Battlefield 1 general discussion

paul_booth_fan

XtraFalcon wrote: »

Video was just removed by the user but from the video we can see

Yeah I was under the impression that footage from Rush was still being kept back. Wonder if he was to take it down. The smaller player count will make the vehicles even more powerful, a single squad wipe can completely kill all momentum. Definitely be giving it a good look in the beta. I've been saying it for a while, that when it works, Rush is absolutely brilliant. Turns into a unbalanced sh t storm far too often though.

paul_booth_fan

And considering how pissy LevelCap is getting about the changes in Conquest, this game can't come soon enough

Noxin

paul_booth_fan wrote: »

And considering how pissy LevelCap is getting about the changes in Conquest, this game can't come soon enough

They've hinted that they might go back to the old points system with some tweaks - depending on feedback from the beta.
I'll need to test it out for myself obviously but for once I kinda have to agree with Level where you'll just end up seeing headless chickens running from point to point with little to no combat.
Think of Gulian Peaks on every map. That would get very old, very quick.

One week to go. The hype is real here.

Exclamation Marc

10% off Battlefield 1 on PS4/XB1 until midnight on Friday with the code "Zeppelin" on The Game Collection so will come in at £38.65 plus shipping.

BlitzKrieg

Noxin wrote: »

They've hinted that they might go back to the old points system with some tweaks - depending on feedback from the beta.
I'll need to test it out for myself obviously but for once I kinda have to agree with Level where you'll just end up seeing headless chickens running from point to point with little to no combat.
Think of Gulian Peaks on every map. That would get very old, very quick.

One week to go. The hype is real here.

the new system worries me because it genuinely feels like they're trying to control the length of a match much more and keep it within a very specific timeframe, I imagine its so the goliath vehicles can be properly dolled out to the right team etc.

So I imagine they upped the reward for caps due to the shorter time frame.

I somewhat hope they dont do what they did with BF3/4 where they introduced a new spawn system with the squads only being able to spawn on the squad leader (bf2 could spawn on anyone) but decided to leave in the option for servers to turn on BF2 squad spawning instead.

which of course almost every server did, which downplayed radio beacons and the role of squad leaders.

XtraFalcon

Noxin wrote: »

They've hinted that they might go back to the old points system with some tweaks - depending on feedback from the beta.
I'll need to test it out for myself obviously.

The old system is alright as is but I do like the fact that they are removing the kills influencing the ticket counter and I think with a few tweaks here and there pointwise, they could make it very beneficial to defend a flag and hold it as opposed to just running from post to post capping flags.

psnKOB79LFC

XtraFalcon wrote: »

Well World War 2 has been picked apart to death from game designers including the two biggest being Call of Duty and Medal of Honour over the years, so if Battlefield did that, it might seem like they were repeating themselves, albeit on a newer engine.

But World War 1 isn't a very well touched era by bigger titles so it has a lot more potential to work with.

Before Battlefield 1 was announced, there were tonnes of people asking for either a World War 1 or Vietnam era game in videos on Youtube predictions of the next game and news about DICE "Working on a new Battlefield" with a smaller band asking for Bad Company 3.

Also there would be no point in them doing Sci-Fi as Titanfall already leans heavily on that area and that would be 2 Sci-Fi games on the same market from the same parent company within a week of release of each other.

Just my opinion.

This is a world war 1 game on paper but realistically it seems more ww2 than ww1 with the pacing and list of automatic guns.

Ww1 is just a marketing plot imo , even the horses is ****e with it being 3rd person only. What is this red dead redemption?

(Opps don't dare speak foul of the game...must be great look at all the views on youtube!)

XtraFalcon

psnKOB79LFC wrote: »

This is a world war 1 game on paper but realistically it seems more ww2 than ww1 with the pacing and list of automatic guns.

I won't be speaking foul of the game because I haven't played it yet so it wouldn't make sense to blindly defend/attack it, come Tuesday I'll have a better idea based off the general gameplay mechanics.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by the 'pacing' but I think the horses will be a good edition, something unique to add to the mix. While some of the weapons weren't fully deployed on the battlefield they weren't a million miles away from it.

No game will ever really be 100% historically accurate, especially when the point is to sell a First person shooter as opposed to a documentary.

This is a quote from an article related to the first trailer released on historical accuracy (Which is linked here)

"We get asked a lot how accurate the trailer is in historical terms, and it’s difficult to say. Some of the scenes feature some unusual or experimental gear, and some weapons are carried by soldiers from the other side. Overall, it is an entertainment product foremost, and you probably won’t get an accurate depiction of the horrors of the war. However, the trailer already shows a lot of aspects that are usually forgotten when talking about this war.”"

Also there was a game released way-back-when (2000 I think) called Codename Eagle set in an Alt timeline in 1917 made by a company called Refraction Games which was later bought by a company called Digital Illusions CE or as we know them DICE.

In saying that if you don't like the game or like what you're seeing then you're more than welcome to that view.

Noxin

XtraFalcon wrote: »

The old system is alright as is but I do like the fact that they are removing the kills influencing the ticket counter and I think with a few tweaks here and there pointwise, they could make it very beneficial to defend a flag and hold it as opposed to just running from post to post capping flags.

I kinda like that kills have an impact. The closer battles in bf4 are always tense and funny as hell when it breaks down to the "DON'T FUPPING SPAWN" roars. :pac:
But I'm happy to test out this system and see how it plays out. Will just have to see what I feel works better next week.

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

the new system worries me because it genuinely feels like they're trying to control the length of a match much more and keep it within a very specific timeframe, I imagine its so the goliath vehicles can be properly dolled out to the right team etc.

From what I've seen from some of the Gamecom footage, the Goliath comes out to the losing team no matter what and at a set time.
I assume it's when the tickets get to a certain point on the winning team. In some footage, the losing team was only behind by a few points (possibly only one). Still got a Goliath.
The footage from Gamescom was also a tweaked build to keep the games to a specific timeframe so more people could get a chance to play. The beta would be standard builds (I hope) so can get a proper feel for match lengths then.

XtraFalcon

Battlefield 1 Premium Pass

FAILSAFE 00

I knew premium was coming. They are trying to sell loads of those special editions that don't include premium at launch and then get more money later with Battlefield Premium.

TerrorFirmer

Did anyone expect there not to be a premium?

As long as the core game, like BF4, has plenty of maps and game modes and is not a hollow, stripped out shell like Battlefront was, I don't see any problem with it at all.

IvoryTower

buy premium straight away or wait? probably cost a lot more to buy them separately?

XtraFalcon

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Did anyone expect there not to be a premium?

As long as the core game, like BF4, has plenty of maps and game modes and is not a hollow, stripped out shell like Battlefront was, I don't see any problem with it at all.

Someone said a while back that there was no premium and that the all map packs would be free. I'm guessing a lot of people took that as a fact and are now disappointed.

Also there were 5 map packs in BF3/BF4 plus 3 free additional maps, this is only giving 4 for the same price.

MiskyBoyy

Can get Premium for €28 from South Africa on XB1, or €14 with a game sharing buddy. Not so bad so!

FAILSAFE 00

Just a warning for people to watch out. Premium does not cone packaged in special editions of the game that already cost an arm and a leg.

So for example your €90 deluxe edition of Battlefield One does not come with Premium.

XtraFalcon

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

Just a warning for people to watch out. Premium does not cone packaged in special editions of the game that already cost an arm and a leg.

So for example your €90 deluxe edition of Battlefield One does not come with Premium.

All the more reason for the beta to be good. I'm guessing a lot of pre-orders and season passes will be decided on next week during the beta.

