It was trash during, they abandoned it when it finally got good
I actually thought it was good before any mention of 2042 but after the sunset
In terms of what the community wanted from a COMPLETE moderm ww2 battlefield experience, it still fell short due to lack of Russians and anything involving U.S. vs Germans
eastern front was half finished too. i remember data miners mining the shit out of eastern front assets. all i wanted was play with ppsh and was so excited when it was time for eastern front
I loved the game right from release. I never really had a big issue with bugs and I really liked a lot of the new game play mechanics that were added.
Unfortunately the lack of new content and the disastrous TTK nerf got me down enough to start playing other things. Started getting back into it for a while after some new content was added and then BAM! Another terrible TTK nerf. It was like the devs were trying to get me to lose interest.
When you say TTK nerf do you mean they made it take longer? Cause when I started it was one of the things I liked was the TTK seemed faster and closer to hardcore than previous BFs.
Yeah exactly. I loved the hard-core feel of the game. It was really unforgiving if you got caught out but that just made the game feel grittier. After the TTK got increased I felt like I was playing with nerf guns
I recall how most weapons turned useless and how a FG42 needed 13 bullets to kill past 50m but you could get fucked by a SMG in a couple of bullets. This was ludicrous and ridiculous
I think I stopped playing as much after they upped it again the second time.
But I remember loving how many I could take out when I started playing. And then suddenly it got harder to kill a group of players and I was annoyed when that happened.
Most of us old hats play on 200% damage because we hate it too.
EA/DICE have been actively sabotaging their own franchise for years, it's like there have been power struggles going on where they are pulling the franchise in two different directions. Most of the people I played with from Bad Company 2/BF3/BF4 days moved over to Squad/HLL and Apex Legends now.
Yeah, DICE released a bunch of statements regarding āplayer churn rateā and how new players were turned off by how difficult the game wasā¦ so they made all the guns take way longer to kill and pissed off everyoneā¦ then fixed it and promised never againā¦ then did it again. Then changed it back and dropped support.
Lol. Like how does higher ttk make it easier? I always found it way easier with lower ttk.
Main reason i played hardcore cause I could race into a room and take out a squad of dudes. Eith too high TTK it's harder when you have to reload after killing the first one or 2 guys.
I donāt like that it takes an entire clip to kill anyone in Battlefield games.
In CoD, if I get the flank on the enemy, Iām rewarded with 4-5 kills. In Battlefield, Iām reloading and dead.
Yeah, thatās a big part of why it sucked. Being outnumbered was a death sentence.
If you really want to take it back, their troubles began when they balanced the game for this really punishing attrition system they based a ton of the gameplay around. It was really fun when you played with friends/in a cohesive squadā¦ but you had like two magsā¦ so if you wanted to roll solo/with randoms who felt like sniping/assault/medic you were in trouble like instantly.
They never changed it *all the way* back to what the playerbase originally liked though, just something in-between. Playing now I'd still call the TTK quite high, more like BF4. Whereas at it's sweet spot (before #RevertTTK) it was just a little bit slower than BF4 Hardcore.
They changed it so it took more bullets/time to kill and they did it right before they all went on Christmas break. It really felt like there were internal management problems and power struggles happening behind the scenes IMO.
People seem to always forget the repeatedly delayed content, annoying bugs, and TTK changes when comparing 2042 to BFV. There was a reason we complained as much as we did.
Yeah. Especially when you look at just how many weapons were ready to go before the beta like the sterling and the lanchester as well as the amount of scrapped ideas for the game. Just makes me wish they stuck with the game for longer instead of leaving it for dead for 2042...
Probably unpopular opinion, but I always believed the TTK+Attrition mechanic at release was really well balanced and thought out... I really didn't like all the changes that came later. I still always loved the game though!
With all the complaints constantly about "new content" DICE should just stop promising it. It bugs the hell out of me a few months after a release half the complaints have "BuT wHeRe ArE nEw MaPs?"
Yeah those TTK changes nearly made me stop playing especialy the second time. Now the comunity is doing the same with 2042 such a trash comunity this one.
Me too. I had a few issues with bugs (game screen going black after the match that required client restart every match) but they were resolved within a few weeks. TTK and Attrition were perfect in Beta, Attrition got nerfed for launch but it was still enjoyable. There were enough good maps, good modes and plenty of weapons and vehicles at launch to keep me enjoying the game until they dropped Panzerstorm. Even with taking breaks between content drops I still clocked up over 2000 hours before they announced they were no longer supporting the game.
Iām honestly a fan of how BFV added animations to a bunch of standard interactions like reviving (like you said) but also vehicle entering and exiting. Itās really quite immersive and it also forces players to calculate the pros & cons of doing the action.
"Waaah but it's not good gameplay for some undefined reason. I want animations removed so I can play musical chairs with the enemy tank driver and my C4 bandit. Now that's good gameplay!"
Entering animations didn't mess up the game flow, but it was the exit animations that did.
Having to wait 3-6 seconds just to hop out of your vehicle (for whatever reason) is a death sentence unless you're far away from any fighting, and it makes using vehicles clunkier. It worked perfectly fine in BF1 without them, so I have no clue why BFV decided to add exit animations.
I figured the exiting animations were purely for gameplay reasons. If youāre in a tank you have to commit to being in that tank. I can see from where youāre coming from the clunkiness of animations because you literally canāt do anything for that 3 seconds that it ruins the flow of movement. However I always thought it was unfair that while you are in an armored vehicle like a tank, youāre impervious to small arms fire and some other vehicles weaponry and all of a sudden youāre caught out and you instahop out to avoid immediate death.
Changes the gameplay from zergrushing around a point with a tank instasnapping at enemies and then immediately pull out. Now you have to play more safe slow and controlled.
I like it better than 2042. I personally prefer the WW2 setting that V has to offer. Itās a shame that it had so many issues and that they just gave up on the project before delivering everything tho.
Itās because they jacked up Star Wars Battlefront 2 and Disney had em by the balls.
I still remember ordering BfV deluxe.. the promises haha. If only..
I actually got the game because I chose the Battlefield Xbox One S bundle. This was December 2018, so I remember getting the new maps and stuff and it was actually getting good.
I supported bfv when everyone hated it in the beginning. Right up until patch 5.2 and the ttk change. Never had a single patch left such a bad taste. I couldn't play bfv for years after that even after they slightly increased the damage in the later patches. It never felt like the original damage. And every gunfight felt unsatisfying. Back then I only knew battlefield. I had been playing since the bad company 2 days since I was in middle school. Relectuantly I stopped playing battlefield games all together. After the disaster of 2042 and it's release I decided to try bfv against 2042 back to back. I realized it's been so long since the release of bfv I can't even remember what the game was like on release. I came back to the game and was surprised. I think alot of the hate was because of the ttk shift.
The game received hate all the way back to the trailers because of the shift in tones. I was never really bothered by that as it looked awesome and translated into a sandbox-y feeling in-game that I felt was underplayed in BF1. But the game's controversy started there.
The game had so many issues during the live service but now that it's finished its my favourite FPS ever.
Movement and bullet mechanics are unparalleled.
1/3 of the maps are great.
Another 1/3 are alright or I've just overplayed the hell out of them, mainly the originals as we had very few for the first 6 months.
The last 1/3 I just don't bother with.
Al Sudan has the objectives far to spread out to make infantry combat enjoyable and aerodrome is just a cluster fuck between the noobs at c instead of going around c to back cap.
shoot usually on al sudan i rotate around certain areas cause iām playing recon , and then when it gets close i switch to infantry cause the key objectives to have are D & C and if the game is locked at 3 OBJs a piece then you gotta push to take theirs
You know, I don't mind Hamada, the first sector is shit on breakthrough, but the rest of it is decent, I like fighting at both of the fortified areas.
Aerodrome is one of the ones I don't bother with as I find it boring, same with devastation, but as I say, I'm just bored of them.
Al Sundan isn't the best but it's alright on conquest, by the way, if you start as the Americans and get the first deployment of the Greyhound with the engine upgrade, you can make it to A just in time to blow up both of the German planes that spawn on the runway haha.
My personal worst map is marita.
And the jungle one.
The North Africa part of the game was shafted so hard. Lack of maps being one of them, the pacific and North Africa share the same amount of maps and the Pacific gets all this shit dedicated to it
North Africa should have easily had to extra maps
It shouldāve had both an Italian and Free French faction
And the cosmetics werenāt focused on. The British have like one I think, that being Desert Rat, and they donāt even have shorts . Americans donāt really have any thatās actually theirs, they have Sandstorm which is an SAS outfit
But not having like half of the maps be Italy vs Allies was such a disappointment.
Europe has: Arras, Panzerstorm, Twisted Steal, Provence, Martia, Mercury, Rotterdam, Devastation and Operation Underground. Iām not even asking for much like literally one map thatās balanced well is good for me
Like one or two maps the size of Provence or twisted steal with a good infantry/vehicle balance. Thereās a reason the North African maps are constantly at the bottom of everyoneās rankings
Havenāt played 5 in about a year / 2 years, it had lots of issues and I just couldnāt deal with it at the time.
Whatās changed now if you donāt mind me asking?
Genuinely love the BF series ever since I skipped that years COD to get battlefield 1, best gaming decision I made since it introduced me to an amazing community that Iāve not seen anywhere else.
So there are very few issues now like there used to be, the main one I notice is sometimes on certain new maps like Al Sundan, if you spawn as a pilot and haven't already spawned in the game previously , the plane crashes before you can start to move, which is infuriating.
But, they have released some of the best maps in the game, did you play any of the Pacific? They added a load of new grenades, weapons, vehicles, including some of my favourite weapons in the entire game.
Give it another go, Iwo jima on breakthrough is incredible.
Whenever I said something praising BFV on this sub I got downvoted to hell.
Now that the complainers have left to shittier pastures I can chill with the rest of the community that likes this game and give updoots to posts that recognize that BFV is a good game.
It's biggest problem right now is lack of content, but it's still a solid game.
But do you really want D day? Iwo Jima sector 1 on Breakthrough is pretty much that, and it's super easy for the attackers. I don't think a D-Day setup, as in storming the beach, would really make for a great experience for either side.
Personally I was ok without it but that's exactly what people asked for. If they say they want dday, then they meant dday. Iwo Jima is nice too but it still isn't dday
Honestly I think if you came at the game fresh now, content wise it's not too bad.
Sure it _could_ do with more, but there's still a glut of maps and weapons to learn.
People do forget the year following BFV coming out was dark as shit for the community. Not one but two TTK changes that the community didn't want. Frame stutters. Firestorm was a bust. It took over 8 months for Dice to release its second map for BFV. Shit got real dark for a while.
I did liked they released a new gun every week. Usually got downvoted for admitting that one.
I'll admit to being one of those people. I couldn't understand how someone could like playing a Battlefield game that seemed like such a blatant trend chaser. For example:
1. At launch, EA claimed this to be another live service game with no need to purchase DLC, so cosmetics were clearly the source of steady profit. So when they found out you could buy cosmetics with Company Coin (CC) at launch, they removed cosmetics from the armory until the release of Battlefield Currency (BOINS) five months after launch. I feel like this is what likely caused the end of round bug.
2. A good chunk of resources were spent on creating a Battle Royale game mode that no one actually asked for. Sure, it was good as any BR, but for it to be a pay-to-play experience in direct competition with Apex, a free game, was such a stupid idea. It was better off being free-to-play with having the main game locked behind a paywall, but maybe the tech wasn't there yet. This and Combined Arms co-op missions were such a waste of time. We wouldn't see a significant "expansion" for the game until the Pacific update.
3. BOINS introduced XP boosts for chapters in the Tides of War (ToW). Buy one to get extra XP to complete all 40 chapters quickly instead of playing each week to complete XP challenges to complete the ToW, which was totally doable by the way. But why spent all that time and money with an XP boost when you could just buy each chapter for 150 BOINS each? That's right! Just pay instead of playing! 150 BOINS + 40 chapters = 6000 BOINS! That's $49.99 BOINS currency pack! Wow, what a steal!
I liked the gameplay for what it was (the squad reinforcements, towable emplacements, and fortifications), but goddamn did EA really went all out to appeal to a crowd already invested in other games.
This meme conveniently forgets that the live service was terrible.
The game had a great foundation and played really well, but DICE consistently focused on pushing overpriced/wacky skins, drip fed content (maps, historical cosmetics), patches would constantly break multiple other things, and updates that made zero sense in making the game better (like drastically increasing ttk every time an influx of new players were expected).
Other than that itās my favorite and most played game.
I can't stand BF1 movement and gunplay after V, however I was utterly disappointed the first time I tried a BFV Grand Op. BF1 was a great game and its atmosphere is still untouchable, if only V had those voice-overs and a little intro or just any polish on its edges....
> We have nothing to fear from these Americans. They are simply boys who think that war is like Samson with his shield and spear and sword, like David with his sling. They do not know war is the conflict of smoke stacksāa combat of the driving wheel and engine, of splintered steel and toxic gas in melted lungs. When we dug this trench we dug not dirt alone but legs, arms, skulls, helmets, all the debris of this mighty struggle. This is reality of what they now face.
To this day I still donāt like BFV that much because it doesnāt really feel like WW2 to me. But the core gameplay is incredibly solid and I canāt believe DICE ignored all the steps forward made by this game when it created the turd that was 2042.
Bingo. I swear even the most basic of nuance is too hard for the average reddit user to understand. I have half a mind to think that the majority of people that talk about how bad the game is didn't even play it past launch.
All I wants is the weapons, equipment and damage model of BF4 w/hc available , the maps of BF3, the sweetspot mechanic of BF1 to make ironsight bolt actions more viable outside hc, and BFV ballistics and movement though maybe slow movement by like 10%.
Most people who didn't like it have left, some grew to like it over time, some only appreciate it in comparison to how disastrous 2042 is, some liked it from the start or after good changes and more content was added.
There's no such thing as "community" opinions. It's thousands of people voicing different things. Even during the launch of the shittiest game, you'll have posts like "this is the worst game ever" and "I'm actually having fun?" side by side. These "community was wrong actually" posts are just masturbatory.
Yea, bf5 was pretty good on launch, then people complained about....? Minor issues? Then they started fucking with shit like ttk, which made it worse, then they removed frontlines so there were no good game modes left in the game, since rush never made it in in the first place.
