Battlefield V Trailer + In case anyone gives a hoot Battlefield V is having a reveal stream in a few hours

  • 122 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Avatar image for hayt
Hayt

1794

Forum Posts

548

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#1  Edited By Hayt

It's that time of the year again so if you want to see the follow up on the literal 1 second of WW2 looking footage DICE is doing a stream later tonight (4pm New York time). It's bound to involve youtubers and maybe a dev if you're lucky. Personally i am pretty hyped for this entry if it does turn out to be WW2 as that's a setting I'm always keen for. Who knows though maybe this clip will pan out to reveal a mechsuit or something. We'll find out in a few hours!

Avatar image for notnert427
notnert427

2389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 1

I'm interested. Battlefield 1 was pretty great overall, aside from the glacial progression. As someone ready for another WWII romp, I tried to give the CoD series another chance with WWII last year, and I regret it. The pace/feel of those games is just off to me, and that arcadey crap felt especially out of place in a WWII setting. I think the Battlefield series is much better fundamentally in terms of controls/tone to be able to tackle this era.

My only real concern here is that EA gonna EA and haven't learned from the Battlefront II loot crate stuff to fuck everything up trying to #monetize. If they focus instead on making worthwhile DLC as with BF1, I don't have any problem shelling out some extra cash for the season pass again, but they'll need to be a bit more prompt with the release schedule for the DLC this time around.

I'm probably on board for this, barring them revealing something particularly offputting. As amazing as the DICE games usually look, I'm already a bit sold based on this being the first Battlefield console game designed from the start to take advantage of the power of the One X and to a lesser extent, the PS4 Pro. The HDR patch for Battlefield 1 was dope, and that game looked great in not-4K, so 4K and fully optimized HDR this time around would be rad.

I'll have more thoughts post-reveal.

Avatar image for thatonedudenick
ThatOneDudeNick

1607

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By ThatOneDudeNick

Battlefield is my one "no matter what" game. I've put hundreds of hours into each release since 1942. Looking forward to large scale WW2 multiplayer again. I want to see the Wake Island map with 2018 tech. I'm going to buy this no matter what. I'll be mad at them for having too many modes and still locking so many maps behind paid DLC, splitting the playerbase. I'll be mad at myself for buying the super mega edition and Premium. BF is my shit.

Stay tuned for my predictable impressions after the reveal.

Avatar image for holycrapitsadam
holycrapitsadam

729

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4  Edited By holycrapitsadam

No premium pass is the biggest thing for me.

I always hated shelling out an additional $50 to get maps, guns, etc.

Avatar image for machofantastico
MachoFantastico

6760

Forum Posts

24

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 73

User Lists: 4

That reveal trailer as left me very confused. Is this the new Bad Company game set in WW2? The whole trailer seemed silly and comedic.

Avatar image for ghost_cat
ghost_cat

2706

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6  Edited By ghost_cat

Wait, if I heard correctly, instead of a premium pass, are they dulling out campaign and content similar to Hitman?

Overall, it feels like they decided to double down on the ridiculousness of both 1942 Bad Company, and the suggested expansion of mobility is very cool. Digging all this more than expected.

Avatar image for hayt
Hayt

1794

Forum Posts

548

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Well that looks nothing like WW2. A lady with a wooden arm and a dude with a golden katana. Good to see DICE found a way to fuck up the setting.

Avatar image for notnert427
notnert427

2389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 1

  • WWII confirmed.
  • Battlefield 1 fingerprints seem all over it in terms of art style. This is a good thing.
  • Co-op combined arms is exciting. My roommate and I will have fun with this.
  • War stories returns. I'm happy about this, as that was a novel and fun single player experience in Battlefield 1.
  • They say there will be no pay to win. No mention of loot crates, though, which surely means they'll be in there.
  • Fortifications sound lame as shit. Sounds like I'll skip support class on this one.
  • Cosmetics seem like they'll be pushed hardcore here. Which...okay, sure, people apparently love that shit.
  • Multiple characters in your company is a bit concerning. I don't want to have to try to level multiple characters simultaneously.
  • "Progress by playing the game" likely means the glacial progression has returned.
  • No premium pass? Wow. Hard push on cosmetics is definitely confirmed. Gotta make that skrilla.
  • Episodic DLC? Hmm... Could be good or bad. HITMAN made it work.
  • Trailer time. It is comically frenetic. Everything is exploding ridiculously.
  • Fuck, it looks like they sped the pace up significantly from BF1. I hope this is just for the trailer to try and pull in the CoD fanbase.
  • Even the gameplay looks faster in chaotic, not-great ways. This could be a big deal in a bad way. Again, hoping this is just to make the trailer look more action-y.
  • Wait, did she have a robot arm or a prosthesis?
  • What's in the "Deluxe Edition" if there's no premium pass?

