@filthy_vegans wrote:
So many people taking about "muh feels! It's not a battlefield game"...
This is entirely subjective and highly influenced by emotional factors. If you look objectively at core features of Conquest throughout the series, however, it's strongly consistent:
- Objective-oriented gameplay. Rounds are won or lost through control of territory.
- Resource management. The prevalence of resupply/health is extremely important, influencing how, when, or even whether you engage enemy. BFV is notable in this regard, as early player
reeeee! feedback led to the attrition system being heavily scaled back, to the point where it was largely meaningless. - Weapons with strengths and weaknesses that heavily influence engagement range.
I wonder whether many people are salty because they simply aren't very good at it yet, having learned the games they came from over years. If each installment played the same as the last, there would be little compelling reason to release it, and no reason to buy it.
- If you go from BF4 to BF2042 expecting them to play them same, you're going to have a bad time.
- If you go from BFV to BF2042 expecting them to play the same, you're going to have a bad time.
With regard to BF4, there's been 7 years of changing trends in the games industry. If you've played nothing else in the Battlefield series in between, you're doing both of the games and yourself a disservice with the comparison.
As for BFV, the change in map size and player count, along with the shift in balance away from semi-automatic weapons towards full auto rifles and the return of lock-on weapons makes comparisons difficult. The expectations of BFV will get you killed. Often.
I had a hard time the first few weeks finding a loadout that reflects my playstyle and helps me succeed (close support and spotting.) The absence of fixed classes means you have to develop your own. Now I've found my niche, I'm doing much better:
- Falck
- MP9 with heavy suppressor/cq sights/extended mag + cq rounds/laser
- Prox sensor
- SOFLAM
My squadmate(s) run Boris/McKay/Sundance and the recoilless M5. They kill the armour, I revive them and pick off infantry at close quarters. If I'm playing alone, I choose a flag/area to contest and stay there, painting targets when not pewepewing. A little flexibility also helps. If no one is reacting to my painting targets and I see others are using the SOFLAM, I'll switch to the M5. If there's no SOFLAM or rockets going up, I'll switch to the ammo crate. Sometimes I'll switch to C5 and blow things up.
Generally, I've noticed, over the six weeks or so since the game came out, that people are starting to defend flags a lot more than in other BF titles. This leads to some really fun, intense battles on A, C or D on Orbital, for instance.
It works for me and "feels" like Battlefield. I get both BF2 and BF4 vibes depending on the map and its infantry/armour balance.
Sure, I can do without the awful voice lines at the end of the round, but the reaction to specialists and much freer loadouts suggests to me that many people just don't want to think all that much about their loadout. This is a real shame, as the opportunities for team play afforded by the changes are, in my view, much richer than before.
I’m not a massive fan of specialist but admit they aren’t a problem. neither are bugs, balancing, gunplay, map designs.(though I think they’re a bit crowded and could do with more capture points). voice overs( ok perhaps a hit cheesy but I tend to block them out anyway)
my problem is.
* one round per game
* new squad every round
* lack of squad options
* lack of map rotation
* some quality of life issues such as awkward User interface design for consoles.
* scoreboard, end of round review. (I know people don’t understand why scoreboard is so important to some people, basically people’s love of KD is akin to my love of a full server end of round scoreboard)
* official hardcore servers
BF has always been about the team and ptfo. So one round per game per squad means it’s hard to build rapport, and takes away from the team play possibilities.
lack of map rotation in conjunction with playing with the same squad also takes away from having some intense games as you build up an understanding of who your playing with and the roles and play style they have. Also, some players are just better on certain maps, I.e they like vehicle maps, or have good knowledge and ideas. Again very hard to learn and benefit from that in one round.
lack of options to team up, switch squad and see how well players are playing also makes it hard to find a good squad and as such get a good game going. It’s all just random, where as before it was easy to leave an all sniper flag fest and join a team who are clearly playing the objectives.
End round and in fame squad scoreboard for me was crucial in getting a sense of reward for my part. I could easily see how other players were doing, how our team faired amd I learned a lot about how to play better by seeing what my peers where doing. I unfortunately get no sense of gratification currently playing. And I really couldn’t give a tss about who did what or well if it’s without context. I mean the end game round review is utterly pointless and means nothing. And it doesn’t give me time to garner anything about the game just played.
it’s exhausting and boring. But I accept some people will love it.
I also prefers playing in hardcore, and whilst I dont play for unlocks, because they tend to be based on kD, and seriously I’m like 0.75 kD avg. I still like my meagre kills to count towards something, and would like official HC AOW servers.
All of these little issues mainly around matchmaking add up to ultimately take away from the genre battlefield had carved out for itself. And this is I think a great shame and a massive oversight.
things like specialists, I think bring certain problems, but nothing that can’t be addressed with some tweaks. And whilst I agree the fact they all look alike is a bit rubbish, that’s something that can be ultimately resolved down the line. Plus I’m blind as a bat. So everyone looks the fricking same to me anyway. plus I’ve seen some good suggestions on how to i prove specialists and give portal admins more options.