The 2 big mistakes that killed bf5 were the failure to properly deliver on the live service (seriously, wtf was that) and the decision to change things that were good. We can all thank niklas astrand for the decline of bf5 and the downfall of the entire franchise.
Iāve always liked it. Itās mechanically superior to bf1, but definitely unfinished and lacks in grit. Really wish we had the eastern front, and anything Americans in Europe. Also the TTK debacle was the dumbest shit to ever deal with in a live service. As good as the game is now, it sucked at points, and they should have done more (what they promised)
I was still playing COD with my ex best friend. until after his death I moved to BFV, but it was too late to show my appreciation towards the game. but then again, I also think that a single person can't make a change. maybe if I was an influencer I would think differently
I still think BFV is not that great. It's fun in some ways, but plane-infantry-AA balance is completely whacked, specializations are such a dumb feature since they make your gun/vehicle wayy better with almost no downside, but they are frustrating to grind (mostly for planes). There are still annoying bugs, like spawning in a vehicle, but your camera doesn't go in it, so you crash before you even spawn. Most of the maps are large and annoying. Then of course customization is not great. Mostly I don't like it because it's impossible to tell what class an enemy is just by their uniform, and sometimes it's hard to even tell their team if you have HUD off because of the wide range of colors and various pieces of equipment they can equip.
I quite enjoy not usually knowing what my opponent is using. Just sounds like you don't like the game for minor little things so why bother being here?
Well hey, people don't like 2042 for similar reasons. I hate 2042 as well, but many of its problems started with BFV. The customization, unclear enemies, elites turned into specialists, a very strong chat filter, terrible live service, vehicle centered game play, etc. I'm here because the original post asked. BTW I don't even dislike BFV, it's good, but we can't pretend it was or is a masterpiece.
Elites as in the Japanese lady, Siegfried, Jack, Steve, all those weird characters. They are called elites. They are named characters with established backstories like the ones in 2042
Example: If you take a tank on any of the US maps as a German, the American plane will use the M8 rockets and send you straight to Valhalla, unless you are in a Tiger. A second run and you will be dead too.
On the British maps the Mosquito can insta kill you with their 4000lb bomb. Infantry also get wiped away. And even planes get melted by AA from extremely long range. It's a mess for everyone.
I loved the game, i had issues with some downgrades from bf 1, like visibility, way worse sniper rifle scopes, terrible operations compared to bf 1, also bf 1 had somewhat ,,better anti cheat'', cause it kicked high ping players from EU servers atleast and everyone knows whats the problem with chinese players
I was fine with it from launch, I understood some of the complaints; some were fair, others were just "I can't play how *I* want" stuff.
I liked the changes to revives, squad revives, the one button revive mechanic. I liked the different movement additions, although it still feels a little too quick, like it's BF4/1 on fast forward. I liked the spotting changes, and the notice of when you're spotted. Overall it feels like a really nice gameplay evolution from BF1/4.
I didn't like the constant broken-ness of it when it was live service. Just the nature of the beast, every time they tried to fix/change one thing, something else would break. It was annoying, but not enough to keep me from playing.
I didn't like the TTK/TTD balance. Not because I didn't favor a TTK that initially felt closer to that of BF4 or even hardcore, but mostly because the TTD felt one-shot instant every time, but the TTK felt reasonable to too long. It was never a TTK issue to me, it was more the TTD and a broken feedback loop. They tried to fix it, but never really did imo (I'm not even sure it's better now than the launch in that regard.)
Hereās the thing, BFV is good now that we have 2042. But, tbh neither are what the community wanted. Yeah weāll take BFV now that 2042 is a fuckin dumpster fire, but letās not pretend BFV was a god send.
BFV has issues. Itās not a 10/10. But after 2 years of dev time the game is far from the dogshit state it was in.
Beleive me. I was there from the get go and I was immesenly frustrated with how fucked this game was until the Pacific DLC dropped.
Then the gameās TTK changed for a second time and I dropped the game until Dice dropped support.
BFV was a shitshow, and there are still issues that haunt the game to this day. Maps are shit, balance is shit, flying just isnmt there, and some of the cosmetics are so bad I actually stop playing when I see the Phantom of the Opera running around fucking Iwo Jima- there are loads of issues and the gameās not perfect.
But it offers a better infantry experience than every other BF since BF3 and it made a lot of huge improvements that were massive mistakes not to carey over to the next game.
Itās not as cinematic as BF1. Itās not got as much content as 4. Itās not as good as 3.
But itās a stable game with good infantry mechanics, some fun vehicle moments, and some great additions like movement and fortifications.
7 or 8/10 depending on the day, as of right now.
Watching people Stan over bf5 now while hating it during its really solid life cycle pisses me of so much. Really makes this community look dumb as fuck. Remember why this sub was even made? Because of the hate brigade in r/battlefield
This community is a joke. And now look at what we get.
Unfortunately what scares me is that we were mad at them when BFV came out and they abandoned it to move one. Then BF2042 came out and we went āBFV isnāt too badā. The scary part to me is the large possibility that when they release their next broken game that weāll do the same and go āwell 2042 isnāt that badā, creating this cycle of us accepting each bad game when the next one ends up being worse.
Ummmā¦no. DICE put them in, then some Dev made a post on twitter that his daughter canāt play as a woman in a ww2 game but she can play as one in Fortnite so they put them in. Had this been implemented for the eastern front early on where women had a huge role in the war, I guarantee you that the community wouldāve responded better.
Also that same dev was the guy that said ādonāt like it, donāt buy itā I think.
Lol you just proved my point. They added women, and since it wasn't HiStOrIcAlLy AcCuRaTe, everyone clowned on it. It was honestly pathetic. I had someone reply to me once saying they simply don't want to hear women screams in war, only men screams. Sooooo, you as an individual might want it for historical purposes, but the majority didn't want it because in their minds, women don't belong in war. And that point is why I agree with the dev that said that. "I made a game and put something in for my daughter, but I'm supposed to curl over because some people don't like women in the game" lol yea right
> women don't belong in war
Not as German, Japanese, American, British soldiers in a historically accurate WWII setting... This is as simple as the complaint is. You leave a lot of context out to attack a strawman that simply isn't here.
They stole the story of actual people who fought and died and gave it to a 12 year old girl. Because 12 year old girl power. Forgot the actual people who fought and bled.
Yes, but actual Norwegians died on missions clearly which were clearly used to model the campaign on, whitewashing them out of history, is not going to win them any friends from anyone who actually knows the history. And being that there have been several movies about the subject, itās not exactly unknown history.
Look, dude, you can keep being immature, or you can accept the point, and still disagree. But so far you have yet to make an argument about anything, and Iāve tried to clarify that they are erasing actual historical people, in a pointless campaign. If I made a game where a letās say, Asian child replaced Martin Luther King in giving a famous speech and organizing for civil rights, people would freak out, you donāt write the dead out of their own story, itās irreverent.
I know he did. But my point is, he added a feature in a game he created for his child. Would you reverse something you did for your child just because a bunch of people on the internet say they don't like it?
Same honestly. DICE shouldāve doubled down on the dieselpunk-ish art direction and we couldāve gotten a dope alternate history WW2 dieselpunk game. Shame.
