Associate
I am the only one who wishes the new battlefield games would go back to the way it was in bf2/1942 a lot slower pace ?
*** Battlefield 1 ***
- Thread starter TonyTurbo78
- Start date
I'm with you, BF1942 is still my favourite BF to date, I think its the one that had the most interesting maps and the best balance. Plus I loved having the naval ships/subs too.
Loving this BF1 game engine though, would love to see a BF1942 remake using this engine.
Associate
Soldato
Are EA/Dice doing the same as hardline and battlefront? As in only having a handful of weapons per class with obvious OP ones?
Or will it be more like the old bf's with progression and lots of weapons?
Or will it be more like the old bf's with progression and lots of weapons?
Soldato
Doubt i will be playing this BF4 ruined the franchise for me, the people in my clan at the time slowly gave up one by one, in fact a few of them went back to BF3 as it was the better game. It was a shame because some of the maps were excellent.
Caporegime
i'd estimate its more like BF4 but you'll need to wait till closer to release date for confirmation.
The base game.. yeah probably will 
Although only if they fix the utterly retarded gun fire mechanics with regards to bullet spread and how holding down left mouse button will be better than tap/burst fire... as well as the random bullet deviation they just added for the sake of it.
Premium/DLC stuff, I probably won't bother with this time round, hardly played any of the expansion packs for bf 3 (CQ pack excluded) and bf 4 and none of the "premium" features are worth it.
Although only if they fix the utterly retarded gun fire mechanics with regards to bullet spread and how holding down left mouse button will be better than tap/burst fire... as well as the random bullet deviation they just added for the sake of it.Premium/DLC stuff, I probably won't bother with this time round, hardly played any of the expansion packs for bf 3 (CQ pack excluded
) and bf 4 and none of the "premium" features are worth it.
Last edited:
The only really good DLC maps for bf 4 were propaganda, lumpini gardens imo. Final stand maps were ok and I enjoyed the naval maps but don't think any of the others liked them). Second assault was a disaster, they took the best maps from bf 3 and completely butchered them 
Yeah x, anderzel and I believe others have said that you get rewarded more for holding down the LM button instead of tap/burst firing, iirc, the automatic guns get more accurate the longer you hold down the LM button
Even when just tap firing 1 shot at a time at a very slow rate, apparently the bullets don't go where your ADS is aiming, they either go slightly to the right or left. Essentially making it more noob friendly for the COD boys who are just use to hold LMB FTW...
Yeah x, anderzel and I believe others have said that you get rewarded more for holding down the LM button instead of tap/burst firing, iirc, the automatic guns get more accurate the longer you hold down the LM button
Even when just tap firing 1 shot at a time at a very slow rate, apparently the bullets don't go where your ADS is aiming, they either go slightly to the right or left. Essentially making it more noob friendly for the COD boys who are just use to hold LMB FTW...This isn't Day 1 DLC, so no, it's not just cut content. It is post-support content, and is not just for Premium users.
I think a lot of people dont understand that DLC takes time to make, and plans for it are usually made well ahead of the actual production of it.
The only really good DLC maps for bf 4 were propaganda, lumpini gardens imo. Final stand maps were ok and I enjoyed the naval maps but don't think any of the others liked them). Second assault was a disaster, they took the best maps from bf 3 and completely butchered them
Yeah x, anderzel and I believe others have said that you get rewarded more for holding down the LM button instead of tap/burst firing, iirc, the automatic guns get more accurate the longer you hold down the LM button
Ahh I hope that's not the case
. I hope they still keep the relatively high skill ceiling. Meh I reckon it's all done before release. They don't have enough enough time after dealing with bug fixes to really make DLC after release
.Yup it's not day 1 DLC as the game isn't even released yet and they are already marketing the DLC/premium expansions...
Call it what you want, doesn't change the fact that the game isn't even out yet and they are already locking content that should be in the base game as default behind another pay wall, there is no way around that. They kept a ton of stuff in Battlefront behind DLC pay walls that should have been in the game as default.
This is what DICE said about the expansion
French forces will be premium DLC for Battlefield 1
Sounds like a premium only thing to me otherwise why not just say "expansion" or "DLC pack"???
What I classify as proper DLC is the vietnam pack that we got for DLC for BC 2, something that was developed and marketed a long time after launch and was something completely different/new to the game. This is what hardline should have been to BF 4.
Publishers just love to milk customers these days with all this season pass, premium, dlc crap on day 1/before the game is even released. To the likes of EA, all they care about is how much more money can they make by using tactics like that, it is as simple as that. If people really want a certain map, weapon, skin or whatever then they will pay for it (unfortunately).