Overall thoughts:

No premium pass is rad. Having no split playerbase this time around will be cool. At least for now, they're saying the right things re: cosmetics/progression, but I'm suspicious of what the post-launch "additions" there will be. There has to be a plan beyond selling cosmetics to try and get some money out of gamers that they won't be getting from the premium pass, and I'm concerned about what that will be. Chiefly, though, I'm worried about the seemingly sped-up pace of the gameplay. That could very well break the game for me and ruin my interest in it. I will need to try the game to be sure before I order it. I'm excited for most of what I saw, with some reservations/skepticism as to the unknown. I'm not sure if I'm more or less hyped for it, but I'm interested to learn more.

Avatar image for machofantastico
MachoFantastico

6760

Forum Posts

24

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 73

User Lists: 4

Didn't make a great first impression, the whole tone of that trailer seemed off to me. But will wait and see more. Just a shame given how awesome DICE's trailers were for Battlefield 1.

The comedic tone reminded me of Fortnite oddly.

Avatar image for babychoochoo
BabyChooChoo

7105

Forum Posts

2094

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 2

#10  Edited By BabyChooChoo

I've never cared much for Battlefield (though I always thought 2142 seemed neat), but that looked fine I guess? I feel completely unqualified to say whether or not it was bad or wasn't true to the series or whatever. To me it just looked like some more Battlefield.

I'm kinda in the mood for more futuristic shooters at the moment which is why I got back into Titanfall 2. I know it's been a known fact that they were going back to WW2 for this, but I'm still kinda bummed because I got tired of shooters set in that era long ago. If they ever announce another game similar to 2142, I think I would be all over that shit.

Avatar image for notnert427
notnert427

2389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 1

Didn't make a great first impression, the whole tone of that trailer seemed off to me. But will wait and see more. Just a shame given how awesome DICE's trailers were for Battlefield 1.

The comedic tone reminded me of Fortnite oddly.

I definitely feel like that trailer was specifically catered to the Fortnite/CoD fanbases. What I need to know is if that will be representative of the actual game, or if its just a marketing ploy. I'm really hoping for the latter.

Avatar image for mattchops
mattchops

396

Forum Posts

67

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Battlefield with metal gear tech cross over

Avatar image for hayt
Hayt

1794

Forum Posts

548

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Guys seeing that British army dude with a katana and the lady with Skyrim facepaint and a cricket bat might be the lamest thing Battlefield has ever created.

I am going to be the only person in uniform like a historical reenactor at comic-con.

Avatar image for conmulligan
conmulligan

2250

Forum Posts

11722

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 11

That trailer was a mess but I'm sold on the gameplay changes they're making.

Avatar image for deactivated-5f9398c1300c7
deactivated-5f9398c1300c7

3570

Forum Posts

105

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

I... just wanted Battlefield 1942 with a Frostbite engine. That's all. Why do they have to overthink it?

Avatar image for boozak
BoOzak

2844

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#16  Edited By BoOzak

I see they've taken cues from the Deep Down trailer 'Hey guys look the HUD! It's totally gameplay!!' (i'm sure it will be very pretty just like all of DICE's games, but come on.)

I just wish I liked using WWII weapons in multiplayer and that DICE's campaigns didnt always suck because some of the stuff they say they're adding seems pretty cool.

Avatar image for oursin_360
OurSin_360

6623

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Did giantbomb talk over this? I am more interested in that tbh.

Avatar image for hayt
Hayt

1794

Forum Posts

548

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

@oursin_360: Unlikely. I don't think any of them really play Battlefield.

Avatar image for oursin_360
OurSin_360

6623

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19  Edited By OurSin_360

@hayt: I believe vinny does

Avatar image for blackout62
Blackout62

2241

Forum Posts

84

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 11

Well contrary to what seems like popular opinion I'm honestly enticed by everything I've seen so far.

Avatar image for hayt
Hayt

1794

Forum Posts

548

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

@blackout62: gameplay wise it sounds very enticing but I am just blindsided by how stupid the player customisation looks. Battlefield 1 had great looking player models and although they weren't super accurate they didn't look like a time travelling biker gang.

Avatar image for pie
Pie

7370

Forum Posts

515

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

@blackout62: yip same. If people want the same old drab ass WW2 go play COD:WW2 maybe the drabbest looking WW2 thing ever. I love what their doing with the animations and how colourful they seem to be making it. And heck yeah I wanna play as a lady with a roboarm who beats people with a cricket bat. Why nottttttttttttttt

Avatar image for whitestripes09
Whitestripes09

959

Forum Posts

35

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#23  Edited By Whitestripes09

I really don't like the tone that they are going with this and wished it was a different art style than Battlefield 1. It all looks really cartoony and goofy, which I really don't like. If they had told me it was an alternate universe inspired by WWII, I might have actually been all for it. All of it looks like a bunch of period "Accurate" pieces thrown into a giant costume party.

It reminds me of that long lost free to play Battlefield Heroes game and with all the talk about cosmetic skins, it might as well be.

Avatar image for hayt
Hayt

1794

Forum Posts

548

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

@pie: You're allowed to like the style but to answer your "why not" I feel like it's a waste of the setting and slightly infantile to have Kratos looking men and Phantom Pain looking women in something purporting to have a historical setting. It is and was a pretty significant conflict and putting in pure fantasy cheapens it.

You don't have to agree but that's my view.

Avatar image for pauljeremiah
pauljeremiah

253

Forum Posts

4

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

Details from the PC Gamer article: https://www.pcgamer.com/everything-you-need-to-know-about-battlefield-5/

* No Season Pass

* Launch locations are France, Africa and Rottedam and North Africa desert

* Coop Mode called Combined Arms

* Single player War Stories return

* Fortifications are things like sand ags, trenches, tank stoppers. Only supports can build offensively defense fortifications such as machine guns, field cannons and are much faster at building everything.

* Predetermined areas to build such as at flags, can rebuild destroyed buildings

* Health bar is in stages, only regen up to closet stage not to 100 anymore

* Physical interactions - every action in the game requires a player interact for things like medkits, spotting, ammo, ledge grabbing (example: healing requires walking over to a health pack, character animation to pick it up, then start healing)

* No more HUD/map spotting, spotting is based on movement/changes around you

* Much less ammo on spawn, out of ammo after a few fights, but more ways to resupply ammo in the battlefield from packs, crates, or grabbing small amounts of ammo off of bodies (all requires physical interactions)

* Revive systea m has a full on animation, takes a few seconds to complete, no more revive trains, takes time to complete

* Ragdolls are server side, can now drag a downed player's body elsewhere

* Any class can do a squad revive, takes longer than a medic revive, does not give full health points

* Can call for help when down such as in the trailer

* Ragdolls (player bodies) effect the environment, push down grass etc.

* Gunplay completely changed

* No more visual recoil

* Each gun has a unique recoil pattern that can be learned and mastered

* Bipods easier to use and setup

* Bullet penetration through thin wood, sheet metal, walls

* Movement change, can now dive froward, backward, left and right similar to R6 Siege prone system

* Diving has a delay to prevent dolphin diving

* Crouch sprinting is in the game

* Can burst out of widows and commando roll, no destroying windows first

* Can catch, throwback or shoot grenades

* Less grenades because less ammo

* Can tow items in the game with vehicles such as previously stationary anti-air guns, teammate can use an anti-air gun while you tow it with a vehicle

* For example, can drive a tiger tank towing a field cannon behind it or a truck towing ammo crate to resupply teammates on the front line

* Destruction explodes inwards or outwards based on where the destruction happens. Throw a grenade inside of the building? The explosion sends things outside of it. Outside of it? Breaks inwards.

* Tank driving into a building slowly destroys a building, walls slowly crack/fall, not instant

* Heavily focused on squad play, instant placed in squad when joining a game

* New squad spawning system, squad deploy system that shows what squad mates are doing in third person in real time before the tactical map screen, so spawning on squad is kicker than spawning on tactical map screen

* Since squad spawning/deploying is faster than tactical map, squad wipes are serious

* Squads accumulate points that can be spent on "squad call-ins", only squad leader can spend them in

* Squad Call-ins are V1 or JB2 rockets as seen in the trailer, supply drops with ammo/health, a smoke barrage, heavy weapon pickups (not hero kits), squad only vehicles such as Churchill crocodile flamethrower tank or the Sturm tiger

* Elite classes are gone

* Behemoths are gone

* Large, non-fatal explosions can knock a player over

* Four classes are back: assault, medic, scout, support

* Create a solider, add them to a company of soldiers, then can customize things like gender, face look, face paint, outfit, accessories, etc. and assign them a class archtype

* Class archetypes highly customization

* Can be an assault that specializes in anti-tank or anti-infantry only, or a mix of both, etc.

