Follow TV Tropes
I prefer to call them by their classical term, misogynistic self-deceived losers. It's longer, but has more impact. You know, the comparison between a 9mm Parabellum to a .50 BMG.
I also hate what we did with the word literally.
Edited by VutherA on Feb 8th 2019 at 9:25:41 AM
sure tom,. incels do0nt exist. i mean they call themselves that on their own forums while bandying about a dozen buzzwords that mean nothing to anyone but then, but its all a conspiracy to girlify their precious shootygames.
How about "The Unfuckables"?
And now you have me wondering if they already came up with that nickname somewhere on the net.
...but that would mean having to dig through 4Chan's endless garbage and their Reddits, so nevermind.
Anyways, something to bring things back on topic. A player put together a video consisting of gameplay footage from both BF 1 and BFV, using live gameplay footage taken between December 2018 to January this year. Save for the obvious camera angling and video editing, the footage was completely unscripted, nor were any of the subjects filmed told of their participation... and you know what? Save for a few wonky FPS movement concessions, it's one solid trailer.
Edited by SgtRicko on Feb 10th 2019 at 1:11:13 AM
^ Which is ultimately sad that fans make much better trailers than DICE could possibly hope for right now.
Well excuse me, the story mode trailers have excellent sequences that I already repurposed for stream intros twice!
New Battle Royale mode.
After stewing for a bit, I felt right to only share my thoughts on BFV online as a vent as a longtime fan of the Battlefield series (I started with BFBC 2, but became more active as a fan in BF 3). Now I will be blunt and honest in saying that BFV has left me moving between a state of disappointment and frustration that ultimately leaves me tempted to stop playing it altogether.
I will confess and say that I was one of the few that thought the reveal trailer along with the more crazy customization and cosmetics was a bit ridiculous, but it wasn't because I didn't want women or minorities in my video games as I'm sure I will be accused of (Frankly I wanted female units to be historically accurate and present in the Russian and partisan forces, yet seeing as how the game's factions are simply divided into Allies and Axis...I can't exactly complain too much (especially at this rate I'm uncertain if either will even be integrated into the game at this point)) and was satisfied with the removal of the more egregious cosmetics such as the prosthetics (I am sorry, but no military of the era or even today would deploy crippled troops to the frontlines...and even if so it would have to be quite the exception)that I made the excuse to myself to purchase the game. (I would come to regret said decision however as the game was then discounted significantly weeks later...leaving other players who purchased it get wrecked)
And Frankly...while I enjoy the combat, the introduction of the buildable system and the detail the developers have placed into the vehicles and weapons...the game ultimately left me initially underwhelmed. The lack of overall content in maps, vehicles, and weapons made the game quickly feel repetitive and dissatisfying, to say the least. This is not getting into the issue that the game effectively releasing unfinished made me wonder why they did not wait until they had a more polished and complete product. I can look past the glitches, the mostly historically inaccurate and lackluster "war stories" (though the Last Tiger was a pleasant surprise), and initial balancing issues having played BF 4 at launch and experiencing the attempts at a story over the years...
Yet as time has passed, I cannot excuse the decisions DICE and EA have made on BFV that I ultimately believe will go unlooked over the political controversy, and might kill what is left of the game.
The first is the lack of content which I will characterize as EA effectively kicking DICE to death to release game after game every year without much time for development, the reuse of assets from BF 1 is clear and part of me wonders if the reason DICE did not attempt to do something more ambitious such as show the eastern front, or Pacific was due to a lack of time and resources, and the plentiful amount of BF 1 weapons that could be carried over to expand the still relatively minimal arsenal. With even fewer maps than BF 1 at launch and limited variety in characters despite having one of the in-depth customization systems in the franchise with only 2 factions (the Germans and Brits) the game just doesn't have enough I personally feel to keep players wanting to go back. While I appreciate the developers trying to show parts of WW 2 that are often overlooked, I feel that the lack of anything iconic to a gross majority of consumers may have done little to really keep peoples interest. Ultimately we do know that the game did underperform, and without a significant player base at launch...this leads to more problems down the line.
