How did it go all wrong?

>Players complain about key countries being left out of BF1 at launch.
>Say they understand and will do better.
>BFV launches with less than half of playable countries of BF1 at launch.

Attached: 1560992348034.jpg (474x348, 22K)

Oh, and no russian fodder, jap slapping, or murricans was pretty damn lame.

Less than BF4, the pinnacle of BF (after bug fixes and expansions)
But if you want the combined arms tactics you better off going back to 1942/2/2142 or skip all that and head straight to Red Orchestra.
Or go full boomer with ARMA.

I don't know why devs keep adding battle royal modes to their games. People don't play BRs that aren't Fortnite or PUBG.

>less than half
Exactly 1/3rd of BF1
BF1 started with UK, US, Italy, Germany, Austria-Hungary, and the Ottoman Empire
BFV has bongs and krauts

Attached: expection reality.jpg (994x1066, 506K)

To be fair BF1 had
>Brits
>Ottoman Empire
>French
>Italian
>Germans
At launch. Meanwhile BFV just has Brits and Germans.

BF1942-BF2 had a stable playerbase for ages

Nu-BF is basically cod tier turnover

Pretty sure it was EA commanding DICE to slap it in there and make their shareholders happy to see BR on the box.

For the same reason every big publisher/studio made a DOTA clone
And a WoW clone
And a CoD clone
and a DOOM clone

Hell. I was kinda impressed they went with Whites vs Reds in Russia.

I'll never understand how anyone could stand to be on a forum where any dissent gets you banned, but I guess that's why I'm here.

Seeing kids feeling superior for playing Battlefield over CoD makes me laugh.
The series lost all its main hallmarks after Bad Company yet they pretend its a big brain boys club.

>this project has made everyone in the studio stand stronger together
Bull-fucking-shit.
Many of DICE's developers were leaving the studio since last fall.

The thought of sucking up, circlejerking, and walking on egg shells always sickened me. I don't know how people could stoop to such levels, attention or not; especially since I grew up pretty damn lonely. I just can't fathom it.

It makes them feel inclusive and 'safe', when all they're really doing is living in an echo chamber that's -- ironically -- inclusive to people that may have actually compelling arguments that are against the grain.

Even Bad Company lacked planes, boats, and 64 player support. It had its merits but at the time I considered it a pretty poor successor to BF2, it only looks good in comparison to everything that's come out since.

Sweden

BF4 is still pretty good and alive, I think BFV will go the Hardline route, though.

>Bad Company Console Babbies think that their 1st game in the series was the best

Attached: 1539648520761.jpg (1431x1370, 758K)

>It's well known that gamers are notorious incels, see Yea Forums
>'Hey let's introduce female friendly left-wing politics in our games'

the gameplay itself is quite alright but the game couldn't really grasp me for more than the 60 or so hours I put in. So in that regard it's a weak battlefield title

Attached: 4Chan_Meme_Pepe_Flat1.jpg (400x400, 16K)

>BFV failed
>Its because of lack of content
>It isn't because the Dev's socially ostracized the players
>It isn't because the Dev's bastardized WW2
Get a load of this tumblrite. Imagine being so provably wrong and still blaming everything but the cause. I suppose the public massively down voting the initial BFV trailer with SJW cripple women soldier was because some how the players knew ahead of time there would be a lack of content and not because people disliked the historical revisionism!?!

Attached: 011e630c09e97ad05db5afa9f1f3aaea88284ed751033a2ffdb0d077cba8ca82.gif (526x250, 3.19M)

Bad Company is fine because its a spin off but its still only better than the aborted garbage that the series is now, its not really comparable to its predecessors

Oh im sure everyone just loves drama, faggot freaks and politics at their workplace. 100% true that they stand stronger together

They copy pasted BF1 assets to save time/money and then added women to a WW2 game. EA is hellbent on this 2 year period between Star Wars battlefronts and Battlefield games and you simply cannot produce good games in that time period.

>If you dont like our game dont buy it, we're on the right side of the history anyway
Deal.

The game's so bad even its YouTube shills can't stay positive about it

Yes, and they lightened up on that after that 1st premiere trailer didn't do well. They toned on the wacky appearances. Again the game just didn't look all that interesting from the beginning as they also announced the whole games as a service bullshit and the small amount of shit the game would launch with.

women

>female friendly left-wing politics
This is not the problem. If the females had been contextualized in a way that made sense, whether as spies or as french resistance members or partisans, then no one would have been upset. It's the fact that they claimed they were making an authentic WW2 game when it very clearly is not.

You can make a goofy fantasy WW2 with female soldiers all over the place work (see: Valkyria Chronicles), but you can't pretend it's an "authentic World War 2 game".

I'm a big BF fan. I've been playing BF games regularly non-stop since bad company 2. The only reason I didn't play 1942 and 2 hardcore was because I could only play them at LAN centers since my PC and internet were too shit.

I've gone back to BF4/1 because I just cannot stand 5 any longer. It's riddled with so many bugs STILL, also has a severe lack of content. Nobody gives a fuck about battle royale, we need content for the core fucking game. Adding in a new gun every 3-4 weeks and a couple new textures ain't enough.

At this fucking rate, i actually miss DLC packs. At least they had fucking maps/weapons/new armies in them.

BF5's content model of free updates so far has been pure shit. I seriously hope they go back to DLC packs or premium because I'm fed up of playing the same 6 fucking maps over and over.

Like, barring all the social nonesense, there's just not enough content to justify dumping time into it. It's got so few weapons and maps, and how long after release has it been now?

Pretty sure they've ghosted the game and have been working on other shit instead, should have used the battle royal resources to flesh up core multiplayer honestly. Actually, now that I think about it, every decision made on this game has been a terrible one.

Those niggers at DICE are so fucking retarded, like honestly what the hell about that screenshot screams ww2? How out of touch and/or drunk on their own activist koolaid do you have to be to not see this would be a dumpster fire tier disaster?

I just realized what it reminded me of. The PS3 reveal.
>This game is based on real battles that actually took place in ancient Japan
>so here's this giant enemy crab

I mean BF1 had done it previously. They just weren't spamming it to seem like they were holier than thou.

Attached: maxresdefault (13).jpg (1280x720, 137K)

>EA and Dice
>lightened up on the first trailer reaction
Are you crazy they doubled down. Patrick Söderlund went on record telling the players to either like the SJW historical revisionism or fuck off
theverge.com/2018/6/12/17453728/ea-women-in-battlefield-v-backlash-response

narr EA and Dice can eat shit.

They promised one time buy and that it would include content over the following year(s). What is happening is the same as SWBF2, the initial sales were poor, so they cut life support to the game doling out the bare minimum to make it look like they haven't abandoned it.

most of the women in the game are spies or partisans though...

BC2 was the patient zero of all further bad game design
>choke point oriented maps
>weapon bloat for the purpose of unlock grind treadmill
>shitfest Conquest mode because lack of transportation
>soldier customization over unity on front
214 had some of the future problems, but I thought that after they realized that medics are dropping medkits in favor of grenade launcher, they will realize problems coming with this philosophy

its got few maps yes, but its got more weapons than BF1 had

The only females in BF1 were locked away in a dlc for one side and a class no one plays (scout).
I don't see a problem here.

Don't you know that olive drab uniforms immediately make it WW2? Faggot

They're in the multiplayer as well. Nobody gives a fuck about single player battlefield.

>its got more weapons than BF1 had
Nah, most of them are just ported over from BF1 and the smgs are just a bunch of mp20 derivatives.

Bull fucking shit, I don't believe you.

That's not how they advertised it.

>scout
>a class no one plays
>BF1
Hillniggers have absolutely plagued the game since day one, what are you on?

She cute.

Attached: maxresdefault (14).jpg (1280x720, 86K)

This is no different than desecrating a memorial.

If Dice really wanted to put in women, they should've just made it a fantasy alternate universe and not even mention WW1. Then that would be acceptable.

But because they're a historical war simulator, they have no room for that. They can't. It insults their ancestors. WW1 was well documented. This wasn't something that happened hundreds of years ago with little to no detail. Dice fucked up hards and will be remembered for that.

Attached: 1554866973599.png (1280x720, 3.52M)

I know user. But no one with a brain should play scout.

do you want me to fucking count? bf5 has like 10 weapons per class while bf1 had like 6

I think it's time for Yea Forums to apologize.

Attached: maxresdefault (5).jpg (1280x720, 92K)

with the sweetspot mechanic they were by far the best class, they even had an anti-tank gadget

This whole DLC was god tier.

The maps, the guns, the elite class, the behemoth. All 10/10. Also, the music that plays in operations when you capture a sector is amazing.

I honestly cant understand why anyone would go back to another BF game after this, having your bullets actually go where you aim is too much to give up

I think its time for DICE to shut down, they haven't made anything worth playing since 2142.

What the hell happened between BF1 and V? Did that BR mode fuck everything up?

People keep saying this but I don't understand. Previous BFs felt fine with their guns.

Oh, did they change to hitscan in BFV? I'm surprised there hasn't been more complaining if they did that. Ballistics were one of the things the series was known for.

every single other BF game has a random deviation mechanic, the more you shoot the less likely it is that your bullets will go where you aim.

that is in addition to normal recoil. So your view is shifted by the recoil and the bullets are RNG as to whether or not they go where your sights are

They needed another year to bug fix and add more base content. Yet another example of software deadlines killing the product.

no its still projectiles for everything

Yeah I honestly don't think ever felt and issue with it. I liked the way the guns looked, sounded, and felt in BF1

they spent a lot of resources making the wacky content we saw in the e3 trailers and then had to scrap most of it when people hated it

>Ms. Heidi J. Ueberroth has been a Director of Electronic Arts Inc. since 2017

>Ms. Talbott Roche has been an Independent Director of Electronic Arts Inc. since June 6, 2016.

Explains everything.

Attached: MK-CF713_NBAINT_G_20130820201955.jpg (553x369, 87K)

You can say (and "they" surely do) that games piss on history all the time.
When any Spartan goes Super Sayian or knight does a shining cut with sword, or any samurai is on screen anywhere.
But its done by people thinking "this is awesome, players will love it!".
You can tell that whenever DICE adds women or negroes they think "this is awesome, those nazi incels will hate it! Fuck the history, we will write it!".

who?

I have a huge soft spot for iron sight bolt guns, please don't lump me in with the rest of the retards

im still mad

Attached: fun.png (1080x1336, 902K)

mad at what? bf1 was great

You are retarded.

at the DICE cuck's tweet, not BF1

Nah I liked how BF1 did it where each rifle had the sweetspot. Made playing a sniper much more faster and aggressive for me as I would throw flares and put beacons.

his tweet is true though

Ancient, poorly recorded events in history is entirely okay to put whatever the fuck you want in it.

WW1 was literally a European holocaust and every little detail was recorded about it. Almost entirely white men died in that war and we have memorials dedicated to them standing to this day. To discount that is insulting and just plain stupid. They could put dragons in it and it would look stupid as well, but they posed it as a war historical simulation.

>they posed it as a war historical simulation.

no BF game has ever been posed as a simulation

put aside bugs, lack of content and shitty dice politics, BFV is good multiplayer shooter and decent battlefield
-everyone on the team can build temporary fortifications and grab you from the ground if you're dying, that makes game more stable and you dont have to bitch about medis not saving you
-every role has some usefull shit like, medic builds med points, assault is only one with heavy weapons like RPG to deeal with tanks, snipers can mark enemies on the map, support builds ammo crates
all this makes teamplay more important than ever
one shit thing is bleeding mehanics so you lie there like a raggot waiting to respawn and then you have to wait 3-10 seconds to actually respawn

you can say a lot bad things about BFV but there is not many better multiplayer shooters

>grab you from the ground if you're dying
wrong, only squaddies and medics can
>you can say a lot bad things about BFV but there is not many better multiplayer shooters
idk man if i we are talking about class synergy rainbow six siege, insurgency and SQUAD blow BFV out the fucking window

the atmosphere design and sounds are topnotch, but the other design choices forever taint my experience with a "what if they dropped the aspergers vitrue signalling and just made the fucking game" feeling

whenever a breakthrough map sounds like a fucking maternity ward from all the women shrieking like they are giving birth in their respective foxholes (compared to how RO2 battles sound) i feel like shit because it could have been far more immersive

>all this makes teamplay more important than ever
>'I want to depend on blueberries more than ever!' -- t.Nobody, ever.

BF 1942 was for sure

Is this game still alive? I wanted to try it for 15 bucks

Not even the royale is alive. Can't find a game ever. EU btw.

So is BF6 gonna happen? Because I want them to double dip.

Attached: ahahahaharahaha.jpg (540x390, 39K)

The PS5's accurate specs/games leak, and the guy who accurately leaked BF1 and BFV point out that the next Battlefield game will be Bad Company 3.
I don't know about BF6 though.

>make shitty modern or futuristic games since BF2
>normies dont care and buy the games in droves
>bastardize WW1
>normies dont care and buy the game
>bastardize WW2
>normies riot and become offended
I blame actual boomers for this dichotomy.

Is BF4 still worth trying on PC?

It is not the female or cosmetics
It is the inappropriate gunplay and gameplay in general
The game is not fun to play

Only faction that has women in BF1 are the russians, who actually had women fighting irl. How is this an insult? Should we just ignore them because there wasn't as many of them?

Normies don't know how WW1 looked, they mix it up with WW2.
For them ground attack Zeppelin makes sense.
DICE reinforced it by making imperial germans into nazis v0.5

Every game after BC2 was more Bad Company than old Battlefields

Guns are too accurate over long distance, incentivizing camping too much. As a compensation, they made soldiers really fast, so you got a really fast sprint to barely survive if you quickly run from cover to cover, but these facts combined makes all frontlines in the map null and void. Result is random pockets of fighting in very inconsistently built maps and it just feels bad.

The ebb and flow of Battlefield is ruined. Conquest sucks, everything points to baseline game sacrificed in favor of battle royale mode, but that sizzled out fast.

There's nothing "fun" about an ugly dyke with a prosthetic arm you fucking mong.

Yeah, it's comfy, famicom.

>no battle royale mode at launch
>battle royale mode should've been it own thing like apex

you sound like you play a lot of CoD user. the camera locking to recoil is one of the worst fucking changes in V

that's because he is talking about V retard

based morpheus

>you can say a lot bad things about BFV but there is not many better multiplayer shooters

except literally every other battlefield game

Can you post a screen?

the next battlfield will be about vietnam, bfv is leading into this
on another note is the mg42 still fun? it's the only weapon that made the game bearable

Attached: 1536568223201.jpg (459x440, 87K)

I mean there's nothing to post when it comes to the royale, just kids jumping in a lobby and leaving because the game never gathers enough players
There are a couple servers up with 64 players on conquest but mostly in the evening and on weekends

The ex CEO of Dice literally called everyone a retard who doesn't think that Battlefield 5 is authentic

>LITERAL SEETHING TRANNY FAGGOT
YOUR GAME BLOWS XIR. DEAL WITH IT!

Attached: 121344_preview.png (445x482, 196K)

real talk they spent too much dev resources on the stupid fucking ring of fire mode, to try to cash in on the BR craze
this shit was not in a releaseable state at all, but they wanted to get wind of the popularity of Battle Royale games in time to get some of the relevance
If they had just focused on making fucking BF instead of BR we would have something half playable at the 2018 launch

BF4 stats - there's 8,189 peak PC players, and 9,524 peak PS4 players. BF1 stats - 7,174 peak PC players, 9,803 peak PS4 players. I didn't buy BF1, because I thought that surely BF5 would've been modern, like BF4, but better! Instead, they did two consecutive historical settings and we got the absolute pile of stale dogshit that is current BF5. Pathetic. EA even said don't buy the game, and I'm glad the did - I sure as fuck didn't buy it. I'm still playing BF4 until I get a PC, then it's on to Insurgency: Sandstorm.

more like CoD than Battlefield that's the issue.
personally Bf can get fucked ever since Bf1 because of fucking reflex sights no matter era

Year and a half dev cycle

Go watch the first battlefield v trailer, tell me it looks like ww2 or something I would like to play.
You can't, you genuinely can't, it sold bad because of the marketing and poor decisions

All the sights on the weapons in BF1 actually existed in the period you retard. A simple google search would have shown you this

its really a giant mess that's pretty hard to thoroughly understand considering there were so many flabbergasting failures on so many levels, it wasn't just the marketing but everything from the political messaging to basic lighting and readability is completely fucked in that game, it also wasn't even close to finished when it released
based morpheus telling it how it is
>nooooooooo dont criticize muh historical revisionism

people play 1 because its genuinely the best battlefield made since bc2 and im not kidding, it'll probably be alive for at least another year at least

this is true but the proportions are still pretty screwed also half of everyone being a nigger is silly

>confusing gameplay shenanigan moments with authenticity

Attached: 1445805514664.gif (500x281, 668K)

Use the server browser dingus, don’t lie

In truth, I don't think there's any gaming community where I really feel at home. Era alienates me when they ban people for reasonable dissent, and Yea Forums alienates me when the /pol/tards start rambling about the nigger faggot kike trannies.
When I have to decide between walking on eggshells to avoid offending anyone, and feeling like I'm in the presence of my uncle blaming "the pakis" for all society's woes, I often end up not posting at all.

They handed over their company to people that say y'all and buy decaff, lactose free latte that are about as creative as my shoes. The age of good games is over, the age of multicultural feefees had begun.

Attached: 1561552166245.jpg (568x705, 244K)

I just want a true successor to 2, and especially to 2142, but at this point I know modern DICE would never manage to do something even partly decent.
>tfw 2143 never

Attached: 1544309194071m.jpg (858x1024, 90K)

They spent way too much time pandering instead of learning how to code.

The problem really is the marketing. World war 2 implies World War 2. What people got was Brits and Germans on one real front and a few fake ones. Similarly, call of duty WW2 implies World War 2. What people got was one american unit in the last 2 years of the war. Sad.

Attached: MOHFbox.jpg (220x284, 16K)