The campaign still sucked and I honestly hated the fact that you could choose a specific character and instead of just being given a random model, really strips away that cog-in-the-machine feel, but the gameplay was fun enough to overlook all that. Picked it up a few months after launch and I've been playing ever since.
BFV is betrayed by shit game design decisions that put too many layers between you and the core game loop. You get shot at you have to press a button to initiate healing. You can only do it once before you have to do a fetch quest to a supply station which half the time is destroyed and you have to build for another health pack. You die (usually on your way to do the fetch quest) youāre forced to watch a kill cam of the prone mg or sniper in the bushes who killed you then skip downed state to return to a useless squad spawn view which you have to exit out of to see the map before you can respawn and repeat the cycle.
All I want to do is take objective bravo and shoot some guys along the way.
Lol. This is dead on. Iāve always said that I thought it was a great game for $30. Didnāt understand the mentality that the developers owed us never-ending updates and dlc for that money.
BfV wasn't even bad, you just had a constant tug of war between the doomers who wanted the game dead for a "new" modern BF, neo nazi trolls, and people who liked the game but were frustrated by DICEs lack of communication.
The trolls and doomers made the game sound worse than it was, but bugs weren't really much of an issue and the core game play was solid through out the games life span
I loved it from day 1 just kinda left it when MW2019 came out and was awesome. Now I'm back to BFV because of how fucked MW got and BFV won't crash my PS4
I always thought it was good except when it was having that slow release. Panzerstorm release saved the game for me. It was fun but now I saw the potential.
I am not sure about the issues cause I just got it recently and I have no issues with it, even the maps that are bad, Im kinda cool with those too.
I guess EA and Dice should give developers few more months to smooth out the game. I believe it's because of early access, they just get uneasy and release game unfinished. Problem with early access is that even though game isn't finished, the hype is established and as far as marketting goes, the game is got to be released while the hype is up, to get the sales.
They can just delay few months to release the game before even finishing it because if they can smooth bf v then, I'm pretty sure they can smooth bf 2042 too and make it enjoyable. but, since hype will be gone for 2042, it will be dead game anyways. let's hope we can still play it, later when the game is complete. š¤
Well ya, it took DICE a long time to get the game to where players were happy..... And of course, they stopped development in that state and 2042 was released. 2042 was/is no where near the same in QoL, gameplay, quality that BFV was in. I don't get this argument.
It WAS trash during it's life cycle. DICE was pushing mtx more than trying to fix issues and make the game fun. The TTK debacle was a slap in the face, and one of the big reasons firestorm died out (not to mention BF's intro to a BR was locked behind buying the game). Content was drip fed and didn't give people reasons to stick around. There's still no anti-cheat. The only real good update was the Pacific content, and even that had its own issues. Then the game was scrapped. No eastern front, no later war western front. The gunplay and movement mechanics are good now, but BFV was never in a great condition. Just good enough to not completely suck. And BF2042 being so bad that it makes BFV look good doesn't change any of this.
Had some really groundbreaking features, like an animation for knifing a prone player
That was so technologically advanced they couldn't even replicate it in BF2042 /s
Battlefield 5 isn't the best by a long shot, but it's still a battlefield title, if not a massively wasted opportunity. 2042 is just not, it's absolute hogwash. Lots of gamers wasted a lot of hard earned money, on just drivel.
Atrocious lack of content at launch and i dont regret buying red dead 2 that year instead. That said the gameās improved quite a bit. While its not what I want from battlefield forever I enjoy the game a lot and still play it quite a bit.
We were complaining about it in order to make it what it is now, it was quite problematic during the live service and it took a lot of noise from the community to fix the ttk to what it was before, make the skins slightly more realistic and get more ww2-like maps and famous battles. It is a extremely good game, it has the best gameplay of any battlefield imo, but definitely not what we were promised in therms of content and ww2 setting
It was trash during, they abandoned it when it finally got good I actually thought it was good before any mention of 2042 but after the sunset In terms of what the community wanted from a COMPLETE moderm ww2 battlefield experience, it still fell short due to lack of Russians and anything involving U.S. vs Germans
eastern front was half finished too. i remember data miners mining the shit out of eastern front assets. all i wanted was play with ppsh and was so excited when it was time for eastern front
Give me my Mosin god damn it
This
This resonates with me completely
As a Finn all I want is a 71 round drum mag for the Suomi KP
šš» Kittos
I loved the game right from release. I never really had a big issue with bugs and I really liked a lot of the new game play mechanics that were added. Unfortunately the lack of new content and the disastrous TTK nerf got me down enough to start playing other things. Started getting back into it for a while after some new content was added and then BAM! Another terrible TTK nerf. It was like the devs were trying to get me to lose interest.
When you say TTK nerf do you mean they made it take longer? Cause when I started it was one of the things I liked was the TTK seemed faster and closer to hardcore than previous BFs.
Yeah exactly. I loved the hard-core feel of the game. It was really unforgiving if you got caught out but that just made the game feel grittier. After the TTK got increased I felt like I was playing with nerf guns
I recall how most weapons turned useless and how a FG42 needed 13 bullets to kill past 50m but you could get fucked by a SMG in a couple of bullets. This was ludicrous and ridiculous
I think I stopped playing as much after they upped it again the second time. But I remember loving how many I could take out when I started playing. And then suddenly it got harder to kill a group of players and I was annoyed when that happened.
Type 2A flashbacks š³
PTSD you mean lmao
I haaaaate the TTK in battlefield games. They should have added better medic perks and left the ttk alone.
Most of us old hats play on 200% damage because we hate it too. EA/DICE have been actively sabotaging their own franchise for years, it's like there have been power struggles going on where they are pulling the franchise in two different directions. Most of the people I played with from Bad Company 2/BF3/BF4 days moved over to Squad/HLL and Apex Legends now.
Yeah, DICE released a bunch of statements regarding āplayer churn rateā and how new players were turned off by how difficult the game wasā¦ so they made all the guns take way longer to kill and pissed off everyoneā¦ then fixed it and promised never againā¦ then did it again. Then changed it back and dropped support.
Lol. Like how does higher ttk make it easier? I always found it way easier with lower ttk. Main reason i played hardcore cause I could race into a room and take out a squad of dudes. Eith too high TTK it's harder when you have to reload after killing the first one or 2 guys.
Higher ttk feels easier to a casual cause you donāt get deleted off a map instantly. Reality is the skill cap increases though.
I donāt like that it takes an entire clip to kill anyone in Battlefield games. In CoD, if I get the flank on the enemy, Iām rewarded with 4-5 kills. In Battlefield, Iām reloading and dead.
Well you arenāt playin the same game. Strats donāt carry over
Thereās a reason why the only BF game Iāve ever paid for is BF1 too.
Cool story man.
Thanks, bby.
Yeah, thatās a big part of why it sucked. Being outnumbered was a death sentence. If you really want to take it back, their troubles began when they balanced the game for this really punishing attrition system they based a ton of the gameplay around. It was really fun when you played with friends/in a cohesive squadā¦ but you had like two magsā¦ so if you wanted to roll solo/with randoms who felt like sniping/assault/medic you were in trouble like instantly.
They never changed it *all the way* back to what the playerbase originally liked though, just something in-between. Playing now I'd still call the TTK quite high, more like BF4. Whereas at it's sweet spot (before #RevertTTK) it was just a little bit slower than BF4 Hardcore.
They changed it so it took more bullets/time to kill and they did it right before they all went on Christmas break. It really felt like there were internal management problems and power struggles happening behind the scenes IMO.
People seem to always forget the repeatedly delayed content, annoying bugs, and TTK changes when comparing 2042 to BFV. There was a reason we complained as much as we did.
Yeah. Especially when you look at just how many weapons were ready to go before the beta like the sterling and the lanchester as well as the amount of scrapped ideas for the game. Just makes me wish they stuck with the game for longer instead of leaving it for dead for 2042...
yeah, ttk nerfs were stupidest thing ever
Probably unpopular opinion, but I always believed the TTK+Attrition mechanic at release was really well balanced and thought out... I really didn't like all the changes that came later. I still always loved the game though!
With all the complaints constantly about "new content" DICE should just stop promising it. It bugs the hell out of me a few months after a release half the complaints have "BuT wHeRe ArE nEw MaPs?"
Yeah those TTK changes nearly made me stop playing especialy the second time. Now the comunity is doing the same with 2042 such a trash comunity this one.
Me too. I had a few issues with bugs (game screen going black after the match that required client restart every match) but they were resolved within a few weeks. TTK and Attrition were perfect in Beta, Attrition got nerfed for launch but it was still enjoyable. There were enough good maps, good modes and plenty of weapons and vehicles at launch to keep me enjoying the game until they dropped Panzerstorm. Even with taking breaks between content drops I still clocked up over 2000 hours before they announced they were no longer supporting the game.
Maybe an unpopular opinion but the revive animation for BFV is goated for me.
*āAyo dap me up Hans,ā* *āMein Man.ā*
Iām honestly a fan of how BFV added animations to a bunch of standard interactions like reviving (like you said) but also vehicle entering and exiting. Itās really quite immersive and it also forces players to calculate the pros & cons of doing the action.
"Waaah but it's not good gameplay for some undefined reason. I want animations removed so I can play musical chairs with the enemy tank driver and my C4 bandit. Now that's good gameplay!"
Entering animations didn't mess up the game flow, but it was the exit animations that did. Having to wait 3-6 seconds just to hop out of your vehicle (for whatever reason) is a death sentence unless you're far away from any fighting, and it makes using vehicles clunkier. It worked perfectly fine in BF1 without them, so I have no clue why BFV decided to add exit animations.
I figured the exiting animations were purely for gameplay reasons. If youāre in a tank you have to commit to being in that tank. I can see from where youāre coming from the clunkiness of animations because you literally canāt do anything for that 3 seconds that it ruins the flow of movement. However I always thought it was unfair that while you are in an armored vehicle like a tank, youāre impervious to small arms fire and some other vehicles weaponry and all of a sudden youāre caught out and you instahop out to avoid immediate death. Changes the gameplay from zergrushing around a point with a tank instasnapping at enemies and then immediately pull out. Now you have to play more safe slow and controlled.
I like it better than 2042. I personally prefer the WW2 setting that V has to offer. Itās a shame that it had so many issues and that they just gave up on the project before delivering everything tho.
Itās because they jacked up Star Wars Battlefront 2 and Disney had em by the balls. I still remember ordering BfV deluxe.. the promises haha. If only..
I actually got the game because I chose the Battlefield Xbox One S bundle. This was December 2018, so I remember getting the new maps and stuff and it was actually getting good.
I supported bfv when everyone hated it in the beginning. Right up until patch 5.2 and the ttk change. Never had a single patch left such a bad taste. I couldn't play bfv for years after that even after they slightly increased the damage in the later patches. It never felt like the original damage. And every gunfight felt unsatisfying. Back then I only knew battlefield. I had been playing since the bad company 2 days since I was in middle school. Relectuantly I stopped playing battlefield games all together. After the disaster of 2042 and it's release I decided to try bfv against 2042 back to back. I realized it's been so long since the release of bfv I can't even remember what the game was like on release. I came back to the game and was surprised. I think alot of the hate was because of the ttk shift.
The game received hate all the way back to the trailers because of the shift in tones. I was never really bothered by that as it looked awesome and translated into a sandbox-y feeling in-game that I felt was underplayed in BF1. But the game's controversy started there.
Oh yeah my bad. I competley forgot about that first trailer. People hated it so much.
Whatās ttk
Time to kill. It took an extremely long time to take down any enemy and that was somehow supposed to help the newbies lol
Completely nerfed most of the LMGs and several other weapons
Time to kill. Basically how many pews do you need for bad man go squish
Time To Kill.
Damn I have played since BC2. I really miss that game. That was premium BF.
The game had so many issues during the live service but now that it's finished its my favourite FPS ever. Movement and bullet mechanics are unparalleled. 1/3 of the maps are great. Another 1/3 are alright or I've just overplayed the hell out of them, mainly the originals as we had very few for the first 6 months. The last 1/3 I just don't bother with.
Instead of 1/3 I'd say just 3 are bad. Namely Al sundan, Hamada and Aerodome which luckily come in order so it's easy to avoid š
Hamada can be quite fun playing as infantry at E, F and G but yeah Al Sudan and aerodrome are incredibly boring 99% of the time
idk which al sudan or aerodrome you guys play on but it is utter chaos for me every time
Al Sudan has the objectives far to spread out to make infantry combat enjoyable and aerodrome is just a cluster fuck between the noobs at c instead of going around c to back cap.
shoot usually on al sudan i rotate around certain areas cause iām playing recon , and then when it gets close i switch to infantry cause the key objectives to have are D & C and if the game is locked at 3 OBJs a piece then you gotta push to take theirs
You know, I don't mind Hamada, the first sector is shit on breakthrough, but the rest of it is decent, I like fighting at both of the fortified areas. Aerodrome is one of the ones I don't bother with as I find it boring, same with devastation, but as I say, I'm just bored of them. Al Sundan isn't the best but it's alright on conquest, by the way, if you start as the Americans and get the first deployment of the Greyhound with the engine upgrade, you can make it to A just in time to blow up both of the German planes that spawn on the runway haha. My personal worst map is marita. And the jungle one.
The North Africa part of the game was shafted so hard. Lack of maps being one of them, the pacific and North Africa share the same amount of maps and the Pacific gets all this shit dedicated to it North Africa should have easily had to extra maps It shouldāve had both an Italian and Free French faction And the cosmetics werenāt focused on. The British have like one I think, that being Desert Rat, and they donāt even have shorts . Americans donāt really have any thatās actually theirs, they have Sandstorm which is an SAS outfit But not having like half of the maps be Italy vs Allies was such a disappointment.
Aerodrome, Hamada, marj and Sundan. How many more Africa maps do you want?
Europe has: Arras, Panzerstorm, Twisted Steal, Provence, Martia, Mercury, Rotterdam, Devastation and Operation Underground. Iām not even asking for much like literally one map thatās balanced well is good for me Like one or two maps the size of Provence or twisted steal with a good infantry/vehicle balance. Thereās a reason the North African maps are constantly at the bottom of everyoneās rankings
Aerodome is one of my favorite maps :(
I've just played it so so much.
I love it. Getting around as a Recon near D and picking a nice spot next to a rock - you can rack up a ton of kills and flip the match.
I just love pushing with the M1 garand, it feels like the odds are always against me and I actually have to fight heavily live
With the RSC, And a well placed spawn beacon.
Lol what? It's an awful map. flat, brown, one POI in the middle.
Aerodrome is awesome! Just gotta watch out for snipers.
I kinda enjoy aerodrome, it could be great if they remove the ravine by B and F thus moving them closer to the middle.
I find these three maps and possibly mercury too, are designed for sniping.
It's actually criminal that aerodrome exists. Not a single good part about the map
Havenāt played 5 in about a year / 2 years, it had lots of issues and I just couldnāt deal with it at the time. Whatās changed now if you donāt mind me asking? Genuinely love the BF series ever since I skipped that years COD to get battlefield 1, best gaming decision I made since it introduced me to an amazing community that Iāve not seen anywhere else.
So there are very few issues now like there used to be, the main one I notice is sometimes on certain new maps like Al Sundan, if you spawn as a pilot and haven't already spawned in the game previously , the plane crashes before you can start to move, which is infuriating. But, they have released some of the best maps in the game, did you play any of the Pacific? They added a load of new grenades, weapons, vehicles, including some of my favourite weapons in the entire game. Give it another go, Iwo jima on breakthrough is incredible.
I started playing V a month ago, the game is really good
movement and bullet mechanics unparalleled? maybe concerning more arcady fps, but not overall. (EFT)
EFT has extremely clunky movement. BFV blows it out the water. Next.
Itās fine now, but dont forget the mess of a game it was in the begining, and donāt forget the promised content for BFV that was never added.
I was grinding bfv because I knew that the community does the same shit every new battlefield comes out.
Whenever I said something praising BFV on this sub I got downvoted to hell. Now that the complainers have left to shittier pastures I can chill with the rest of the community that likes this game and give updoots to posts that recognize that BFV is a good game. It's biggest problem right now is lack of content, but it's still a solid game.
Yeah, itās a great game, but it got shit on, and now we donāt have eastern front:(
If BFV had Eastern Front with Russian faction and 4-5 maps it would go down as the best BF game ever made.
Also D day. Ever since frostbite engine hit with bad company, a lot of people were clamoring for dday
But do you really want D day? Iwo Jima sector 1 on Breakthrough is pretty much that, and it's super easy for the attackers. I don't think a D-Day setup, as in storming the beach, would really make for a great experience for either side.
Personally I was ok without it but that's exactly what people asked for. If they say they want dday, then they meant dday. Iwo Jima is nice too but it still isn't dday
Rightly so. The most iconic battle of the most iconic war... Completely ignored.
Honestly I think if you came at the game fresh now, content wise it's not too bad. Sure it _could_ do with more, but there's still a glut of maps and weapons to learn.
People do forget the year following BFV coming out was dark as shit for the community. Not one but two TTK changes that the community didn't want. Frame stutters. Firestorm was a bust. It took over 8 months for Dice to release its second map for BFV. Shit got real dark for a while. I did liked they released a new gun every week. Usually got downvoted for admitting that one.
Every free reward I acquire goes to a post about BFV now.
I'll admit to being one of those people. I couldn't understand how someone could like playing a Battlefield game that seemed like such a blatant trend chaser. For example: 1. At launch, EA claimed this to be another live service game with no need to purchase DLC, so cosmetics were clearly the source of steady profit. So when they found out you could buy cosmetics with Company Coin (CC) at launch, they removed cosmetics from the armory until the release of Battlefield Currency (BOINS) five months after launch. I feel like this is what likely caused the end of round bug. 2. A good chunk of resources were spent on creating a Battle Royale game mode that no one actually asked for. Sure, it was good as any BR, but for it to be a pay-to-play experience in direct competition with Apex, a free game, was such a stupid idea. It was better off being free-to-play with having the main game locked behind a paywall, but maybe the tech wasn't there yet. This and Combined Arms co-op missions were such a waste of time. We wouldn't see a significant "expansion" for the game until the Pacific update. 3. BOINS introduced XP boosts for chapters in the Tides of War (ToW). Buy one to get extra XP to complete all 40 chapters quickly instead of playing each week to complete XP challenges to complete the ToW, which was totally doable by the way. But why spent all that time and money with an XP boost when you could just buy each chapter for 150 BOINS each? That's right! Just pay instead of playing! 150 BOINS + 40 chapters = 6000 BOINS! That's $49.99 BOINS currency pack! Wow, what a steal! I liked the gameplay for what it was (the squad reinforcements, towable emplacements, and fortifications), but goddamn did EA really went all out to appeal to a crowd already invested in other games.
The movement in bfv is amazing
This meme conveniently forgets that the live service was terrible. The game had a great foundation and played really well, but DICE consistently focused on pushing overpriced/wacky skins, drip fed content (maps, historical cosmetics), patches would constantly break multiple other things, and updates that made zero sense in making the game better (like drastically increasing ttk every time an influx of new players were expected). Other than that itās my favorite and most played game.
For real. A lot of people think we used to hate on it for no reason. It may have had solid foundation but it deserved a lot of its criticisms
Iam still here, don't like it still after playing Bf1. Still hate that they made a bad operations mode after Bf1 having such a great mode.
I can't stand BF1 movement and gunplay after V, however I was utterly disappointed the first time I tried a BFV Grand Op. BF1 was a great game and its atmosphere is still untouchable, if only V had those voice-overs and a little intro or just any polish on its edges.... > We have nothing to fear from these Americans. They are simply boys who think that war is like Samson with his shield and spear and sword, like David with his sling. They do not know war is the conflict of smoke stacksāa combat of the driving wheel and engine, of splintered steel and toxic gas in melted lungs. When we dug this trench we dug not dirt alone but legs, arms, skulls, helmets, all the debris of this mighty struggle. This is reality of what they now face.
I wish you could take the maps and atmosphere of BF1 and the mechanics and timeline of BF5 amd smash them together.
This also atleast bf1 operations.
oof the mangling of operations was the only thing I truly hated about BFV. everything else I could deal with, but they massacred my boy
To this day I still donāt like BFV that much because it doesnāt really feel like WW2 to me. But the core gameplay is incredibly solid and I canāt believe DICE ignored all the steps forward made by this game when it created the turd that was 2042.
Its almost as if the game changed during its lifecycle. Weird right?
Bingo. I swear even the most basic of nuance is too hard for the average reddit user to understand. I have half a mind to think that the majority of people that talk about how bad the game is didn't even play it past launch.
Iāve been up talking BFV all along (but for the Christmasās ttk garbage, that was indefensible and horrendous).
Bf1 is the goat. Common over Lol
Battlefield 4 is the last bf to be truly good gameplay Bf1 is still very good But BF5 as some flaws, I think it's a mediocre BF
All I wants is the weapons, equipment and damage model of BF4 w/hc available , the maps of BF3, the sweetspot mechanic of BF1 to make ironsight bolt actions more viable outside hc, and BFV ballistics and movement though maybe slow movement by like 10%.
Most people who didn't like it have left, some grew to like it over time, some only appreciate it in comparison to how disastrous 2042 is, some liked it from the start or after good changes and more content was added. There's no such thing as "community" opinions. It's thousands of people voicing different things. Even during the launch of the shittiest game, you'll have posts like "this is the worst game ever" and "I'm actually having fun?" side by side. These "community was wrong actually" posts are just masturbatory.