Secondly, EA and Dice do not know how to run games as a service model, and while I initially cheered that the developers removed the premium pass from the game...now I beg for it back now. The fact is...the current system of development of new content can best be described as the IV drip of a coma patient, with little expectation from consumers for their investment in time and money, and even less written down "so to speak" it has lead to much less content being released at a snails pace through their "tides of war" system. I was originally optimistic, believing that the past two chapters of tides of war were just filler for them to really develop some impressive stuff for later seasons...yet come to the most recent chapter "firestorm" I have been let down as in the next 3 weeks the only new weapon being released...is a fire ax, and in the next 2 seasons up to the fall we are getting at best 3 maps...between the Germans and the brits...on Greece and likely one other location. Only for this fall to bring likely the Pacific theater into the game...and we have no idea to how much content that will truly bring with it. It leaves me depressed as I come to realize that this is EA's Star Wars Battlefront 2 all over again, and the point of the games as a service model has been rendered mute as the lack of microtransactions has made the games post-purchase profit been effectively nil...and even when said microtransactions will arrive I fear the remaining fanbase will not be enough players to make up for that loss or make a significant profit...and I fear this respect has ultimately made EA cut resources to DICE and pressure them to focus on the development of a new product behind the scenes rather than make BFV truly exceptional.
Finally, I will say bluntly, The inclusion of battle royale...Having played it myself, still hasn't justified its inclusion into the game. When the New firestorms competition is games that can focus development primarily on battle royale as a mode...developing content for it and refining it, all while often being free to play. I cannot understand the logic of why this mode was included in the game, as it can't feasibly compete in the long run against its competition in its current state (especially with the lack of developed microtransactions and initial purchasing price) ...War stories, combined arms, firestorm...all of these things took time and resources away from developing Battlefield 5 into a far superior multiplayer shooter than it currently is, and the sad part is that the game has elements that contribute well to it being a multiplayer team-based shooter that if expanded and fleshed out with more content could make a game I would love to come back to week after week as new content is introduced.
Ultimately the game has left a very sour taste in my mouth, as frankly, I think battlefield V has developed an identity crisis as it attempts and fails to follow current trends in gaming that ultimately the franchise itself was not tailored exclusively too. I know this post will likely be torn apart for one reason for another, but I just wanted to vent and share my piece as frankly...the game just keeps letting me down, and I wonder if others feel the same.
Regarding the identity crisis, I'll agree with you on that. It's like DICE is flinging a bunch of random ideas and gimmicks at the board in hopes at least some will stick, but the result is a confused product, that while claiming to be an accurate representation of WWII, has a bunch of jarring inconsistencies that ruin the feeling of authenticity, both in terms of gameplay and the historical setting.
Plus, this is easily the most difficult battlefield title of the bunch. After hopping back into the scene recently, I'm noticing why people were complaining about the Time-to-Kill being far shorter and unforgiving. I thought it was the ping-times at first (which, due to the way the battlefield games handled latency in the past, you can get some REALLY wonky results), but after playing on a few maps with my ping in the green between 100-135 ms, I'm led to believe otherwise. Especially when somebody wielding the MG 42 or MG 34 somehow manages to accurately gun me down in seconds WITHOUT going prone or deploying the bipod. Can't put my finger on just what exactly is the cause though, because as far as I can tell the biggest change was to the movement system and sprint speed, while the gun mechanics are mostly the same.
At least I haven't ran into any hackers yet, and I'm usually on servers with a large Asian/Chinese population.
^ I agree quite a bit.
I will say that personally, I think they also in the removal of some gameplay aspects from BF 1 have to lead to less variety...
I will not defend behemoths and elites (despite the later maybe being able to be retooled into interesting or functional interpretations), but I feel that the lack of a cavalry equivalent had removed a potentially interesting dynamic of swift lite glass cannons into the game.
Now Hear me out, actual cavalry in ww2 would be pretty dumb, but I think that it could be instead substituted for the potential inclusion of "tankettes" as their own class of vehicle that has its own values. A much more nimble, anti-infantry and light vehicles class of vehicle with at the most 2 people operating it, yet its armor is relatively light (a grenade might do a 1/4th of its health in damage, a rocket launcher or tank strike could probably do 45 damage) and its weaponry is relatively light in comparison to other vehicles. The inclusion could also help represent Italian, Japanese, and other nations armor and introduce more content.
It's wishful thinking, but the fact is that the conflict currently in the game is...underwhelming. I can understand if this is due to the current restraint of only 64 players per a map (frankly I think that it could be upped to 88 players or more) Yet I would prefer a more active, more chaotic battlefield with more vehicles and players, rather than the "pretty" but bland maps we have currently. I will say this unpopular opinion...if battlefields map graphics went back to BF 4 or hardline levels of quality, in exchange for more overall content, and a more active and intense battlefield I would have to say I would take it.
More like most frustrating. There's very little difficulty curve to anything. Partially because pretty much the entire small arms arsenal fires essentially laser beams with lightning fast time to kill. It's no different than Call of Duty's gunplay minus that it doesn't have Hitscan. Partially because everything's so geared towards creating infantry meatgrinders with weak or irrelevant vehicles or gameplay loops where anything else like a bomber seems horrifically out of place. And then there's the spammed out killstreaks "Squad call-ins" which really means a V1 or artillery strike.