* Highly specialized archetypes called exotics such as a recon paratrooper, stealthy short-range behind enemy lines person who uses a suppressed SMG and silent gadgets like pistols and garrotes comes with silent footsteps and throwing knives

* Can change and add specialization trees such as agility, flak armor, suppressive resistance

* The more you play a class more you get more specializations/archetypes within said class

* Same system for guns, pick a gun, level it up, unlock specializations and making gameplay choices in a skill tree on that gun

* Specializations are the only thing that affects how a gun plays or feels (ex: bipod)

* Five-seven elements to change on a gun to make it your own (stocks, sights, muzzles, chassis, skins, leaves on the front, cloth on back, straps, etc).

* Gameplay and visual customization is SEPARATE. Look of weapon is just visual without impacting gameplay, specialization is what determines how the gun plays/feels.

* Same system for vehicles and planes

* Asymmetric vehicles for teams, (ex: one team might get a big slow tank that does lot of damage, other team gets a small fast tank that does light damage)

* Grand Operations gamemode, each day is a full match, always advance to the next day

* GOs have different objectives per day

* Success or failure in GO days have visual and gameplay impact

* Day 4 only has a chance to happen if there isn't a clear winner from previous days

* Day 4 is last stand, limited ammo, no respawns, whoever lives to the end wins

* Coop mode, combined arms with a dynamic mission creator/AI that sits between SP/MP as a creative sandbox

* Soldiers created for a company can be used in both coop and MP, parity

* No news on suppression yet, uncertain if in game


* All logic in game is server side, not client side so changes to systems do not require a patch

* Promises of more communication between devs and community, roadmaps, etc.

* New content is called Tides of war, daily/weekly/monthly challenges with overarching chapters and questlines that give you "unique items and cosmetics"


* Tides of War givs new maps, game modes, limited time expierences

* Variety of maps with different tones such as complete crushing battlefield chaos or more slow space large maps with tempo that goes up and down

* Gamemodes confirmed: Grand Operations, Conquest, TDM, Domination

* No news on RSP


* The Shhhh animation from the trailer is possible to experience in game

* Transport vehicles are alive on the map and can jump into them


* Combat vehicles spawn from tactical deployment map

Avatar image for bigboss1911
BigBoss1911

2956

Forum Posts

488

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 3

Good god was that trailer a cringe fest. I think Wolfenstein might be more historically accurate than this.

Was really hoping it would be Vietnam.

Avatar image for captain_insano
Captain_Insano

3648

Forum Posts

841

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 15

Only seen the trailer.

It doesn't feel like WW2, even though it's set in WW2? If it is some weird alternate history version of WW2, I may be interested, but if this is meant to be like, proper WW2, then the tone feels way off.

Avatar image for minipato
MiniPato

3030

Forum Posts

3

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@hayt said:

@pie: You're allowed to like the style but to answer your "why not" I feel like it's a waste of the setting and slightly infantile to have Kratos looking men and Phantom Pain looking women in something purporting to have a historical setting. It is and was a pretty significant conflict and putting in pure fantasy cheapens it.

You don't have to agree but that's my view.

The WWII setting has been re-purposed in film and television for all kinds of genres including comedy and campy action movies. Turning WWI and WW2 into a virtual sport where you gain points and exp for killing people already cheapens the conflict.

Avatar image for hayt
Hayt

1794

Forum Posts

548

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

@minipato: if you can't see the difference between a WW2 videogame with soldiers who look like soldiers from WW2 and what we got in the trailer we have nothing to talk about.

Avatar image for hayt
Hayt

1794

Forum Posts

548

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

@pauljeremiah: yeah that's a great article. The gameplay side of things sounds very promising.

Avatar image for luchalma
Luchalma

574

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Based entirely on just what I've seen in the trailer, this will be the first Battlefield I pass on. It could change. But really I doubt it as I'm not sure I'm looking for another Battlefield these days.

Avatar image for doctordonkey
doctordonkey

2099

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#32  Edited By doctordonkey

That was the most disjointed trailer I have ever witnessed. What the hell is even going on? It's like trying to be real and alternate history and steampunk all at the same time. It opens like it's part of the campaign, but then shows multiplayer UI elements. "Squadmate spawned on you" in a cinematic moment. What on earth.

Avatar image for hippie_genocide
hippie_genocide

2555

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

It's not Bad Company 3 so I don't care. That trailer was ridiculous to the point of being absurd.

Avatar image for mightyduck
MightyDuck

2276

Forum Posts

6751

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: -1

I'm not really sure what to think at this point.

Honestly, I just wanted them to take the progress they made with Battlefield 1 and place it in a World War II setting. Something about the goofiness from the trailer just sorta rubs me the wrong way. Like others had mentioned, if they prefaced it by saying, "this isn't going to be your typical WWII take" then maybe I'd be more excited.

That being said, it's only the first trailer. I'll see what else they show at E3.

For some reason, I'm sort of more excited for Black Ops 4. I honestly don't know why.

Avatar image for minipato
MiniPato

3030

Forum Posts

3

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35  Edited By MiniPato

@hayt said:

@minipato: if you can't see the difference between a WW2 videogame with soldiers who look like soldiers from WW2 and what we got in the trailer we have nothing to talk about.

I feel like you're putting words in my mouth and responding with a post that has nothing to do with what I actually said.

My point is that the WWII era in general has been appropriated for a long time in other media in a way that you could consider disrespectful and cheapening the historical conflict. Exp tickers for killing enemies and leveling up already cheapens the conflict. Is making World War 1 and WWII a "fun" videogame experience ever going to be respectful? Wild avatar customization is just the next step in the videogamifying of historical events.

Avatar image for captain_insano
Captain_Insano

3648

Forum Posts

841

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 15

On the one hand, I think the trailer captures some of the insanity of a Battlefield game - Vehicles everywhere, planes everywhere etc, though the brief bit of gameplay the guy is racking up kills way too easily.

For me, the tone just seems way off for a WW2 game. It's not even the colour saturation, just the general feel of it is really weird - I think it was the weird arm prosthetic and the club at the end that was quite off.

If this is some weird steampunk WW2 universe, cool, I'm all for it. I don't mind a 'fake' WW2 if that is the point of it (Inglorious Basterds for example), otherwise, I'll take a 'serious' WW2 (Saving Private Ryan).

I'm just not sure what this game is going for. Early days I suppose. I liked Battlefield 1, and don't mind a return to WW2, but it'll need to really sell me for me to jump back into it. I played BF1 for 20 - 30 hours then fell off pretty hard.

Avatar image for ssully
SSully

5752

Forum Posts

315

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

I think it looks cool, I am interested in seeing some unedited gameplay though.

Also I don't give a fuck about historical accuracy. Plenty of games out that that do that, and it's fun when you want it, but it has limited appeal.

Avatar image for thepanzini
ThePanzini

982

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Battlefield V sounds like its making fundamental changed to the formula to slow down the gameplay and add more tactical depth, but the trailer was bombastic Hollywood nonsense and the event itself talked alot and said nothing. Noah was a very good host though, but needing to watch JackFrags after the event renders the whole thing kinda pointless.

Avatar image for hayt
Hayt

1794

Forum Posts

548

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

@minipato: Okay allow me to be clear then. Picking WW2 as your setting then using stuff like Woad facepaint on British soldiers with katanas and female British soldiers with mechanical arms and barbed wire covered cricket bats is fucking stupid. It is stupid in most contexts but especially stupid in the context of a Battlefield game. It looks bad and reeks of deviant art fanfiction. Stuff like Inglorious Basterds didn't have people running around with battle axes and punisher facepaint because that shit is stupid.

Avatar image for thepanzini
ThePanzini

982

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@hayt: It's the cost of free maps, daft cosmetic items.

Avatar image for hayt
Hayt

1794

Forum Posts

548

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

@thepanzini: If Battlefront 2 is any example it won't even result in many free maps. I'd much rather pay for map packs to be totally honest.

Avatar image for moosefalva101
Moosefalva101

11

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#42  Edited By Moosefalva101

I see what you've done here, DICE. Welcome back, Undercover Battlefield 1942! So Much Promise! As an old hand, I'm going to be profoundly disappointed if I can't fly across the map with my entire friggin' team on the wings of my plane before skydiving en masse into a single jeep.

Cricket bat? Prosthetic claw? Silly leather jackets and face paint? Pedestrian distractions. I just need servers full of wild stunts happening all day for the purposes of posting videos to YouTube scored by alt-rock garbage!

Loading Video...

Avatar image for bicycleham
bicycleham

1441

Forum Posts

362

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

If they wanted to make a sillier version of WWII I dunno why this wasn't called Bad Company 3. The mainline games have usually had a pretty serious tone and this screams "We were supposed to make Bad Company 3 but a V on the box sells better."

Avatar image for theflamingo352
TheFlamingo352

470

Forum Posts

11

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@moosefalva101: Oh my god that video is fantastic, plane hopping is a Battlefield tradition.

From what I understand (via Jackfrags on Youtube) that trailer isn't very indicative of gameplay, so even though it looks bad, the changes being made sound pretty fun or smart across the board. I'm optimistic we'll get a better look at E3 here.

Avatar image for captain_insano
Captain_Insano

3648

Forum Posts

841

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 15

@theflamingo352: Then it has really failed in its purpose as a trailer. I think made worse by the fact that it tried to show like 30 seconds of 'gameplay' in it. Would've done better to be wholly cinematic, then have a gameplay trailer or "First Look" later.

Maybe I'm just the wrong demographic now. For me, the tone is the issue rather than the gameplay. I don't have a holier than thou attitude over using WW1 or WW2 as settings, I am just genuinely unsure of what tone this game is going for.

Avatar image for thetrashman
thetrashman

17

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#46  Edited By thetrashman

This is a real lame trailer. I'm not saying that Battlefield 1 was the most historically accurate, respectful portrayal of the Great War, but it always felt like there was a sense of grit and authenticity in its version of WW1. I was hoping that same tone but applied to ww2 for this and instead I got whatever that confused mess was.

Despite this, all the new gameplay changes sound really interesting and immersive. I wish they could've made that come across instead. Overall I'm just left confused.

Avatar image for charongreed
Charongreed

139

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

I really loved 4 and was initially pretty dissapointed by 1, but I ended up coming around on the scale and the destruction they were focusing on. But the stuff I didn't like about 1 were things like the awful announcer and the terrible UI that didn't fit the period and the lack of gun variety, not the tone of the gameplay. My initial reaction to V's trailer was 'oh man fuck this, this looks AWFUL' but reading back over it, I've cooled off a little bit. My biggest problem is that this feels like they saw Fortnite and said OH SHIT LET'S DO THAT, instead of 'where can we take this that would be really visually interesting and also let us push the gameplay forward', like they did with 1. Add to that the rumors of a Battle Royale mode and this seems like they're tripling down on a demographic that isn't me, making it super arcadey and approachable with cosmetics instead of making the physics just dumb enough that you could run jeeps full of C4 at tanks and crash jets into objectives. Battlefield has always been home to nonsense, but this isn't the brand of nonsense I want, I think.

Avatar image for atwa
Atwa

1692

Forum Posts

150

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 10

#48  Edited By Atwa

A whole lot of the feeling of authenticity goes right out the door when you bring in customization on this level into a game based of history. Like the bright blue face paint or the golden katana. Its a hard problem to try and solve. But I then think they should have found another way to monetize the game all together or alternatively just not gone back to world war 2 at all. Yeah the maps are free, but if the trade off is a complete loss of consistency in terms of art style I don't even see the point of going back to world war 2. It gets exacerbated when they hinge so much of the reveal on that very fact.

Largely what I expected though, Battlefield 1 took a step in this direction and this kind of just seems to continue on what that started. Its fine, there are so many games that offer historical accuracy though that I will stick to. I'd recommend anyone that wants accuracy to check out Hell Let Loose.

Also fuck that event was bad, really you just show concept art for 30 minutes and talk about the game, then tell everyone to come back in two weeks for actual gameplay? And of course, when you then put out a trailer that is bad and people only have that to judge you spell disaster right there. If they instead had the trailer and then actually showed a match or a mission to let it breath more you don't put all your bet on a single piece of media to determine the general perception.

Avatar image for machofantastico
MachoFantastico

6760

Forum Posts

24

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 73

User Lists: 4

I'd honestly be amazed if this game doesn't allow you to sit on the wing of a fighter plane.

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.