Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Battlefield V
Options
Comments
-
I moaned here at lot about my issues with BF4. I didn’t like it and I won’t drag it back up. Suffice to say for me the game felt like:
I only really got into Battlefield properly with BC2. I played a bit of 1942, BF2 and 2142 at the time but never had the time or the hardware for it proper. However BF3 is where the current trajectory the series has taken all started, all games since have iterated on its short ttk and chaotic gameplay in favour of objective focused gameplay.
I did have a lot of fun with BF3 as well as BC2, but they’re very different experiences. BF3 eliminated the clunkiness of BC2 and the gameplay shifted as a result. You could have some epic concentrated gunfights in BC2 that didn’t feel like the meat grinder you often got in BF3. That said BF3 has much better gunplay.
However it often felt that BF3 didn’t always know what to do with itself. Jets were disconnected from the rest of the game while BC2’s (and BF3’s) helicopters were generally part of the mix. Giving Assualt the medkit was a weird decision and felt like a knee jerk reaction to BC2 super medics. Also PTFO in Conquest in BF3 often just revolved around touring the map in armour while snipers did their point and click adventure games.
I loved playing Engineer in BC2, the tracer dart was a great way to balance lock-on weapons. Land mines were a lot of fun, especially frisbee throwing them over a wall or a rock where the enemy would stack and chase it up with a grenade...
Also Battlelog was great IMHO.
BF1 was alright, it didn’t really grab my attention for many of the same reasons as BF4, and I found it a bit silly.
I’m not really bothered by BFV, I just don’t have the time anymore to get anyway proficient so I’ll pick it up on sale I guess.0 -
So BF3 is the winner overall
Id have to go with that too as a complete BF package.
I havnt gotten to 4 yet and I do want to put a bit more time into each of them.
I'd say 3 is probably the most accessible overall, it just etches out ahead of BC2 due to nicer menu system and clearer upgrade paths in battlelog.0 -
-
-
Kinda agree and disagree with Hellrazor.
4 is the best in the series BUT only if you play hardcore, its the only that game mode that works in regards team play.
Bad Company was the death of BF, going console with easy to get into gameplay killed off the 64 player Conquest game. Making everything easier and clearly explaining things was not for the original players of 42/V/2.
I mean to this day there is still no sniper limit by default in any BF game, it was never an issue with 42/V/2 but now I have joined games seen 20 snipers on my team, noone capping and simply just left the server.
The simple way to make BF a thing again is simply go back to Conquest 64 players with the absolute emphasis on capping and holding, in BF5 you can win the game by not having all/or the majority of the points
they are rewarding KD and not forcing team play. 0 -
Advertisement
-
Join Date:Posts: 10076
The simple way to make BF a thing again is simply go back to Conquest 64 players with the absolute emphasis on capping and holding, in BF5 you can win the game by not having all/or the majority of the points they are rewarding KD and not forcing team play.
Says he with the million to one kill death ratio
But yeah completely agree--more needs to be done to encourage team play. Stop rewarding k/d and increase rewards for objectives / healing / resupply / anti-vehicle etc.
In other words encourage each class to actually play as that class in team based matches. Nothing worse than screaming for ammo or a heal when theres a medic 5 feet away from you whose sole interest is in getting kills. And that did my head in in BF1.
I don't think I ever got into a positive kd ratio in any BF game. But that was solely because I wasn't interested and only played the objectives regardless of the mode running on the server.0 -
I think BF as we knew it is pretty much dead. The game is just starting to feel less like a labor of love and more like a huge catch-all commercial behemoth, where the first and last consideration is making as much $$$ as possible, no matter what gameplay concessions have to be made (See Battlefront 2).I tried BF2 last night and I got to say anyone who complained about grenade spam in BF3/BF4...holy f*ck you've got it easy. I joined a Karkand map and at the beginning of the round the americans were just constantly lobbing long range grenades from their spawn into the first point. It was ridiculous.
Coming at the first point as the Americans was like the opening scene of Saving Private Ryan. Playing as the MEC, if you didn't get at least one random kill from hurling grenades in the opening 20 seconds, you felt like an utter failure.
I've liked all the BF main entries from 42 to BF1 (and even Hardline to a certain extent) but BF2 was the boss.0 -
-
Exclamation Marc wrote: »
Was hoping the SP would generate a bit more interest for me, but I'm just completely cold to this game. All that bombast and barely any gameplay..0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
Could be any number of issues really. Possibly they have seen what the latest COD BR has and want to either improve/change or add more to theirs to compete with it or make it better etc.
In other news, I have installed BF3 again and am having good craic playing it. Feel's good to be C4'ing lads again 0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUPimAwTo3E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LZIP91e7ck
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLR5DXRqtis
Advertisement