PDA

View Full Version : Battlefield, where is it heading?



LandShark
05-02-2014, 10:16 AM
I am a BF fanboy, I will admit that and have no problem admitting it. What I want to know from everyone is their honest opinion on the direction and overall gameplay of the BF series.

My opinion is that it is far and above the other games, multiplayerwise. Now, unfortunately, with the release of BF4 came tons of bugs. This has been extremely frustrating for all im sure. Nobody wants a broken game when paying top dollar for it. Does this mean that I have given up on the BF series? Hell no, I would still take a "broken" game that has huge maps, multiple vehicles air and ground, good graphics, CLAYMORES, plenty of targets and an array of game modes over the same ole same ole. What I think happened is that they were pushed to release a game more often to compete with the COD franchise and just upgraded BF3 in order to do that. Given more time, say another year, I honestly think the bugs would be mostly fixed. If this keeps up and their potentially great games continue to be meh, then I will certainly jump off the band wagon.

Poll is at the top for those "crapatalk" users. I ony call it crap because what kind of app wont let you see one of my most awesome polls!?!?


ITS MULTICHOICE!

donhardeone
05-02-2014, 10:50 AM
I'd say I'm a BF fanboy of sorts, but I'm somewhere between option 1 and option 3. I won't buy just anything a franchise I like throws out, mainly because I have to be pretty calculated on which games I can afford to even buy. EA/Dice has not instilled a lot of confidence in me with BF3 or BF4 in several regards. In BF3 the manner in which they went about rental servers and such was shady, showed lack of concern about fanbase, and has stuck in the back of my mind ever since. In BF4 I echo Retro's comments from early on: This is what BF3 *should* have been. BF4 is slightly more than a new skin on top of BF3, and overall I have enjoyed BF4 a lot...I mean I was a level 70 in the first month I think playing the game so much. The bugs have been plentiful and frustrating, especially for team play. If I was going at the game solo and got booted everytime a map came up in the rotation I wouldn't give a crap. Given how hard it was to get into a game with my friends in the first place, getting booted sucked since it was almost a certainty that I wouldn't get back in easily. Then comes issues like Naval Strike. On my 360, I had zero issues with this DLC and absolutely loved it. On XB1 it is laggy and frustrating to play. The other mas on BF4 are a significant upgrade IMO though.

I think you are right in your post LS. If they weren't pressured to "keep pace" with COD, we would likely not be having this discussion around BF4. It sucks to wait longer for a game, but I'd rather wait and have a playable game over getting an unplayable game early. I wouldn't go into a car manufacturer and pull a nice car from the assembly line early...it would be incomplete and shitty no matter how nice the car looks or its former prestige. That's what I feel like they are doing with the releases nowadays for a lot of games. They are trying to release games before fads die off or other franchises beat them to the punch, which results in a lot of half-completed games that due to the current movement forces us to pay double anyway: $60 for the game and $60 for a season pass.

It's a frustrating trend that I do not expect to improve in the short-term unfortunately. Here's hoping Battlefield stands apart moving forward, but pardon me if I'm skeptical.

Retro
05-02-2014, 10:52 AM
They haven't changed anything about how often they release a BF game.

BF 1942 - 2002
BF Vietnam - 2004
BF2 - 2005
BF 2142 - 2006
BF Bad Company - 2008
BF 1943 - 2009
BF Bad Company 2 - 2010
BF3 - 2011
BF4 - 2013

9 full AAA released games in 12 years plus all expansion content, ports and smaller offshoots like BF Heroes and BF Free to Play.

donhardeone
05-02-2014, 11:11 AM
They haven't changed anything about how often they release a BF game.

...

BF Bad Company 2 - 2010
BF3 - 2011
BF4 - 2013

9 full AAA released games in 12 years plus all expansion content, ports and smaller offshoots like BF Heroes and BF Free to Play.

That's rather surprising to see the actual release years. I felt like there was an eternity between BC2 and BF3 launches, but felt like there was not enough time between BF3 and BF4. Maybe it was because BC2 only had one DLC (solid DLC IMO) versus 3-4 in BF3 that led to this feeling. The point still remains though that they released a game with several issues, and a DLC that was essentially unplayable for some consoles. I'd have rather see them push the original launch date back a few months to iron out the issues personally instead of trying to stick to a 2-year cycle or release that comes close to the COD launch.

LandShark
05-02-2014, 11:18 AM
maybe it was because it was a year and a half we got to enjoy BFBC2 before BF3.

Retro
05-02-2014, 11:27 AM
That's rather surprising to see the actual release years. I felt like there was an eternity between BC2 and BF3 launches, but felt like there was not enough time between BF3 and BF4. Maybe it was because BC2 only had one DLC (solid DLC IMO) versus 3-4 in BF3 that led to this feeling. The point still remains though that they released a game with several issues, and a DLC that was essentially unplayable for some consoles. I'd have rather see them push the original launch date back a few months to iron out the issues personally instead of trying to stick to a 2-year cycle or release that comes close to the COD launch.

My point is, the quality of the game has nothing to do with some new release schedule. They took more time between BF3 and BF4 than most BF games. I think many also forget the buggy mess most BF games have been at the start. BF4 has had more issues, but it also released on more platforms than any other BF title in the past. I believe they should have pushed the release of BF4 back, but I think they were arrogant.

I haven't had any problem running BF4 on XB1 since the Dec. update, so really it was just a month of lag and instability. Anyone who played BC2 from release day knows the lag/rubber banding in that game lasted much longer. The only problem since then was the release of Naval Strike and it was contained to that content. Even with that it only lasted a week (I'm not a sucker with Premium).

I don't believe a BF title will ever run perfectly out of the box at release, it's just the nature of this type of game. Add in with talk of future games having 128 to 256 players in a match, I don't future titles being much different.

Retro
05-02-2014, 11:28 AM
maybe it was because it was a year and a half we got to enjoy BFBC2 before BF3.

And two years to enjoy BF3 before BF4.

LandShark
05-02-2014, 11:36 AM
And two years to enjoy BF3 before BF4.

holy crap, it felt like they were right on top of each other.

donhardeone
05-02-2014, 12:37 PM
The only problem since then was the release of Naval Strike and it was contained to that content. Even with that it only lasted a week (I'm not a sucker with Premium).


I was trying to play a few rounds with Teach and Freak the other day on NS maps and was getting a fair amount of lag. Changed to different maps just to see and had no issues.


holy crap, it felt like they were right on top of each other.

That's what I was saying above. BF:BC2 felt like it was out for a good while, whereas the gap between BF3 and BF4 felt like a year tops. Seems there were two years there, but sure as heck didn't feel that way.