's an audio driver bug. Seems more like sounds are being occluded, if that's the correct term, over distance. Maybe that's why the game seemed so lifeless when I first tried it?
Anyone else find that sound rolls off too quickly? I swear I hear a lot of bullets flying past me and the people shooting are fairly close range, but I can barely hear their gun firing. I also encountered a tank driving over a chain-link fence, at maybe 30 feet, and I could barely hear the fence falling and the tank didn't make any sound at all until I walked about 5-10 feet closer.
I've tried both 3D sound for headphones and the regular headphone setting. Haven't done much other experimentation. I have pretty nice headphones, I might try out one of the speaker settings and see if it sounds any different. I don't think it's an audio driver bug. Seems more like sounds are being occluded, if that's the correct term, over distance. Maybe that's why the game seemed so lifeless when I first tried it?
I noticed some wierdness with audio a few times. I really really like the audio in this game, the sounds are fantastic, very immersive. But there have been a few moments when I expected to hear sounds and didn't.
Do you happen to have a Ryzen?
My other impression was that it seems to lack the sustained fights of previous battlefield titles, especially the snow map. The snow map has a few spots in and around houses and up on the train platform where you can get those tight combat areas, keeping your team revived and supplied, but a lot of the map the fights seem very quick. There aren't a lot of good positions on the map either. I've only played Rotterdam once. It seemed better, but maybe like the players were too spread out? I didn't encounter any large fights. Maybe that's another audio problem, because they sound is not directing the players to the action around them.
I do have a ryzen cpu. You're right about the quality of the actual sounds. They're very good. I really like the sounds of the planes overhead.
Make sure you have the latest BIOS for your motherboard. There is a bug in the frostbyte engine on Ryzen platform which causes a lot of audio cutout issues. It took a year of complaining to EA for them to respond and it was fixed soon after in an AGESA update. It's been confirmed the bug is still present in BFV if you don't have that BIOS update and it was only back in April or so when it was fixed.
I've played two rounds of conquest last night. My impressions so was that it was rather boring. That's bad. Maybe it's crappy level design, but I think half the time I just spent looking for the action.
Who ever made the point about 1 tank per side being a problem is spot on. In BF4, even though I'm absolutely terrible with the vehicles, they are still great to have on the battlefield. When I think about modern battlefield maps like Golmud Railway each team gets multiply tanks, light armor vehicles, and helicopters. The vehicles also allow for quicker traversal of large maps so you're not just running forever.
I think helicopters help with vertical level design. You can transport troops to higher elevation (roof tops, mountains) or across a map quickly. Plus it's incredibly satisfying to take out a full transport helicopter with an RPG. Yeah, I wanted another modern battlefield game.
One other thing from the beta, for the sniper, it's incredible slow to bring up the rifle and look down the sites. It really affects how aggressive you can be. In BF4, my favorite class to play is Recon with a short scope on a sniper rifle and C4. This allows you to be really effective in close range against troops and vehicles. I thought that was missing in BF1. I couldn't find the right class loadout that I really enjoyed.
Who ever made the point about 1 tank per side being a problem is spot on. In BF4, even though I'm absolutely terrible with the vehicles, they are still great to have on the battlefield. When I think about modern battlefield maps like Golmud Railway each team gets multiply tanks, light armor vehicles, and helicopters. The vehicles also allow for quicker traversal of large maps so you're not just running forever.
I think helicopters help with vertical level design. You can transport troops to higher elevation (roof tops, mountains) or across a map quickly. Plus it's incredibly satisfying to take out a full transport helicopter with an RPG. Yeah, I wanted another modern battlefield game.
One other thing from the beta, for the sniper, it's incredible slow to bring up the rifle and look down the sites. It really affects how aggressive you can be. In BF4, my favorite class to play is Recon with a short scope on a sniper rifle and C4. This allows you to be really effective in close range against troops and vehicles. I thought that was missing in BF1. I couldn't find the right class loadout that I really enjoyed.
I'll check my BIOS when I get home. I think I should be running one newer than April. I'm pretty good about keeping it up to date, but there is a BIOS version for my MB from the end of July that I may not have installed. It includes an AGESA update.
I didn't realize it was only 1 tank per side. That's very unBattlefield. Now that I think about it, where are all the jeeps, motorcycles?
It maybe just this map or the beta. There were some other transport vehicles with a turret, but didn't feel like a battlefield level.
The Conquest map is an urban infantry map in much the same way Paris was in BF4 and Amiens in BF1, I'm not a big fan of this map style as I love me some tanks but I would be shocked if they didn't have Golmud style maps in the main game. It is odd though, BF1 beta used the desert map that offered a decent mix of gameplay as did the Shanghai map in the BF4 beta (even if it was almost impossible to do anything that interesting with tanks in that map). Rotterdam also allows you to spawn with that german half track thing, I haven't seen the allied version but tbh given the map constraints it's mostly pointless as only flags B, D and E offer much vehicle access.
I'm quietly confident so far personally as I've played 8-9 hours so far and had a mix of good and bad rounds on Rotterdam but Narvik has been uniformly bad as a defender. I like the idea of multiple game types over time with Day 1 being a Defuse mode with 5 targets and Day 2 being a standard 3 phase operation from BF! (i.e. two flags per phase, controlling both wins the phase and pushes defenders back) however it's pretty clear folks are still getting used to what they are meant to be doing.
The ability to build looks like it might be a real game changer but I still don't know what button to press to start doing it so the beta could have down with a bit more instruction as to how all the new stuff works, hilariously the blog post highlighting new features doesn't include instructions on how to use them in game. I want to drag people to revive them, how do I do it DICE, how?!?
So according to @Lalaland , th real WW2 battles were indistinguishable from Fortnite matches. If you disagree you're sexist and racist.
I have to ask where did the idea that this game looks like Fortnite come from?