Couple that with extremely poor visibility of soldiers friendly or enemy (there are HUNDREDS of You Tube videos proving this), exceptionally poor class and weapon balance, clunky gameplay mechanics (Press X to teamwork) and very little gameplay depth and you end up with simply nothing but frustration.
And that's ignoring the hundreds of bugs in various states of severity from annoying but inconsequential to downright game breaking.
Eh, the gameplay has more depth than anything from the COD games... maybe not Titanfall 1/2 though. Definitely nowhere near close to R6: Siege.
Personally I think the biggest problem is unfortunately something very integral to the Battlefield series: the huge player count. Ultimately, no matter how well you play, the only true winning method is going to depend on the average amount of players who decided to aggressively push objectives, not die, and consistently re-take objectives via infantry mobs. That, or just merely running into the meatgrinder locations on the map in hopes of gaining exp, or attempting to fulfill the tasks related to the numerous assignments required to unlock most of the expansion weaponry.
Guess that kinda raises the question: what would you implement if you had the opportunity to completely overhaul the infantry mechanics of BFV? Or step further, perhaps develop a completely new sequel?
First off, eliminate the grindy and often esoteric assignments system and unlocks in general. A complete overhaul is needed if such a system is to return at all.
Secondly, faction weapons. It wasn't enough in BF 3 to do it but what faction weapon systems there were were done somewhat well. It was even better in BF 2 or 1942. No more of this play with your favorite toy at all times garbage. Same deal with vehicles. And no more obsessions with experimental, prototype or showroom guns that go/went nowhere.
Third, damage by caliber eliminated. No more uniform weapon damage. It doesn't behave that way in reality, it doesn't make good gameplay either.
Fourth, throwbacks to the BF 3 and earlier eras in the return of vehicles to map specific spawns and physical existence. No more spawn menu tripe. This includes runways/carriers for planes and helicopters. And yes this means if you get shot down out of a plane or abandon a burning tank to die, you will have long walks/swims back to base for a new one.
Fifth, pare down the bloat of gadgets. We don't need 5 bazillion ways of resupply or health. A singular medkit or ammo box gadget will do for each. (Or eliminate the concern altogether and have supply crates on flags/bases with full Regenerating Health otherwise.) Similarly, gadgets will be faction locked. No more PIAT's on Germans or SMAW's on Chinese for example.
Sixth, gimmicky mechanics such as Levolution, Behemoths and Attrition are terminated and ignored.
Seventh, the return of spread. First shots in gunplay may be accurate to long ranges but subsequent shots might not be and magdumping will most definitely NOT be accurate at long range fire (off a bipod). We return the gunplay depth of BF 3 with the return of spread and unique recoil patterns for example a weapon always pulls up and left during firing.
Eighth, map design. Give us some space between flags and the flags themselves will have benefits and reasons worth fighting over be it (additional) vehicle spawns, defensive emplacements that may or may not cover other flags, ammo boxes, jump off points that prove tactically advantageous in controlling other flags (for example the Hilltop flag on Caspian Border in BF 3 or the B flag on Seine Crossing the name of which eludes me right now) and perhaps more. Similarly, the maps will have minor alterations based on the mode, for example defensive emplacements face the direction of the Attackers spawns (generally) in modes like Rush and Breakthrough.
Ninth, numerous fixes especially to audio. Sound will carry for long long ranges. We are not going to have ninja planes that can't be heard until the ground all around you starts exploding Ilya Muromets/JU-88 style. You'll hear stuff coming. Same deal with visibility, you'll be able to see the enemy without spotting from a long ways off.
And that's but a few as I've lost my train of thought writing this far.
Edited by MajorTom on Mar 31st 2019 at 12:49:31 PM
Most frustrating? Shirley, you jest. BFV removed the cheapest weapon of BF 1, that is, mortars and indirect-fire artillery in general. The calldowns require a lot of points gained across the squad and are pretty telegraphed (V1 can be heard all over the map, and the artillery strike starts with noticeable red smoke which means you should haul ass outta there).
Full Regenerating Health is bullshit. They had it in BF 1. You just had to lay down for a bit and then you could go right back into the fray. Haha, nope. Those medkits, in two varieties, either taken from crates (deployed by medics and available at control points) or directly chucked at you by medics, work fine and require you to play cautiously.
The vehicles feel noticeably weaker, which surprisingly is a good thing as I still remember how much havoc you could cause with nothing but a Renault FT in BF 1. This includes squad calldowns like the Sturmtiger and Crocodile (hint, the Crocodile is useless, and Sturmtiger needs at least two or better three people to operate).
There are tankettes, thank you very much. The Staghound and Panzer 38 fare best against infantry and transports - they can't do shit against the bigger tanks, but the bigger tanks and tank destroyers are very vulnerable to the Assault class' anti-armor weaponry.
As for the visibility... You want visibility, put on that top-tier Season 2 reward Allied uniform (I forgot how it's called, the mountaineer getup). But don't go around crying there's working camo in the game. I find the extra challenge of spotting enemies via tracers, muzzle flashes and scope glint stressful, but not really game-breaking. Particularly considering that I kitted my Allied Assault loadout in grey and German Assault in green on purpose (And It Worked - despite the fact that the German Assault wears a bergmutze, which should tip more observant players off). I'm glad they removed BF 1's spammable spotting mechanics that allowed you to mash Q and just shoot at any red markers that showed up. Also, playing the Firestorm mode I realized one thing: it's not that something is wrong with the audio, it works in Firestorm well, thank you very much. The problem is, a battlefield is a cacophonous clusterfuck.
And finally... Christ on a biscuit, no fucking vehicles spawning outta bumfuck nowhere, unattended, every minute and a half or so. The vehicles in BFV can be requisitioned only from the main base spawns or specially designated control points (and not on every map, mind you), preventing the exact specific cheap bullshit I reasonably assume a lot of people griped about in the old BF games (I recall my buddy's stories of rigging helis in enemy base with C4, laying low and blowing them the fuck up when someone had the bright idea to jump in and do something).
The only problem I have with BFV is Suomi in the Firestorm mode. Nerf that fucker, and buff the Auto-5 instead. Auto-5 is crap compared to the M1897 for no reason, and if Suomi can kill you faster than an assault rifle, something's wrong.
It is. I have not seen any feature of BFV that is genuinely long term fun. Not one.
The poor balance and poor technical competence of the game doesn't aid any of it either.
And don't call me Shirley.
The reason why medkits fell out of favor in FPS games over a decade ago is precisely what you mention. You had to play too cautiously, always playing a juggling game of "Find the medkit".
Single player games, multiplayer games it didn't matter. "Find the medkit" was a clunky cliche. Regenerating Health allowed for greater and more dynamic fights and tactics. It also allowed greater competitiveness by giving people a chance to keep going without hunting for medkits or being effortlessly killed by stray bullets simply because they're too far wounded to compete.
And given that BFV has twitch shooter time to kill which was originally designed around Regenerating Health (or at least that popularized the concept), anything less becomes very unfun outside of very very specific scenarios. (R6:Siege for example where rounds seldom last more than 5 minutes.)
You could kill a tank in two hits in BF 3 with a basic rocket launcher to the arse, even faster if using C4, well-aimed TOW missiles or clusters of mines.
Yet in BF 3 vehicles were not camping hills and good tankers (and good IFV drivers) could rampage across the map going 20-0 on a 12 v 12 round.
In BF 3, vehicles were powerful but vulnerable. You could solo them at high risk to yourself or pull together with teamwork and EFFORTLESSLY destroy them with (small) groups of people. The reverse was also true, poor solo play put your tank at high risk of being easily blown up, but teamwork could make your tank easily unstoppable and yet you didn't need teamwork. A lone but competent tanker would prove a formidable threat.
Real world soldiers are not invisible even with camouflage. You ever do the challenge of "Spot the sniper"? Take pictures of random wilderness, there's a guy in a ghillie suit in each, your mission is to find the sniper. (In this case it's German Bundeswehr.)
Guess what? In very few circumstances are even modern ghillie suits even close to invisible. These didn't exist in 1940.
And even worse for the arguments about visibility, poor contrast and poor visibility has been a chronic problem in BF games, it's why 3D spotting was put in, DICE could never make a satisfactory visibility without it.
A twin-engine (or more) bomber is not going to be quiet even over a cacophonous battlefield. You can hear planes coming in from kilometers away even in noisy environs.
Same deal with tank engines.
Why not? That was a core experience of many classic Battlefield maps. The flags held something like that instead of just being some space on a map for points.
Nowhere near as many people griped about spawnbombing or Jihad jeeps or stolen vehicles anywhere near as much about the problems of "power-up" vehicles a la BF 1/BFV. (Which is one of but a long list of idiotic "features" inspired by or cribbed from the lame modern Battlefront games.) You didn't have Mortar Truck morons, you didn't have Tigers camping hills, you didn't have Ilya Muromets bombers in a place or faction they didn't belong, you didn't have Mosquitos or other planes in places they had no reason to be in.
