What new features would you like to see?

#1 Edited by FireBurger (1479 posts) -

Original post deleted.
 
See topic.

#2 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18955 posts) -

i'd like to have a badge for 10 Shock Paddel kills in one round just like knife and pistol

#3 Posted by Buck (148 posts) -

I'd like them to NOT dumb the game down, like they've been doing way to much already. BF2142 with only 4 classes, BF: BC without planes or even prone??
Bf 1943 doesn't seem to have prone either and it only has 3 classes... wtf dice?? I understand it could feel strange with a prone position on consoles but BF1943 is also coming to pc...

When it comes to new features I'd like to see some squad/party feature where you can invite your friends so that you can enter a game without entering IP adresses and ending up on different teams. Matchmaking would be cool too.
And i agree with you Fireburger, moar customization. But PLEASE dice, develop this for hardcore pc players and not "casuals" that can't live without regenerating health, "hard controls on choppers" etc.

#4 Posted by Binman88 (3686 posts) -

One of the reasons I haven't gone back to playing BF2 is not having a widescreen option. Apart from that, there's not a huge amount I would want changed, or at least nothing I can think of off the top of my head (been a while since I played BF2).

To be honest though, I think the last thing a successor to a game like BF2 needs is character customisation - at the end of the day, how your character looks is a bit pointless isn't it? I quite like how everyone looks like plain and simple soldiers. As for the 'bragging' decals you mentioned - again I think they're a bit pointless. I think BF pulls off bragging a little more tastefully by means of badges, medals and stats.

#5 Posted by Alex_V (614 posts) -

I don't want to sound negative, but I honestly don't see the need for a new Battlefield. I can't particularly see anything in BF2 that I would drastically change, and there are so many multiplayer shooters now anyway, the market is already flooded.

The game would have to be absolutely phenomenal to interest me.

#6 Edited by 6n00bkilla9 (150 posts) -

I just really hope its not like BC and more like BF2 and I ant to devoped and supported for the PC first

#7 Edited by FireBurger (1479 posts) -
@Alex_V: Hell, just a BF2 with updated graphics and a refreshed player base would be enough for me to buy BF3. In my opinion, BF2 is the best multiplayer game out there, but I think there is definitely still room for improvement and new ideas.

@Binman88: As far as gameplay goes, yes it's pointless. But, I still think it's cool to have a more identifiable soldier on the battlefield. Like I said, it would be within the confines of a regular uniformed solider, but there are a lot of little realistic tweaks that could still set your soldier apart. I'm not talking pink hair and orange camo. Hell, Ghost Recon is one of the most realistic shooters out there and that game has some customization.

I think it would be cool to be playing with your friends and be able to look around and know who's who without even needing to see their names.

Also, you should check this out for 16:9 - http://www.fpsbanana.com/tuts/3909
#8 Edited by Mikemcn (6982 posts) -

They can always add something to the series. 200 player battles, MAG style maybe? A new setting, no more middle East? Maybe even (Gasp) an actual campaign as they have done with Bad Company, which has worked out well for them.

And no they need a new addition in the series, ive played BF2 recently and it doesnt hold up against other games except for those who are the hardcore players, its feature set is good though.

And i already can run BF in widescreen.... why did you post that link? Its 1920 by 1080 and everything, i didnt have to do anything special

Online
#9 Posted by CL60 (16906 posts) -
@Mikemcn said:
"And i already can run BF in widescreen.... why did you post that link? Its 1920 by 1080 and everything, i didnt have to do anything special "
No you can't, BF2 simply doesn't have widescreen in the options. Which is dumb.

@FireBurger said:
" @Alex_V: Hell, just a BF2 with updated graphics and a refreshed player base would be enough for me to buy BF3. In my opinion, BF2 is the best multiplayer game out there, but I think there is definitely still room for improvement and new ideas.

@Binman88: As far as gameplay goes, yes it's pointless. But, I still think it's cool to have a more identifiable soldier on the battlefield. Like I said, it would be within the confines of a regular uniformed solider, but there are a lot of little realistic tweaks that could still set your soldier apart. I'm not talking pink hair and orange camo. Hell, Ghost Recon is one of the most realistic shooters out there and that game has some customization.

I think it would be cool to be playing with your friends and be able to look around and know who's who without even needing to see their names.

Also, you should check this out for 16:9 - http://www.fpsbanana.com/tuts/3909 "

I did that but it cuts off a little bit of the top and bottom of the screen.
#10 Posted by FireBurger (1479 posts) -
@Mikemcn: I think Bad Company's campaign was boring as hell - I didn't even bother finishing it. It felt like a multiplayer map populated with AI and checkpoints added to it. No good scripting or interesting moments at all. Also, time and money spent on singleplayer takes away from multiplayer and the BF fanbase is all about the multiplayer.
#11 Posted by FireBurger (1479 posts) -

What would everyone like to see?

#13 Edited by MrKlorox (11209 posts) -

PC as the lead platform and multiplayer only. The maps need to be designed for 64vs64 action, but have some segments for 32v32 and 16v16 modes for consoles. That way the console players can play on most of the surface area of the full maps, just only a little bit at a time. This results in more total maps for console using the same land mass.
 
The triumphant return of real-ass Conquest mode with Double Assault Lines rules. Not this tiny park with three flags bullshit masquerading as CQ in BC2.
 
I would like a randomization aspect to the map layouts so they won't be identical every time. But maybe that's some next next gen BF5 stuff. It would be best for city maps with randomized but procedural building placement with doorways and windows randomly bricked or boarded.
 
Perhaps some RTS style base management for commanders with upgrades. Either way have a lot more fleshed out commander role. Bring back the importance of squad leaders by giving them some new abilities.
 
Verticality like in the BF2 Special forces expansion including zip lines and grappling hooks. Some semi-futuristic weaponry like EMP grenades and orbital strikes like 2142.
 
Megatexturing like in Rage and Quake Wars.

#14 Edited by FireBurger (1479 posts) -
@drag said:

" I'd like to see some small city maps - how I thought the MoH multi was going to play out. But not having destructible buildings in that made the whole thing pretty worthless to me. I'd like to see some small, enclosed and built-up maps where the whole place is slowly reduced to rubble through the match.  "

I just don't think that small city maps are what BF is about. Variety is OK, but BF needs it's big maps. Mashtuur and Karkand were great city maps while still being large. I'm just worried Frostbite makes tall buildings impractical, since the whole interior would have to be rendered and it could kill performance.
 
@MrKlorox said:

" PC as the lead platform and multiplayer only. The maps need to be designed for 64vs64 action, but have some segments for 32v32 and 16v16 modes for consoles. That way the console players can play on most of the surface area of the full maps, just only a little bit at a time. This results in more total maps for console using the same land mass. The triumphant return of real-ass Conquest mode with Double Assault Lines rules. Not this tiny park with three flags bullshit masquerading as CQ in BC2.  I would like a randomization aspect to the map layouts so they won't be identical every time. But maybe that's some next next gen BF5 stuff. It would be best for city maps with randomized but procedural building placement with doorways and windows randomly bricked or boarded.  Perhaps some RTS style base management for commanders with upgrades. Either way have a lot more fleshed out commander role. Bring back the importance of squad leaders by giving them some new abilities.  Verticality like in the BF2 Special forces expansion including zip lines and grappling hooks. Some semi-futuristic weaponry like EMP grenades and orbital strikes like 2142.  Megatexturing like in Rage and Quake Wars. "


Yeah, scaling maps are a must, and not just for consoles. In BF2 on PC, I preferred 32 player servers because it felt more like you could move as a squad and flank without constant fighting.
 
Agreed on real Conquest. Maps can't be linear, otherwise it's not really conquest and there's not really any strategy.
 
I think that randomized maps would be too hard to balance and polish. I think what would work better is static maps, but with a bunch of potential CPs throughout them. The game could then randomize which CPs were active during each game.
 
As for me:
  • Soldier customization (nothing over-the-top or unrealistic, but enough to distinguish your character)
  • Get rid of the cheesy archetypes that the BC series uses. The engineers and medics just don't look anything like real soldiers, they look like caricatures.
  • Return of jets
  • Return of tall buildings that actually make cities feel like cities and bring real verticality back to the series (this might be complicated by Frostbite)
  • Radial comms on console versions
  • More kit customization beyond weapons
  • Separate kit selection from weapon selection
  • Faction specific weapons to promote variety
  • More visceral gameplay. Blood effects, nearby explosions knocking the player to the ground/knocking his weapon out of his hands, standing near a firing tank or rocket launcher rattles the screen, etc.
 
That's all I can think of for now.
#15 Posted by Meteora (5787 posts) -
  • Character customization (weapon setup, accessories, appearance, etc.)
  • Weapon sway when aiming down the sights (ADS). Last I played BC2; I couldn't remember there being any sway outside of sniper rifles. Even Call of Duty 4 had weapon sway.
  • Coriolis effect for bullets. I know there's bullet drop, but as far as I'm concerned with my limited knowledge, the Coriolis effect makes bullets move unpredictably at long distances, making it curve and shit. Here's an example from COD4's assassination mission.
  • Bare minimum of 64 players cap for PC versions and 32 for consoles. Seriously, don't go backwards
  • From what I heard, dolphin diving has been more or less solved. Please include prone. Make it so you can't jump and then prone. Also include a prone animation so it takes longer, making dolphin diving redundant. Skip to 1:56 in this example in ArmA II.
 
Well, the rest includes larger maps, more weapons variety and more vehicles. Yeah. I can't think of much to ask for.
#16 Posted by Phantom_Crash (298 posts) -
  • Basic Customization of  your soldier. (I can understand why they don't. imagine 32 players with slightly looking uniforms. It all adds up.)
  • Prone!
  • Battlefield Commander? Droping Supply crates and artillery strikes?
  • Faction Specific weapons would be a nice touch.
  • Larger maps.
  • Few more vehicle types?
  • More gadgets would be cool.
  • Wake Island!
#17 Posted by Jayross (2365 posts) -

To be honest... it is not about what new things we would like to see, its that we would like to see all of the old things on the consoles.

#18 Posted by Jayross (2365 posts) -

For PCs, would it be enough to just have 64 players, frostbite-level visuals and destruction, and maybe a new game-mode or two?  
 
Or do we expect 124 player servers, and a whole lot of new features? 

#19 Posted by nick69 (625 posts) -

Lurking the battlefield forums in ea, I found this. 
http://forum.ea.com/eaforum/posts/list/1665711.page     
 
I personally think that this is a really cool idea, bringing back the commander and all. It's probably not going to work well with random people, but for clan on clan play, this could be awesome. 

#20 Posted by boj4ngles (287 posts) -
@Jayross said:
"To be honest... it is not about what new things we would like to see, its that we would like to see all of the old things on the consoles. "

This!
#21 Posted by immike (714 posts) -

I can never understand why players want prone so badly. It's mainly included to increase realism and tactical variety, but look at BF2 and MW2.What is it used for? Dropshotting and camping. Leave prone out. 
 
64 players at minimum would be nice.
Jets!
AI for skirmish mode.
 
Honestly, that's it. I played a ton of BF2 and BF1942 and they are fine, but I think the streamlining that they did for BFBC2 makes the game fun all the time. I hope they don't fully listen to the community and clutter the game up with nonsense.

#22 Posted by warxsnake (2650 posts) -

More community friendly options. 
Steam integration. 
Lobby system so the game picks adequate server with enough open slots based on how many you are. 
FULL JOYSTICK/HOTAS SUPPORT for flight, if any at this point....sigh. 
TrackIR support (6DOF head tracking) support. 
Eliminate dolphin diving by having a small refresh on prone (like for sprinting), or just lengthen animation. 
256 player servers (If joint ops did it, Dice can do....wait no, judging by how bfbc2 started, scratch that). 
Return of the Commander (unlike what was stated on the bombcast, commanders do matter, and i always saw them doing their job in all the servers ive been in (what else would you do being commander)).  
 
Can't think of much else.

#23 Posted by Jace (1092 posts) -

Here's a quick answer : 
 
I want everyone in dice to suddenly contract amnesia. I want that amnesia to completely erase everything post 2005. I want them to wake up, look at all this technology available, and use it. I want them to forget they ever made the abysmal PC multiplayer experience that was bc2.  They're going to see ArmA 2. They'll see what is possible. And fucking put it in to a bf formula. 
 
That isn't too much to ask. But if BF3 doesn't have jets, heli's, wake island, at least 64 players, and rape-ass graphics, im going to be disappointed. 
 
With the port to consoles though, this is bound to be a fucking disaster on pc.

#24 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18955 posts) -
@immike said:
" I can never understand why players want prone so badly. It's mainly included to increase realism and tactical variety, but look at BF2 and MW2.What is it used for? Dropshotting and camping.  "
there are so many moments while playing BC2 when i wished i had prone.. its an essential soldier position that has its uses and benefits, you cant just fucking leave it out. if i wanna prone i should be able to fucking prone 
and it doesnt help camping THAT much.. you can get so skilled at Battlefield that you can spot a sniper lying on the ground from a mile away and sent troops his way

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.