Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 37
  1. #1
    Network Hub
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    122

    Battlefield 1 what went wrong with Battlefield?

    In my eyes Battlefield 1942 was an absolute classic pc game. It was really innovative but quite flawed like most great games.

    Battlefield 2 built upon the same principles developing the game further but had many flaws.

    I played a bit of Battlefield 3 and totally avoided 4.

    Battlefield 1 sounded like it would be the ultimate game and maybe a return to form, but after many hours of trying to like it I just feel like I'm playing a shallow arcade game.

    Has DICE sold out completely to the console crowd? Why is there no classic mode and no ability to play a conquest map with less than 64 players? Only allowing to rent official servers with basically no control is an absolute joke.

    I look back at battlefield 1942 and all the great things you could do in the game and cannot understand what went wrong. Why hasn't anybody copied with battlefield idea and made a spiritual successor?

  2. #2
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Heliocentric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    17,951
    Project Reality (standalone bf2 mod) and their 'sequel' to the mod called Squad are my shining lights for the Battlefield 2 experience moving forwards.

    Forcing 'official' server renting is a huge revenue stream, and you'd have more luck taking a felled antelope from the jaws of a lions, otherwise it'd be peer 2 peer like all the other lazy bastards.

    Time to move on, but don't blame 'soles PC gamers eat this shit up with a grin and have been doing so for years.
    I am once again writing a blog, vaguely about playing games the wrong way
    http://playingitwrong.wordpress.com/

  3. #3
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Bobtree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,062
    Don't forget that EA bought DICE after 2142 and decided BF had to be bigger than COD. Everything since is a side effect: they put it on consoles, made vehicles repair themselves, added 3D spotting (literally a visible marker on anyone who gets spotted) in every game since 2142 (the only one where it was plausible), added single player campaigns, turned most maps into corridors, monetized the hosting, made server listings into browser-based social networked crap, pushed season passes, sold premium access to servers, sold unlocks, and so on.

    DICE is now just a label for parts of EA.

  4. #4
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,130
    Quote Originally Posted by Bobtree View Post
    added 3D spotting (literally a visible marker on anyone who gets spotted)
    That's a good thing when you're playing on a server with strangers, especially if you don't use VOIP, like me.

    I thought Battlelog was awesome, too, but YMMV. If only because it allowed people to improve on it through Userscripts. I heard PC gamers like a thing called MODs, which they're eager to tell the "console peasants". Just sayin'
    Last edited by DanMan; 26-11-2016 at 12:59 PM.
    Resident graphics snob.

    And remember: Bad practices often become a trend, if not dealt with promptly.

  5. #5
    Network Hub
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    336
    Don't play AAA games if you're looking for non-casual experiences. Also Battlefield 1 is awesome.

  6. #6
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Bobtree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,062
    Quote Originally Posted by DanMan View Post
    That's a good thing when you're playing on a server with strangers, especially if you don't use VOIP, like me.
    It really isn't. Mini-map spotting was fine because you still had to correlate the map with what you're looking at to locate a spotted enemy. Universal 3D spotting makes engagements terribly short and shifts BF from maneuver warfare toward a shooting gallery. Too often any initial tracer fire causes a shooter to be spotted and instantly killed by return fire. Clicking at whatever icon pops up is just not very interesting.

    In 2142 the 3D spotting was unlock-based and each class had a different effect, recon's acted like a brief wallhack. Spotted enemies were marked with a red wireframe triangle, but you still had to see them to shoot them. There were also some kit unlocks like a heartbeat sensor, vehicle scanner, and radar grenade, but equipping them was a tradeoff.

    Later games put a colored triangle directly above the head of a spotted enemy, enabling kills on targets you can't even see, like through smoke or foliage or peeking above cover. They had to add a cooldown to spotting because it was too beneficial to spam it when you couldn't see the enemy.

    I remember some extended fights in 2142 going from rifles and grenades to pistols and ending in knife duels. That doesn't happen in any modern BF because of low time to kill, easy weapon handling, and 3D spotting.

  7. #7
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,130
    But it's also a way to communicate "watch out, there's a guy trying to flank us over there", improving orientation for the whole team, especially for newcomers who have trouble telling friend from foe. I take that over "things were much better back in the day".

    It is/was silly to be able to use it through smoke, I give you that. I consider that a bug though.
    Resident graphics snob.

    And remember: Bad practices often become a trend, if not dealt with promptly.

  8. #8
    Network Hub KwisatzHaderach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Munich
    Posts
    416
    BF4 classic is absolutely brilliant imo. Just waiting for classic 48p conquest in BF1.

  9. #9
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Gorizia, Italy
    Posts
    6,134
    I'm not sure what spotting is but it sounds more like an issue with the map being too big and not working as well and small ones, with teams split into random people around the map and those progressing the game, yet from what you are writing it comes with terrible costs because what's the point of my enemies' plan if I can predict their position 100% when they are supposed to have at least two options to attack me I have to watch out for.

  10. #10
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus DaftPunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    4,820
    Yeah,screw great visuals and sounds if gameplay is like cod on steroids.. Still have to try the game out,but from watching beta videos it doesnt look my cup of tea. Also why so many submachine guns? WW1 was fought with rifles! And gas!

  11. #11
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Zephro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    The Big Smoke
    Posts
    4,129
    Quote Originally Posted by DaftPunk View Post
    Yeah,screw great visuals and sounds if gameplay is like cod on steroids.. Still have to try the game out,but from watching beta videos it doesnt look my cup of tea. Also why so many submachine guns? WW1 was fought with rifles! And gas!
    Yeah. It being WW1 made me vaguely interesting for a moment then when I watched a video everything seemed to be semi or automatic. Nobody wriggling through dirt with a bolt action rifle.

  12. #12
    Network Hub artemas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    221
    Helio got the core issue. As the PR and Squad guys have discovered, gameplay mechanics are only half of the answer. The other half is a solid community which is on the same page as regards the general spirit of the game. It takes time for a community to develop, and i'm not sure the shorter production cycles of modern battlefields really allows that. Look to PR or Squad instead.

    With that said, bf1 is a lot closer to the dynamic, fun and teamwork-oriented gameplay of bad company 2 than anything else, and as such i feel it is the best battlefield since that game. But gameplay mechanics can only paper over so many social problems, and at the end of the day what is really needed is a standalone battlefield 1 or bf hardcore game that has both the time and separation enough to develop that sort of community following. There's a million ways to be a teamplayer, but they're all brought down by the disinterest in players wanting, or being able, to play as a cohesive unit.

  13. #13
    There's other changes. Battlefield 3 and above use client side hit detection. Basically, if you see a guy on your screen and you aim where, on your screen, the bullet will hit, the server checks what your client knew when you fired and gives you a hit if, by what your client knew, you would have hit.

    This is mostly a good thing. You no longer have to correct for latency, just actual bullet physics. However, it also changed the feel of the game greatly. In BF 1942, you could run around and you were nearly unhittable at moderate to large distances as long as you frequently changed direction. In the newer games, the maps are more constrained and the hit detection improvements means you will be shot dead immediately. So infantry combat becomes a much greater focus of the game. Also, anti-tank and antiaircraft missiles are a lot more common - in 1942 it felt like you were a god in a tank or a plane, not anymore.

    Also I remember the sloppy airplane physics of 1942 meant you could successfully land almost on a dime. You needed about 50 meters to take off or land in, you basically had a harrier jet. So you could get in a plane, be very hard to hit, and go on a killing spree in your airplane, repairing it periodically. You could even use the plane to capture objectives by landing on one.

    Anyways, it is what it is. I do think the newer games have a lot going for them, and they look amazingly better, ofc. For a PC multiplayer FPS, they are basically the best one available, with Rainbow Six Siege a close second. They may have gotten less fun over the years but for their genre they are easily the king.

  14. #14
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Heliocentric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    17,951
    Quote Originally Posted by BrickedKeyboard View Post
    For a PC multiplayer FPS, they are basically the best one available, with Rainbow Six Siege a close second. They may have gotten less fun over the years but for their genre they are easily the king.
    If you had said "best multiplayer shooter" I would have stopped to correct you, but alas Garden Warfare 2 is technically third person.
    I am once again writing a blog, vaguely about playing games the wrong way
    http://playingitwrong.wordpress.com/

  15. #15
    The client side hit detection can be very very frustrating though. There were a lot of times(more in BF3, some still in BF1) where I ran towards a corner where I should've been safe but when I was actually around the corner I got killed because of that client side hit detection. Fun for the guy who was shooting at me, but to me it always felt unfair.

    I think the biggest problem I have with the battlefields is the squad changes they made over the years. Only 4 available kits(7 in BF2), squads decreased from 6 to 4(now 5), and you can spawn on everyone(while you could only spawn on squad leader).

  16. #16
    Network Hub
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    244
    Quote Originally Posted by Heliocentric View Post
    If you had said "best multiplayer shooter" I would have stopped to correct you, but alas Garden Warfare 2 is technically third person.
    Lol I put a few good hours into the 1st one, the second is that much better huh?

    (not trying to sidetrack the discussion but I haven't played BF1 or PGW2 yet)

  17. #17
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Heliocentric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    17,951
    Quote Originally Posted by unclepauly View Post
    Lol I put a few good hours into the 1st one, the second is that much better huh?
    It makes the original look like an alpha demo. Wide open area is your menu and a battleground, you seamlessly form groups and play missions together, all content is coopable, you have dozens of classes based around a handful of templates, all meaningfully visually distinct and readable.
    I am once again writing a blog, vaguely about playing games the wrong way
    http://playingitwrong.wordpress.com/

  18. #18
    Network Hub
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    192
    Battlefront 1 is just that... pretty much a carbon copy of Star Wars: Battlefront. I was expecting a Battlefield game and a Battlefield game is not what I got.

    But... after sinking in a few hours, I'm slowly getting the hang of it. I'm starting to get a feel for how the carbines work, and where to position myself to avoid the aim assisted sniping.

    It does one thing pretty well and that's the feel of death.

    I must admit, EA know how to fuel the hype train. I'll be taking the release of Mass Effect with a pinch of salt this time round.

  19. #19
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus DaftPunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    4,820
    Hey we could say "What went wrong" for other titles as well. Was just thinking about Tom Clancy's games,one of my favorites obviously. Raibnow Six,Ghost Recon and even Splinter Cell used to be pinnacle of pc gaming but look at them now. Just look at them.


    Quote Originally Posted by Tykh02 View Post
    I'm starting to get a feel for how the carbines work, and where to position myself to avoid the aim assisted sniping.
    Aim assist? In multiplayer game? On pc? Is this for real?

  20. #20
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Gorizia, Italy
    Posts
    6,134
    If you are playing with a pad (Idk) you probably need all 4, don't know if you can toggle them out while playing with k&m

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •