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
Seething Bazelgeuse said:
I seriously hope they have more variable optics in the full release. I fucking hate canted shit. There's only one LPVO and as far as I could tell only the minimi can actually use it. The other optics are all static. One of the only good things about 2042 was the functional variable optics, even if they weren't on all that many guns. They need to bring that back. Give me a 1-4x specter or something.
Click to expand...
The default sniper optic is an 1-6x LPVO, but it's locked at 6x.
 
Tri-Tachyon'sClown said:
Too little too late, now those devs ate BF's lunch but couldn't make their own. There truly needs to be a case study for how you can gain so much attention and goodwill only to do nothing except occasionally shit on your own product before going back to doing nothing again.
1754941388341.webp
They made one meaningless trailer for an update and then back to radio silence. It wouldn't kill them to put out a few dev diaries or whatever, do they think they can pull a NMS and crawl out of the grave? The conditions for that game to rise from the ashes of it's own failure were perfect, this is the worst time for Battlebit to try and make a comeback.
Click to expand...

I sadly don't see this game making a comeback. It has been going through an identity crisis ever since it launched. The devs originally intended for the game to be a milsim that could run on just about any PC, but they've been slowly chipping away at the foundation and moving towards an arcadey Battlefield experience at the demand of the playerbase. I'm not entirely sure on this part, but I heard that the devs *allegedly* lost their original build on a pushed GitHub update and have to essentially rebuild the base from scratch before they can do too many changes to the current version.

Another issue that killed BattleBit was, ironically enough, community servers. The first month or so when everyone was on official servers, you would have no issues getting into full games. Once the devs released community servers, the playerbase fractured into different rulesets, map rotations, and modifiers on them. You have an already niche game that had its playerbase subdivided further by different game modes and server settings.

As much as I like the notion of community servers, it seems like it will always inevitably end in a server list full of empty/half empty servers and struggling to find enough people for a full match. Battlefield itself already has this problem in some titles and I would like to be able to actually play in a few years down the road. At least with matchmaking, you can get a full game and you don't have to deal with butthurt pissbaby server admins that get mad and abuse you for clearing them off their camping spot. I didn't have any issues with the matchmaking during the BF6 beta, but I wish you could queue in with up to 8 people. It's a large-scale warfare game, just let us queue in with two squads. It would even work in the small-scale modes that have a 16 player cap.
 
Lady Adjani said:
Faze clan niggers
washed up CoD pro players
kovaak's community

It's like the shittiest people on the planet decided to team up in order to completely ruin a game.
Click to expand...
Don’t get me started on Kovaak’s community and everyone peripheral to it. They’re all miserable shits who spend hours a day fucking around with an aim trainer because there is no perfect movement shooter left for them. They won’t go to Quake III CPMA because the boomers and Russians would absolutely destroy them and “muh graphics”. They wrecked Titanfall 2 because their sweatiness and toxicity chased away the casual players to stomp. Respawn ruined Apex with the game updates and SBMM, so the last thing they want is to fight each other in the same match. CoD is a shitty mess and only play it because that is all they have.

They hate Battlefield because it’s “casual” and “unbalanced” and they want it to fail so they can have their player base back in their domain.

The one thing that would absolute send these people into a rage would bring back dedicated servers run by clans because they’ll get bullied by the SysOp for being a sperg.
 
Last edited:
Croaking Spider said:
As much as I like the notion of community servers, it seems like it will always inevitably end in a server list full of empty/half empty servers and struggling to find enough people for a full match. Battlefield itself already has this problem in some titles and I would like to be able to actually play in a few years down the road. At least with matchmaking, you can get a full game and you don't have to deal with butthurt pissbaby server admins that get mad and abuse you for clearing them off their camping spot. I didn't have any issues with the matchmaking during the BF6 beta, but I wish you could queue in with up to 8 people. It's a large-scale warfare game, just let us queue in with two squads. It would even work in the small-scale modes that have a 16 player cap.
Click to expand...
Community servers are nice but when a game is dependent on community servers, it will always devolve into control freaks running the game as the playerbase gets smaller.

I tried playing COD:WAW a few months ago and all I could find were the dogshit tactical crouch servers where you get banned for running and gunning.

I tried playing Battlefield 2 a while ago and the only active server's admin banned me because I couldn't understand his beaner-babble he was using to ask me if I understood the server's rules.

TF2's community servers are worse nowadays because 85% of them are nothing but 2fort or the same 5 maps over and over again as well being uncle Dane's or Skial based.

CS:S's american servers are run by boomers with rules such as "no use of the word gay or lame, youngin" with reminders of the rules all over the fucking place.

CS 1.6 is half run by angry beaners who will kick you on a dime for not playing how they want you to because they hope to enter their 3rd world esports scene someday.

I'd rather deal with offical game servers where an AI can autoban me for saying nigger but I can easily work around it and play how I like than deal with these spiteful freaks who hate being alive.
 
Last edited:
I would rather have the control freaks than EA thinking they know best. The control freaks worked well for 2, 2142, BC2, 3, and 4.

Dedicated servers run by the community are a net positive than a loss. The reality why they stopped being a thing was for micro transactions and forcing people onto the next title.
 
Nameless One said:
The lack of offline support has had me stick with Bad Company 2 and no further. Its a shame since BF1 was really fun online, I just prefer bot modes so I can mod it and play splitscreen co-op online or offline. DICE are lazy faggots, they have had literal bots in online modes since BF1 but can't program basic offline modes lol.
Click to expand...
Were DICE too fucking lazy to even give people offline bots in BF1? Well, that's yet another reason to hate the game, say what you want about COD but every single one of them can be played with offline bots up until the more recent ones that require an online connection to play the game.
 
Well, there it is. This time, it will be different, people say
battlefield 6 promise.webp
Personally, I doubt Battlefield 6 will be free of any of these issues, but when that happens, I will point to this post and say "I told you so". Just a matter of time, these issues might not be there at launch, but they will eventually rear their ugly little heads.
 
Last edited:
30+GameOvers said:
View attachment 7771203
Click to expand...

It would be nice if Battlefield forced CoD to change and eject all the bullshit...but I doubt it. Even if Battlefield 6 were to stay true to decent skins throughout its lifespan, I'm not sure that it would outsell whatever CoDslop Activision dishes out, let alone influence it.

Activision will just do what they always do and offer up a solution that turns out to be a lame half-truth. When Battlefield 3 was coming out, they said Modern Warfare 3 would feature destruction...which only meant blowing up a wall Red Faction style, and iirc only in singleplayer. When BF1 was coming out, they promised the next CoD would be a return to WW2...which had black Nazi women and attachment-laden guns. No reason to be any different here. They'll just promise the next game will be Modern Warfare IV or Ghosts 2, and this time no stupid skins*, pinky promise.



*it will totally have stupid skins again
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom