——The Official Battlefield 6 Thread——

Gerard said:
Think this needs dialled back a tad. And still zero player damage from rubble. Hopefully not the case in the final game.
Click to expand...
You definitely took damage/died from falling buildings in the open beta, wonder if it's different in the test environment or something changed. I definitely died to that bridge collapsing on the small city map.
 
Last edited:
t2na said:
You definitely took damage/died from falling buildings in the open beta, wonder if it's different in the test environment or something changed. I definitely died to that bridge collapsing on the small city map.
Click to expand...

It was sketchy at best in the beta, i found myself walking through it with no damage sometimes and other times it did do damage. That's from rubble falling from walls being blown apart at least.
 

20 mins of firestorm. That Bradley type vehicle at the start lasted a hell of a lot longer than I expected, unless they edited out deaths and had a few goes in it.
 
Last edited:
Gerard said:

Reddit - The heart of the internet

www.reddit.com www.reddit.com

Think this needs dialled back a tad. And still zero player damage from rubble. Hopefully not the case in the final game.
Click to expand...
Definitely, I thought the single hit to walls and floors looked bad enough
Rroff said:
That looks incredibly dumb, also some of the worst building destruction I've seen, at first glance looks quite impressive but the more you look at it the more you see how much they've faked it.
Click to expand...

It's all looks scripted. In the beta you'd hit a building with RPG, front of building falls off, poof of smoke/dust to hide the disappearing falling rubble and rubble growing out of the ground. A bit of a same really because it always seems to look the same every time and not dynamic as they made out in the trailers.

Mark1989 said:
Yeah cause in the moment when being shot at etc you’ll stand there to be killed and stare at the building

Honestly people need to enjoy games more and stop focus on so much of the tiny details.

The games frantic considering what’s going on it’s by far the worst destruction design
Click to expand...

Thing is DICE made a big deal about how amazing the destruction is in BF6 so obviously people are going to analyse it.

People need to stop being so precious about games...

Maximum Triceratops said:
Any news on if they have tweaked the vehicle controls? it was a deal breaker for me during the Beta.....
Click to expand...

In the latest labs test choppers had seem improvements and I think it was mentioned ground vehicles speed increased. Hopefully thats wrong because they felt pretty speedy already imo.

Ive also heard reports that in jets now you just need to press two buttons and a direction to do maneuvers. Pretty lame if true.
 
RavenXXX2 said:
Wow even firestorm is another cluster **** map, and this one of the larger maps lol.
Click to expand...


The server player counts are too high in BF6, lucky portal can fix that. Battlefield has traditionally been about driving or running for a bit, picking your spots and then entering combat or taking objectives, but EA has tried to turn it into CoD where no matter what map you play on, it's like CoD and every two seconds and around every single corner is an enemy and it's non stop bang bang bang gun fire
 
Last edited:
Grim5 said:
The server player counts are too high in BF6, lucky portal can fix that. Battlefield has traditionally been about driving or running for a bit, picking your spots and then entering combat or taking objectives, but EA has tried to turn it into CoD where no matter what map you play on, it's like CoD and every two seconds and around every single corner is an enemy and it's non stop bang bang bang gun fire
Click to expand...

I can kind of see why - BF4 2/3rds of the active player base I believe is playing 64 player conquest large on mostly Lockers and Metro. BF5 similar kind of trend, not sure about BF1.
 
Last edited:
Grim5 said:
The server player counts are too high in BF6, lucky portal can fix that. Battlefield has traditionally been about driving or running for a bit, picking your spots and then entering combat or taking objectives, but EA has tried to turn it into CoD where no matter what map you play on, it's like CoD and every two seconds and around every single corner is an enemy and it's non stop bang bang bang gun fire
Click to expand...
Unfortunately if you want that old school bf, you need to try arma reforger
 
Rroff said:
I can kind of see why - BF4 2/3rds of the active player base I believe is playing 64 player conquest large on mostly Lockers and Metro. BF5 similar kind of trend, not sure about BF1.
Click to expand...

I'm aware of that trend and it is unfortunate. Whether or not it's still the case, the original reason for maps like 64 metro being popular is the more densely packed players are the easier it is to get kills and the higher your kill per minute ratio is, the faster you can level up and get new unlocks, so really it was about grinding XP as fast as possible and not about enjoyment
 
jonneymendoza said:
Unfortunately if you want that old school bf, you need to try arma reforger
Click to expand...
Reforger is great but you spend far too much time getting around and too little in combat - its almost the exact opposite of combat around every turn.
Hell let Loose has the best balance imho but im so sick of WW2.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom