Battlefield General - Discuss the series here

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
So far the Contaminated seems interesting. 'Variety' seems to be the map concept with the bunkers, tunnels, mountainous areas, open areas, trenches, etc. I am enjoying it so far, but there's people in chat that have supposed already formed an opinion it's the best map in the game or that it's absolutely awful. A few people in chat brought up the complaint that there isn't 4 new maps per season and they thought complainers were being unreasonable. Some real dumb shit being stated like 'I'd prefer 2 excellent maps over 4 crap ones. Quality over quantity' - that argument might have some merit if Blackwell Fields wasn't widely considered a crap map AND if we didn't get plenty of great maps with BF3, BF4 and BF1 map packs.
 
Epstein's Mexican cousin said:
IMO BF1 was the best game in the series, I'm a battlefield newfag but that game is easily a top 5 game for me, the look, maps, weapon variety, and gameplay is all golden.
Click to expand...

It's not even a bad answer for a newfag, BF1 is one of the greatest multiplayer shooters ever, imo. As far as bf goes though, when I first started playing back in BC2 the consensus more or less was that BF2 was the best. As time went on though, I think BC2 started to take the mantle. BF3, then 4 came along to critical acclaim and they staked a claim to the title of best in the series, then 1 came along and boy... what an experience. BF1 Operations is basically what War was to CoD for me. The best mode in the series. BFBC2 is still my favorite, between the base game multiplayer and Vietnam (the campaign was great, too), it's hard to pick another title over it. BF1 comes damn close, though. BF3 was great too.
 
Professor Donger said:
Played the new map on breakthrough, probably one of the better breakthrough maps, had a ton of fun.
Click to expand...
I've played it around 7 times on breakthrough and I've only seen 1 attacking team make it past sector 3 (of 5). Is it heavily defender sided or do the attackers just suck?
 
Pennypacker said:
I've played it around 7 times on breakthrough and I've only seen 1 attacking team make it past sector 3 (of 5). Is it heavily defender sided or do the attackers just suck?
Click to expand...
It could be a mix of both

A lot of my breakthrough matches have been ending on the final sectors B site. Which is very easy to defend since it's an inside point with a ton of cover, so the tank you get is kind of useless as attackers.
 
Returned to Battlefield 6 to see if the latest update and new map offered any redemption for the most disappointing battlefield game I've ever bought.

And no, the same constant whirlwind of people moving aimlessly around a map with no strategy greater than getting more kills, suddenly appearing from behind corners, weightless tanks and planes that can do little more than fly in endless circles in the sky before getting shot down in moments.

I thought I might be misremembering. Maybe this is how battlefield games always have been? Fired up BFV and I'm met with a pace that actually feels like I'm taking part in a war movie. Troop movements you felt you were actually taking part in. Obvious areas of offensive pressure and defense. Tanks that could be used as actual tanks, and planes that needed to assert air dominance before making a difference on the ground.

BF6 is dogdirt.
 
diroama said:
And no, the same constant whirlwind of people moving aimlessly around a map with no strategy greater than getting more kills, suddenly appearing from behind corners, weightless tanks and planes that can do little more than fly in endless circles in the sky before getting shot down in moments.
Click to expand...

The games gotten to the stage that the flight sim nerds have mastered the jets and helis. The key is they're autism means while they can go 80/2 KD in a match, the second some AA tries to lock onto them, they'll flee to the edges of the map and spend the whole match hiding. The annoyance is that it's not fun to run AA weapons and so few do it.

As a long time FPS player, I think the general IQ of how people play has gone down. It's just people chasing the next kill, running around like a dog chasing a ball and no thought. I used to play Battle Royale games and there definitely was a drop off. In BF6, in the more strategy, brute force modes like Strikepoint. You can literally win a match by distracting enemies trying to get kills over playing the objective.

I've done it multible times, teammates on the objective of a map like Liberation Peak. Someone on one of the roofs. I'm off away from the objective taking pot shots at them. They're just focused at me while the team captures and wins the round.
 
Just beat BF6 on its highest difficulty. The difference between that and the lower difficulties is that there are no revives for you. Once you die, back to the last checkpoint. So, like a lot of shooters. It wasn't hard at all, but there are moments where you are just on their line of sight and get aimbotted in seconds.

So, PAX was funded and created by the CIA to create a common enemy for NATO. The black lady from the flashback scenes, Mills, was in on it the whole time.

Now what? What's next for the Battlefield lore? It was an average military plot full with hoorah dialogue. Environments were nice, but damn those invisible walls and death timers should you dare to venture outside your squad's vicinity.
 
The Last Stand said:
Now what? What's next for the Battlefield lore? It was an average military plot full with hoorah dialogue. Environments were nice, but damn those invisible walls and death timers should you dare to venture outside your squad's vicinity.
Click to expand...

I think part of the issue is that PAX were more-or-less made out to be bogeymen without redeeming qualities. Being a human conflict, it would've been better to present both sides conducting their own operations for fundamentally different yet understandable reasons. They didn't give much for the reasoning beyond individual ambition.

The best solution imo is the tried-and-tested method that they and most modern companies are too pussyfooted to do: Bring out PAX's main benefactor as China, Russia or some combination of BRICS and voila, you can make vehicles based on all the wacky ones China put in its parade last year.

Pennypacker said:
I've played it around 7 times on breakthrough and I've only seen 1 attacking team make it past sector 3 (of 5). Is it heavily defender sided or do the attackers just suck?
Click to expand...

I like the new map, but it's not a fun match in Breakthrough, not without a half-decent squad when attacking anyway. I've had more fun playing Breakthrough in New Sobek City, and I think it's the worst map in the game.
 
That Chris Guy said:
The best solution imo is the tried-and-tested method that they and most modern companies are too pussyfooted to do: Bring out PAX's main benefactor as China, Russia or some combination of BRICS and voila, you can make vehicles based on all the wacky ones China put in its parade last year.
Click to expand...
I remember that Battlefield 4 has China as an adversary and locale in its single player and multiplayer. As you know, China did not like that. I suspect that EA/DICE were terrified of that fallout and decided to sidestep away from countries as factions again.

That Chris Guy said:
I think part of the issue is that PAX were more-or-less made out to be bogeymen without redeeming qualities.
Click to expand...
Most I know of PAX was the Scottish big bad that only appears twice. It's the same fault that CoD: Ghosts did for its Big Bad. It just introduces a bad guy/faction with little backstory or motivation to follow through.
 
The Last Stand said:
I remember that Battlefield 4 has China as an adversary and locale in its single player and multiplayer. As you know, China did not like that. I suspect that EA/DICE were terrified of that fallout and decided to sidestep away from countries as factions again.
Click to expand...
I can understand EA wanting to access to the Chinese market, but would be nice going back to country factions. Boring old US v Russia would be fine, but I assume having to play as the big bad Russian's is going to upset a lot of people in this day and age. Makes me think it would be difficult making a WW2 BF or COD now with all the left wing faggots screeching about Trump supporters being literally nazis.
 
The Last Stand said:
Worse. Operators. Basically, from what I know, operators are not restricted between factions. So you could run as Snoop Dogg in a WWII game as the enemy team.
Click to expand...
Holy shit, these operators are comically woke. I can't imagine these would be well received by the typical COD player. Were the developers trying to deliberately sabotage the sales for their own game?
images_cod-vanguard_operators_halima-bg.png
images_cod-vanguard_operators_constanze-bg.png
 
guiltyspark85 said:
I can understand EA wanting to access to the Chinese market, but would be nice going back to country factions. Boring old US v Russia would be fine, but I assume having to play as the big bad Russian's is going to upset a lot of people in this day and age. Makes me think it would be difficult making a WW2 BF or COD now with all the left wing faggots screeching about Trump supporters being literally nazis.
Click to expand...
Maybe they should go the Ace Combat route and embrace full constructed world.
 
Just got around to trying BF6's Gauntlet mode. Think a mixture of elimination, battle royale and objective based modes. There's six squads of four engaged in four timed rounds of objective based modes. Objectives can range from arming/defusing centers (Rush), eliminating HVTs (high value targets), capturing zones (Domination, Breakthrough) or even basic team deathmatch. Squads can get eliminated if they don't meet the score threshold before the round ends.

It's fine if you want a faster pace of play with Battlefield's formula.
 
The Last Stand said:
Just got around to trying BF6's Gauntlet mode. Think a mixture of elimination, battle royale and objective based modes. There's six squads of four engaged in four timed rounds of objective based modes. Objectives can range from arming/defusing centers (Rush), eliminating HVTs (high value targets), capturing zones (Domination, Breakthrough) or even basic team deathmatch. Squads can get eliminated if they don't meet the score threshold before the round ends.

It's fine if you want a faster pace of play with Battlefield's formula.
Click to expand...
I was surprised how much I liked Gauntlet. I haven't touched it in weeks but it was fun. A lot of it hinges on your squad, even with basic coordination you can win easily.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom