Thread 716470743

Who asked for this?

EA investors wanting a CoD Warzone killer

>>716470743 (OP)
me. I like battlefield

COD players aka Bad Company 2 and onwards fans
And they will buy it

>>716470743 (OP)
EA higher ups stuck in the past
Ever since BF3 EA has been obsessed with trying to woo the COD audience
Battlefield being its own thing doesnt matter. EA wants COD kids for BF

>>716471098
Yep, and it will fail
COD is on it's deathbed

>>716470743 (OP)
If it's actually going to be a return to the kino days of battlefront then I asked for it. If its more "operator" or futuristic bullshit then nobody asked for it.

Loads of FPSfags? what a stupid question

>>716471241
Not sure why you're posting that to me. I think most people on this board prefer older battlefield games to the new ones.

>>716471342
>Not sure why you're posting that to me.

>>716470743 (OP)
>distracting content being banned everywhere by payment processors
>war glorification on the rise
Kek... Do you want me to explain what you're going to be doing three years from now? Or would you rather it be a surprise...

>>716471454
Send the niggers and the muslims, they love their host country so much!

>BF1
>Relegate the French as DLC on a conflict that happened mostly in France
>BF6
Make them only a villain by proxy with "a PMC mostly funded by them" instead of turning them into Belka with extra baguettes

>>716473013
BF1 was made for ameriniggers

>>716473013
Is it really the US/NATO vs some PMC instead of Russia or China? That's so gay.

>>716471152
>kino days of battlefront

>>716470743 (OP)
Me. I can't keep playing BF3 forever.

>>716474338
this but bf4

>>716473447
Yeah, from what I gathered it's a NATO coalition made out of Americans, Brits and Egyptians versus a PMC funded by rogue, "former" NATO nations like France and Spain, and for some reason, Algeria.

People like me who thought BF2/3/4 were the peak of the franchise but then got shit like BF1, BFV and worst of all, 2042.

>>716475591
It's literally BFV in modern setting

>>716470743 (OP)
me, i've been asking for a non shit battlefield game since 3
4s launch was so bad it ruined the game forever, i don't care if its fixed.

>>716474663
>pmcs bad
>all countries le good (except for a few rogue bad guys)
I hate this trend, lets just have a big fuckin dumb war over stupid shit as the main conflict again. Or just go back to cold war kino. do whatever, just not this faggot shit

>>716471147

Honest to God question. What will it take to kill Call of Duty? They've had titles like Infinite Warfare that received massive player backlash and even failed to meet sales expectations (essentially meaning that they lost money because they had to cover for the loss in profits by presumably axing other projects) and they still kept chugging along.

>>716476021
>literally BFV
>literally
>BFV
lol what

>>716471454
well its not fighting for israel they can handle iran just fine. They dont need fat american neets

>>716470743 (OP)
>old team got kicked off the project
>alpha footage looks okay
>a ton of the stuff DICE added over the years that no one liked is gone
>focusing on contemporary era conflict
>no piss filter
>no operators
>heavily focused on immersive visual effects and level destruction instead of fortnite style skins and dances
It may not ENTIRELY be shit.
It still very well could be given EA's track record and $80 is still a bullshit price, but it could possibly not suck completely.

>>716476115
>Honest to God question. What will it take to kill Call of Duty?
Wont happen, the people still playing are locked in for the long run.
It's like asking what would it take to kill WoW, you just can't, no matter how shitty or riddled with microtransactions it gets, there's still going to be millions that just can't not get the latest version and keep paying in to the system.

The only reason why they haven't done clown skins is because BF has been ass and niche since they started liveservice slop. If the game gets enough normgroids they will give it the CoD treatment. There's no way they'd do a free to play BR mode without ridiculous clown skins for normgroids to slurp up.

>>716475591
I liked BF1 atmosphere. But it still played like a CoD with SMGs being very strong and the guns that defined a lot of WW1(bolt action rifles) being bad and inconvenient.

>>716470743 (OP)
why why why did they put a strongk whomyn and a negro on the first PR picture they released.
like why do it when they KNOW they are in the shit right now with Battlefield?

>>716471147
Cod isn't really doing that bad nowadays, is it? I know there was some period of time where they pumped out a bunch of shitty games like vanguard and cold war or whatever.

Me

This looks like bf3 bf4 updated

I just fucking HOPE it 1. performance is good 2. less bugs than every single bf has had and needed 6+ months to fix shit

>>716479239
loved bf1s atmo
hated bf1s weapon naming scheme

>>716479327
there is a zero percent chance its that way.
they will continue to use their abysmal internal "server browser" and fuck up the tickrate immediately because people "die too fast"

>>716479239
This, was still pretty fun and not bad on sale. I do hope they get this right but I’m not gonna hold my breath.

I've seen videos and the guns still have no recoil and stay super accurate even when magdumping. I wanted a game where guns weren't so controllable so you couldn't instantly burst people down outside very close range. But I guess I was asking for something that was never going to happen so that's my fault really.

>>716479881
then you might not have seen recent vids

>>716470743 (OP)
>USA getting invaded in the modern day
I'm assuming a civil war isn't involved so how can we take this seriously as a premise?
It was laughable when Russia did it in MW2. It was even more laughable when North Korea did it in Homefront.
You want to have a war in the USA you need
>a civil war
>aliens
>100+ years timeskip

>>716470743 (OP)
I really hope that BF6 fails, and it looks that way. Battle passes, skins, probably collabs with marvel and dc. It will suck more ass than any bf before, which is quite an accomplishment, but at least they can blame the gamers for their feedback during dev kek.

Me

>>716470743 (OP)
I think EA will immediately shut down all BF servers except 2042 the day before SKG passes law.

>>716478905
the Fortnite style skins are coming, pretending otherwise is pure cope

>>716478905
This was literally what the 2042 showcases looked like before it was called 2042. It will be shit. Don't fall for it.

>>716482249
Nah 2042's beta was significantly worse then the alpha we've seen now. It might not be amazing but its not going to be 2042 tiered bad.

>>716483023
This assumes it is not going to get worse. They can't even decide between an open or closed weapon system. They written extremely lame lore for soldiers and factions, likely by chatgpt. They can and will be pressured to make it worse by the MBAs. Destruction will be taken away. They will be told to make their soldiers more fun looking. You seriously can't trust DICE after 2042, which was supposed to be the saviour of battlefield.

>>716483404
There's nothing inherently wrong with you're saying, but 2042 already had all of that so its not a downgrade technically.
But already the maps look better better and the gunplay looks about the same. There's already more weapons and the gadgets are less special snow flake tiered too. I'd have to play the beta first to see for myself of coarse.

>>716482249
2042 looked fine, actually great in initial previews. It was also advertised as a 'love letter to the fans' or whatever, which sounded great.
It was only when they revealed the hero/operator aspect that people started to worry, and those worries were confirmed in the first beta.
I still think it's funny as fuck that the BF advertised as a love letter ended up being the most radically different in the entire franchise, like what the fuck were they thinking?!

>>716473685
>I'm a dumb faggot with nothing to say but here's my faggot ass ESL gif for you.
Kill yourself

>>716483835
I remember as well how it was nearly a month before launch and we'd seen zero gameplay, like not one actual first-person real gameplay segment. And when they finally showed something it was the old as fuck preview they showed streamers that had like 4 seconds of gameplay in it as well. Compared to this release we have plenty of functional alpha leaks.

>>716483962
wtf just hit him with a brick

toss an axe wtf

why do people do unarmed combat

>>716478905
Don't even pretend that those shitty immersion breaking skins won't come post release. Not an EA game but you just have to look at Siege when it released compared to today. Nothing is stopping EA from pulling that same stunt

>>716470743 (OP)
I dunno, it's hard to judge off a trailer. But if they're going for the BF4 direction then i asked for it. It's just Dice came up with this far too late and now I'm involved in playing better games that are probably considered 'too hardcore' for the audience that Dice has fostered. I mean i think 83' is going to blow this game out of the water personally.

How did they fuck up destruction so badly? It's was what distinguished BF from other shooters back then. I guess they decided it was not worth the effort for the amount of "sales" it brings.

>>716484523
it must be heavy on the netcode/cpu, especially with 64 players.
Idk why they don't try something solid with 32 players first.
Anyway won't play this woke garbage in a "modern setting" that feels like 2003 in reality. Especially with these two generic factions.

>>716484523
They kept changing staff so much that new staff had no clue how the old engines worked and couldn't keep up the standard of destruction so they had to keep redoing it.

Why is that when i look up clips for this all i hear is women soldiers screaming all the time? it's weird. Is it because this some sort of static character no randomization between male and female? i don't like static characters regardless.

>>716476115
the same thing it will take to kill WoW, slow decline

>>716484761
>Why is that when i look up clips for this all i hear is women soldiers screaming all the time?
there are female soldiers, yes. it's randomized so that it's 50/50 female / male characters at any given point.

>>716470743 (OP)
Retards who think DICE has a chance at redemption

>>716484951
>it's randomized so that it's 50/50 female / male characters at any given point.
This + the pseudo "nato" vs merc are revolting

>>716478905
The alpha had low TTK to be like cod. It's over.

I haven't enjoyed a BF game since 4 and I barely enjoyed that one. I have zero confidence in DICE at this point.

>>716470894
Marky POV