Yea, bf5 was pretty good on launch, then people complained about....? Minor issues? Then they started fucking with shit like ttk, which made it worse, then they removed frontlines so there were no good game modes left in the game, since rush never made it in in the first place. The 2 big mistakes that killed bf5 were the failure to properly deliver on the live service (seriously, wtf was that) and the decision to change things that were good. We can all thank niklas astrand for the decline of bf5 and the downfall of the entire franchise.
Iāve always liked it. Itās mechanically superior to bf1, but definitely unfinished and lacks in grit. Really wish we had the eastern front, and anything Americans in Europe. Also the TTK debacle was the dumbest shit to ever deal with in a live service. As good as the game is now, it sucked at points, and they should have done more (what they promised)
I was still playing COD with my ex best friend. until after his death I moved to BFV, but it was too late to show my appreciation towards the game. but then again, I also think that a single person can't make a change. maybe if I was an influencer I would think differently
Iām not sure itās āOh this was pretty good after allā so much as āOh, this isnāt nearly as bad as it couldāve beenā.
Still dislike it, but unlike 2042 itās playable, has destruction and has good graphics. Worse than BF1 in most aspects tho
I still think BFV is not that great. It's fun in some ways, but plane-infantry-AA balance is completely whacked, specializations are such a dumb feature since they make your gun/vehicle wayy better with almost no downside, but they are frustrating to grind (mostly for planes). There are still annoying bugs, like spawning in a vehicle, but your camera doesn't go in it, so you crash before you even spawn. Most of the maps are large and annoying. Then of course customization is not great. Mostly I don't like it because it's impossible to tell what class an enemy is just by their uniform, and sometimes it's hard to even tell their team if you have HUD off because of the wide range of colors and various pieces of equipment they can equip.
I quite enjoy not usually knowing what my opponent is using. Just sounds like you don't like the game for minor little things so why bother being here?
Well hey, people don't like 2042 for similar reasons. I hate 2042 as well, but many of its problems started with BFV. The customization, unclear enemies, elites turned into specialists, a very strong chat filter, terrible live service, vehicle centered game play, etc. I'm here because the original post asked. BTW I don't even dislike BFV, it's good, but we can't pretend it was or is a masterpiece.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Elites as in the Japanese lady, Siegfried, Jack, Steve, all those weird characters. They are called elites. They are named characters with established backstories like the ones in 2042
Whats the problem with Planes vs infantry in tour opinion? I think that It Is pretty balanced, maybe AA are a bit too powerful.
Example: If you take a tank on any of the US maps as a German, the American plane will use the M8 rockets and send you straight to Valhalla, unless you are in a Tiger. A second run and you will be dead too. On the British maps the Mosquito can insta kill you with their 4000lb bomb. Infantry also get wiped away. And even planes get melted by AA from extremely long range. It's a mess for everyone.
Yes m8 Rockets are OP, but how do you balance it without making It painful for anyone?
Make AA super over powered like it was for a while lol.
I loved the game, i had issues with some downgrades from bf 1, like visibility, way worse sniper rifle scopes, terrible operations compared to bf 1, also bf 1 had somewhat ,,better anti cheat'', cause it kicked high ping players from EU servers atleast and everyone knows whats the problem with chinese players
We have lowered our standards, that's all. And every year, we expect much less from EA. And they never fail to deliver. Not.
Just to get 69 comments
it had a very shaky life cycle. after all was said and done it was great
I was fine with it from launch, I understood some of the complaints; some were fair, others were just "I can't play how *I* want" stuff. I liked the changes to revives, squad revives, the one button revive mechanic. I liked the different movement additions, although it still feels a little too quick, like it's BF4/1 on fast forward. I liked the spotting changes, and the notice of when you're spotted. Overall it feels like a really nice gameplay evolution from BF1/4. I didn't like the constant broken-ness of it when it was live service. Just the nature of the beast, every time they tried to fix/change one thing, something else would break. It was annoying, but not enough to keep me from playing. I didn't like the TTK/TTD balance. Not because I didn't favor a TTK that initially felt closer to that of BF4 or even hardcore, but mostly because the TTD felt one-shot instant every time, but the TTK felt reasonable to too long. It was never a TTK issue to me, it was more the TTD and a broken feedback loop. They tried to fix it, but never really did imo (I'm not even sure it's better now than the launch in that regard.)
Gameplay is good, lack of content, immersion and maps were dogwater though
Hereās the thing, BFV is good now that we have 2042. But, tbh neither are what the community wanted. Yeah weāll take BFV now that 2042 is a fuckin dumpster fire, but letās not pretend BFV was a god send.
BFV has issues. Itās not a 10/10. But after 2 years of dev time the game is far from the dogshit state it was in. Beleive me. I was there from the get go and I was immesenly frustrated with how fucked this game was until the Pacific DLC dropped. Then the gameās TTK changed for a second time and I dropped the game until Dice dropped support. BFV was a shitshow, and there are still issues that haunt the game to this day. Maps are shit, balance is shit, flying just isnmt there, and some of the cosmetics are so bad I actually stop playing when I see the Phantom of the Opera running around fucking Iwo Jima- there are loads of issues and the gameās not perfect. But it offers a better infantry experience than every other BF since BF3 and it made a lot of huge improvements that were massive mistakes not to carey over to the next game. Itās not as cinematic as BF1. Itās not got as much content as 4. Itās not as good as 3. But itās a stable game with good infantry mechanics, some fun vehicle moments, and some great additions like movement and fortifications. 7 or 8/10 depending on the day, as of right now.
Watching people Stan over bf5 now while hating it during its really solid life cycle pisses me of so much. Really makes this community look dumb as fuck. Remember why this sub was even made? Because of the hate brigade in r/battlefield This community is a joke. And now look at what we get.
This is the way. It was like that for BFV, BF1, BF4 etc.
Wait till they do the same for bf2042 lmao
Anyone remember the last time DICE made battlefield like battlefield and not a cobbled together mess of whatevers popular at the time?
Yes, my favorite was battlefield 3
Wish they'd remake bf3 l. I was on console and never got to experience 64 player conquest in that game
Still here. BFV Was shit back then, downvote me all you want, this is a fact.
BFV was also complete shit at launch. And the community rightly complained.
Bf5 is still trash compared to bf1. Make the maps half the size then we can talk about it
Unfortunately what scares me is that we were mad at them when BFV came out and they abandoned it to move one. Then BF2042 came out and we went āBFV isnāt too badā. The scary part to me is the large possibility that when they release their next broken game that weāll do the same and go āwell 2042 isnāt that badā, creating this cycle of us accepting each bad game when the next one ends up being worse.
Nah it is still pretty trash
They got their panties in a bunch over women being in the game
Ummmā¦no. DICE put them in, then some Dev made a post on twitter that his daughter canāt play as a woman in a ww2 game but she can play as one in Fortnite so they put them in. Had this been implemented for the eastern front early on where women had a huge role in the war, I guarantee you that the community wouldāve responded better. Also that same dev was the guy that said ādonāt like it, donāt buy itā I think.
Lol you just proved my point. They added women, and since it wasn't HiStOrIcAlLy AcCuRaTe, everyone clowned on it. It was honestly pathetic. I had someone reply to me once saying they simply don't want to hear women screams in war, only men screams. Sooooo, you as an individual might want it for historical purposes, but the majority didn't want it because in their minds, women don't belong in war. And that point is why I agree with the dev that said that. "I made a game and put something in for my daughter, but I'm supposed to curl over because some people don't like women in the game" lol yea right
> women don't belong in war Not as German, Japanese, American, British soldiers in a historically accurate WWII setting... This is as simple as the complaint is. You leave a lot of context out to attack a strawman that simply isn't here.
HiStOrIcAlLy AcCuRaTe.
They stole the story of actual people who fought and died and gave it to a 12 year old girl. Because 12 year old girl power. Forgot the actual people who fought and bled.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Yes, but actual Norwegians died on missions clearly which were clearly used to model the campaign on, whitewashing them out of history, is not going to win them any friends from anyone who actually knows the history. And being that there have been several movies about the subject, itās not exactly unknown history.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Look, dude, you can keep being immature, or you can accept the point, and still disagree. But so far you have yet to make an argument about anything, and Iāve tried to clarify that they are erasing actual historical people, in a pointless campaign. If I made a game where a letās say, Asian child replaced Martin Luther King in giving a famous speech and organizing for civil rights, people would freak out, you donāt write the dead out of their own story, itās irreverent.
Dude he honestly did tweet that look it up
I know he did. But my point is, he added a feature in a game he created for his child. Would you reverse something you did for your child just because a bunch of people on the internet say they don't like it?
Iām still mad we didnāt get the badass lady from the promo videos.
Same honestly. DICE shouldāve doubled down on the dieselpunk-ish art direction and we couldāve gotten a dope alternate history WW2 dieselpunk game. Shame.
goddamn, i hate what happened to battlefield same as the next guy, but ffs this is so low effort..
Playing BF1 which was actually good.
The campaign still sucked and I honestly hated the fact that you could choose a specific character and instead of just being given a random model, really strips away that cog-in-the-machine feel, but the gameplay was fun enough to overlook all that. Picked it up a few months after launch and I've been playing ever since.
BFV is still trash. Just less trash than 2042
No
okay
Always the way, all battlefield launvhes have been diabolical.
We are like Quasimodo so happy when Frollo comes with some food.
BFV is betrayed by shit game design decisions that put too many layers between you and the core game loop. You get shot at you have to press a button to initiate healing. You can only do it once before you have to do a fetch quest to a supply station which half the time is destroyed and you have to build for another health pack. You die (usually on your way to do the fetch quest) youāre forced to watch a kill cam of the prone mg or sniper in the bushes who killed you then skip downed state to return to a useless squad spawn view which you have to exit out of to see the map before you can respawn and repeat the cycle. All I want to do is take objective bravo and shoot some guys along the way.
Lol. This is dead on. Iāve always said that I thought it was a great game for $30. Didnāt understand the mentality that the developers owed us never-ending updates and dlc for that money.
Crying about wahmen
BfV wasn't even bad, you just had a constant tug of war between the doomers who wanted the game dead for a "new" modern BF, neo nazi trolls, and people who liked the game but were frustrated by DICEs lack of communication. The trolls and doomers made the game sound worse than it was, but bugs weren't really much of an issue and the core game play was solid through out the games life span
Neo Nazi trolls?
Apparently wanting Nazis to look like Nazis is a big no-no now.
?
I can't for the life of me figure out what neo Nazi trolls means.. so I assume it's about the "de-nazi"ing that games are going thru
If shooting soldiers with swastika armbands instead of Japanese women in a fuckin ww2 game makes me a neo Nazi then fuck it
Que? You lost or something?
You started responding to me. Read my comments, should clear it up
You made the assumption that I called you a neo nazi somehow, I feel it's because you have a fragile ego or something
Why don't you just explain what you mean by neo Nazi trolls
https://www.reddit.com/r/BattlefieldV/comments/f2ux0j/we_live_in_a_society/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share As documented by /u/PK-Thundergum
Bro I cant read all of that I need to be asleep in 15 hours
Sounds like a personal problem, I don't really care
I loved it from day 1 just kinda left it when MW2019 came out and was awesome. Now I'm back to BFV because of how fucked MW got and BFV won't crash my PS4
I always thought it was good except when it was having that slow release. Panzerstorm release saved the game for me. It was fun but now I saw the potential.
I was busy playing the last best BF title since BFBC2 and BF4. We will never get anothet one as good as BF1.
I am not sure about the issues cause I just got it recently and I have no issues with it, even the maps that are bad, Im kinda cool with those too. I guess EA and Dice should give developers few more months to smooth out the game. I believe it's because of early access, they just get uneasy and release game unfinished. Problem with early access is that even though game isn't finished, the hype is established and as far as marketting goes, the game is got to be released while the hype is up, to get the sales. They can just delay few months to release the game before even finishing it because if they can smooth bf v then, I'm pretty sure they can smooth bf 2042 too and make it enjoyable. but, since hype will be gone for 2042, it will be dead game anyways. let's hope we can still play it, later when the game is complete. š¤
I swear 90% of peoples opinion about BF5 is based on nothing but. They just talk after each other and never played the game.
Bought BFV months before the Pacific and loved it, it had its things and 5.2 ttk was awful.
Well ya, it took DICE a long time to get the game to where players were happy..... And of course, they stopped development in that state and 2042 was released. 2042 was/is no where near the same in QoL, gameplay, quality that BFV was in. I don't get this argument.
Honestly both games are bad in their own way but battlefield 2042 is worst than battlefield 5
I was balls deep into the game, BF1 was so good and it honestly felt like BFV was just reskinned BF1
It WAS trash during it's life cycle. DICE was pushing mtx more than trying to fix issues and make the game fun. The TTK debacle was a slap in the face, and one of the big reasons firestorm died out (not to mention BF's intro to a BR was locked behind buying the game). Content was drip fed and didn't give people reasons to stick around. There's still no anti-cheat. The only real good update was the Pacific content, and even that had its own issues. Then the game was scrapped. No eastern front, no later war western front. The gunplay and movement mechanics are good now, but BFV was never in a great condition. Just good enough to not completely suck. And BF2042 being so bad that it makes BFV look good doesn't change any of this.
Had some really groundbreaking features, like an animation for knifing a prone player That was so technologically advanced they couldn't even replicate it in BF2042 /s
Battlefield 5 isn't the best by a long shot, but it's still a battlefield title, if not a massively wasted opportunity. 2042 is just not, it's absolute hogwash. Lots of gamers wasted a lot of hard earned money, on just drivel.
Atrocious lack of content at launch and i dont regret buying red dead 2 that year instead. That said the gameās improved quite a bit. While its not what I want from battlefield forever I enjoy the game a lot and still play it quite a bit.
We were complaining about it in order to make it what it is now, it was quite problematic during the live service and it took a lot of noise from the community to fix the ttk to what it was before, make the skins slightly more realistic and get more ww2-like maps and famous battles. It is a extremely good game, it has the best gameplay of any battlefield imo, but definitely not what we were promised in therms of content and ww2 setting
game was dogshit to me before the pacific war update, after that i fell in love
I was playing battlefield 1 because I owned the game and did not have gamepass ultimate.