And spawn mining wasn't that much an issue as empty vehicles spawning onto the map would trigger mines and cause em to blow up, long before anybody would've possibly got in.
Also, they weren't indestructible when first spawned and empty too so blowing up empty vehicles that would never get used (like a jeep or tanks that all-but-instant respawned) had a fun factor to it.
Now all the classic elements of Battlefield vehicle play are gone and we're left with this load of tripe it's become.
800+ rpm submachinegun designed around close quarters fighting beating a 600 rpm assault rifle that's not particularly excelling at any one task? Stop the presses! Look at how OP that is!
That's traditional FPS game balance in a nutshell. SMG > AR at close range < DMR at long range. The strength of an AR is its flexibility, it's not an "I win" button against weapons tailored to specific situations in those specific situations. A sloppy DMR or SMG should lose to a skilled AR but if both the AR and SMG are equally skilled then the advantage goes to the SMG in a close range fight.
Regenerating Health makes the Medic class obsolete, particularly in its BF 1 incarnation. BF 1 was a medic campfest, everyone had a Mondragon with a scope and a health crate and just camped on hills like Tiger tanks in BFV. The mechanics of BFV force you to either assault the control points or retreat to the ones you already control unless there's a medic with a nigh-useless short-range weapon behind you. Basically, the SMG might look underpowered in normal game modes because you have miles of range and any SMG gets promptly fucked by anything that can chuck lead farther, be it an AR, an SLR, an MG or a sniper rifle. So that bit makes sense. However, Firestorm throws half of that out the window, as there's a much larger chance someone's gonna flank you with a Suomi at FISH range and promptly fuck up your day.
That and, the reinforcement vehicles in BFV are nowhere near as powerful as BF 1's Behemoths. The supertank Behemoth was a monster, with unlimited mobility, absurd armor and massive firepower, it could turn the tide of battle rather easily as long as you weren't a complete potato. The armored train and dreadnought were no less of a pain in the ass with the artillery that played merry hell with pretty damn much everything, with the dreadnought keeping its distance from the main scuffle. The zeppelin was a bit more iffy, but it still could shit fire and piss brimstone on the field with little opposition. But, the artillery halftrack in BFV requires two people to operate (and it's squishy), the Sturmtiger isn't that much better than normal tank destroyers and the Crocodile is absolute trash.
Edited by NotSoBadassLongcoat on Apr 7th 2019 at 11:33:53 AM
I will say speaking about medics in BFV (being someone who is currently leveling and completing all the SMG assignments) feels more useless and redundant than the other classes.
I won't say that it doesn't have its benefits in the ability to heal on the move and the ability to revive faster...but the class itself has little unique aspects and legitimately "fun" elements to make it feel as enjoyable as other classes.
Outside of health and the ability to pick people up faster, what really sets the medic class apart from the others in value? It frankly just feels a bit too limited in playstyle and effective combat range and viability. I honestly don't understand why they hadn't given the semi-auto rifles to them as options to perhaps diversify their range from strictly short to short-mid range viability, along with gadgets like the normal grenade launcher or AT-pistole instead of the AP mine.
I guess I just feel bad for medics in BFV as there is nothing that really makes them "special" in comparison to other classes unlike past games, besides their weapons which frankly are most effective only in close range, where even they still must compete with some assault rifles and shotguns (though much less as shotguns have traditionally not been the best in battlefield).
The medkit mechanics are what makes the medics actually useful this time around. Everyone carries one medkit on them, and they can only resupply them at control points (and only assuming the enemies didn't trash the medical station), or get a new one from a medic.
Of course, 80% of medics cannot medic, like 80% tankers cannot drive a tank and 80% squad leaders cannot lead a squad.
Also, DICE just gave the medics a semi-auto rifle with a big-ass suppressor and a scope (the DeLisle Carbine of No One Lives Forever fame), so that one's gonna shuffle the meta.
If it's true to either the real-world version or "balanced", it's gonna have horrible bullet-drop and velocity, plus not very much damage.
It does have a "fast bullets" upgrade on the tree, and it deals 35 dmg with a body shot, on par with Assault's self-loading rifles. I think the range isn't anything special either, since I got shot with those from pretty close range.
I'll need to test it, though.
I will say with the addition of carbines into the medics weaponry the class has some potential to grow in viability (though I will admit I find it odd how the M1 Carbine is still under the assault classes "semi-auto rifles" despite literally having carbine in the name.) I guess the only issue now is in gadget variety for the medic.
Otherwise, I just hope more substantial content comes soon to keep the game kicking and exciting.
Community Showcase More