GottaGetGatt

I can't complain. The desert eagle in Bf4 was worth premium alone even if I still prefer the vanilla maps

TerrorFirmer

I didn't put a huge amount of time into the BF4 DLC maps, they were OK but I find that even now I usually pick vanilla servers. Can't say that it was a bad purchase though, it wasn't that expensive overall and the 200 odd hours I've played for is a good return on whatever the cost was at the time, I think around €75-80.

dunworth1

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

Just a warning for people to watch out. Premium does not cone packaged in special editions of the game that already cost an arm and a leg.

So for example your €90 deluxe edition of Battlefield One does not come with Premium.

they have announced a ultimate edition which includes premium its priced at €129.98 on origin pc

FAILSAFE 00

dunworth1 wrote: »

they have announced a ultimate edition which includes premium its priced at €129.98 on origin pc

I think €90 should more than cover the premium sub.

omerin

I have over 1400 hours on BF4 alone, don't play many other games to be honest. So what if I paid 50 or 60 for it, I would have gladly paid 2 or 3 times that. I have already paid for BF1, if it's a piece of crap I still will get many hours enjoyment from it, but I know they wont let me down. Paid only 40 for it. You may think it is crap that we pay more for new maps, maybe game modes, but in my mind these additional $s EA are getting is an investment in the future development and longevity of a game I really enjoy playing, so long may it continue.

This indorsement was in no way sponsored by EA

dunworth1

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

I think €90 should more than cover the premium sub.

i agree 130 quid for a game is expensive think i'll be going with the deluxe edition for the moment and decide later about the premium but that could change depending how the beta goes.

i dont mind paying if its good quality

irishgeo

whats the cheapest place to preorder the normal game for xbox one at the moment

Noxin

Well I knew a premium / ultimate edition would eventually be announced. I'm somewhat surprised they announced it before the beta though.

Anyway, that price tag though. 130 yoyo's is hulla expensive considering their other premiums were only 100ish. (think battlefront, hardline etc.. (yes I am a sap who bought BFH premium))

That said, if the game is good and you get the proper usage out of it, 130 quid is probably quite good. Most games last what these days? 10-20 hours if it's really good? I have 700+ hours in BF4. Just do the math. It still works out better than most and I'm not even close to what others have in played time.

Personal preferences for everyone. For me, If I like the beta and can see myself sinking a lot of time into the game then yea, I'll grab the ulti edition. If not, I might just grab a standard and wait for the first dlc to release and see what I think of it.
Or I could end up hating the beta and not getting the game at all. I guess we'll see :P

Varik

Noxin wrote: »

Well I knew a premium / ultimate edition would eventually be announced. I'm somewhat surprised they announced it before the beta though.

Anyway, that price tag though. 130 yoyo's is hulla expensive considering their other premiums were only 100ish. (think battlefront, hardline etc.. (yes I am a sap who bought BFH premium))

That said, if the game is good and you get the proper usage out of it, 130 quid is probably quite good. Most games last what these days? 10-20 hours if it's really good? I have 700+ hours in BF4. Just do the math. It still works out better than most and I'm not even close to what others have in played time.

Personal preferences for everyone. For me, If I like the beta and can see myself sinking a lot of time into the game then yea, I'll grab the ulti edition. If not, I might just grab a standard and wait for the first dlc to release and see what I think of it.
Or I could end up hating the beta and not getting the game at all. I guess we'll see :P

Bought it yesterday for under €5 and got all the maps for free, had to have a quick google to see if the special edition was worth €10 but I had already got most of that stuff before as they gave it away with the map packs so all I'm missing out on is a few gold packs.

Going to wait for beta for this after I skipped Hardline after playing it's beta.

XtraFalcon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itfZjlhCM5c

GottaGetGatt

Is there a way of changing the background picture? Mine has a different picture and its just tough in the eyes.

GerB40

Looky here, Battlefield insiders get BF 1 beta earlier than non insiders

iLikeWaffles

XtraFalcon wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itfZjlhCM5c

Marking multiple maps on consoles could be faster. Just seems like it takes half a second too long. It looks good though. Love the fact you can save your filters be even better if you could hide certain servers i.e. 24/7