Ahh I hope that's not the case
Well lets just hope they listen to the youtubers that have also stated they didn't like it... They will be stupid to do what happened with battlefront i.e. didn't listen to a single piece of feedback on the alpha and beta gameplay and well look at how that turned out.... They have somewhat fixed most of the serious issues we had with it but as usual, it was too little too late.
Quite normal. DLC plans are made ahead of time. It's good management.
What do you mean 'it should be in the base game'? This is where I think a lot of gamers really would benefit from understanding how development works.
Yes, they *could* put it in the base game, but they'd have to delay the entire base game to do it. And then you could make the same argument for their next content expansion. Say THAT is supposed to be in the base game and you delay the entire game to include. Etc etc. Eventually the game comes with ALL the content from expansions, but it's a year and a half later!! Obviously not realistic or practical for many reasons.
I think they're just trying to promote 'Premium' assocation with DLC, but other sources have stated this is just an expansion, like any of the others. Will be available for 'free' to Premium members, but will still be available to buy separately for non-Premium members.
You're increasingly showing you dont really understand how game development works.
Hardline was a FULL game. Full new singleplayer, full new multiplayer. It was its own game, content-wise.
And I understand if you'd like bigger expansions that do more interesting things. That's great. But you overstepping things when you say that anything that *doesn't* do that isn't actually DLC. Because you're literally and objectively wrong in that situation. You dont get to decide what DLC is and isn't. You are merely expressing preference for what you'd like to see in DLC. You should really understand the difference.
And plenty of us do not mind DLC, as it is. I dont go buy all the DLC I can snap up, but I definitely get more than my money's worth in those I do. Battlefield expansions are one of those examples. I'm very happy with the quantity and quality of content they put out for the price they charge. If you dont get enough playtime out of them, fine, it's not good value to you. But dont act like it's an outrage when for a whole lot of us, it's fine.
Ya know, if gamers would accept games that cost $90-100+ like they probably should given inflation and the exponential rising costs of game production, publishers wouldn't have to do all this stuff. But gamers wouldn't accept that. As it is, for the same price that a game cost in 1995, we get MUCH bigger games(on average) that cost magnitudes more to make. I dont really see how we can complain.
Then for those who want more, there is DLC. For me, I like that it exists. Because often enough, I *do* enjoy more. Especially in a multiplayer shooter, where it's easy to run out of steam on existing content. And I like that Season Passes exist. If I *know* I'm going to be buying the expansions for a certain game, why not get a discount on it? If you'd rather wait and see and only buy DLC here and there for a game, then dont worry about the Season Pass. It's not being forced on you, it's just being made as an option. I do recommend being very selective on which games you buy a Season Pass for, though. Certain devs I trust a lot more than others and only do it if you're *sure* you'll be getting all the DLC anyways. In other words, nothing wrong with it - customers just need to be smart about it.
Soldato
Then delay the game? Back in the old days games we had a full game and the only additions were the likes of United Offensive which were incredible and only £20.
Nowadays we get a game with about 10 levels, the rest follow and are charged extra for. However you want to try and justify it, content is held back to be charged extra for later down the line, or often not down the line but instead at the time of release!
It needs to die!
It's seanspeed, the white knight for developers and companies in general and who loves to argue on ze internetz for the sake of it, best to do what I did.... add him to ignore
All I will say is that I suggest people to watch boogie2988's videos when it comes to things like pre-orders, dlc, premium/season pass and micro-transactions, he knows far more on this and explains a few of the advantages and all of the disadvantages far better than anyone can and actually knows how the business works considering all of the connections he has as well as his input that he has on the games.
All I will say is that I suggest people to watch boogie2988's videos when it comes to things like pre-orders, dlc, premium/season pass and micro-transactions, he knows far more on this and explains a few of the advantages and all of the disadvantages far better than anyone can and actually knows how the business works considering all of the connections he has as well as his input that he has on the games.
Last edited:
there is no plus points anymore for pre order since key sites are available.
only real reason is if they tie in the beta to pre purchase. thing is big treble aaa titles need as many people to play as possible to test so you kind of okay anyway.
only real reason is if they tie in the beta to pre purchase. thing is big treble aaa titles need as many people to play as possible to test so you kind of okay anyway.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 11 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 2,136
I wish they just made BF5 because WW1 weapons suck. You spend more time reloading than shooting.
Plus no heat-seekers
Plus no heat-seekers
I wish they just made BF5 because WW1 weapons suck. You spend more time reloading than shooting.
Plus no heat-seekers
Some of us actually like a challenge. Thank god there are no stupid lock on auto homing pew pew left button click auto kill no skill weapons I say.
I think COD might be better suited to you then.