Never Be the Same
https://media.contentapi.ea.com/content/dam/bf/images/2018/05/horsepainting.jpg.adapt.crop191x100.1200w.jpg
On May 23, Battlefield will never be the same.
I will bet someone ten coins that it's BC3
A few years ago you would have gotten me excited? Now?
Whatever
Yeah.. It'll never be the same
can't wait to see yet another dice game go months inbetween significant updates and be stuffed with lootboxes
I reckon EA will announce it, but conveniently leave out the pay-to-win aspect of it until it launches, as always
I'm legit trying to think of how EA is going to monetize this game.
They obviously can't do lootboxes because of the massive PR mess that was Battlefront 2.
They can't do map packs because that's viewed as antiquated and they pretty much stepped away from it with Battlefront 2 and Titanfall 2.
Maybe, just maybe, they'll do purely cosmetic shit? Maybe a rotating cosmetic shop ala Fortnite?
the Battlefield will never be the same, starting with the Battle Royale mode that is exactly the same as all the others
Never underestimate EA's ways of finding how to fuck shit up
Leaks are trying to allege that this game is a return to WWII, but whatever it is, the modern shooter trend is dying, future space shit is dying, and trying to cash off of the World Wars more was already a drastic move that won't easily sell again like BF1 managed.
in before Napoleonic era
I half-expect them to actually go backwards but I have no clue how they're gonna do that. Barring a drastic move like going 19th century, I think it's pretty obviously gonna be WW2. They nailed a really nice balance in BF1 and I hope they don't go fuck it up with some crass monetization scheme for nu-BF2.
Please do 2143 or BC3 for the love of FUCK
We already know it's a WW2 game called Battlefield V
That's a shame - I was hoping for Vietnam 2.
Can't wait for Battlefield Royale.
I would really love some other historical setting than WW2. I remember going to an internet cafe after school with my friends playing Battlefield Vietnam and drinking slushice. Good times.
It'd be cool to see a game actually explore the korean war.
For a real blast to the past they could actually do a full expansion pack too for vietnam. Ofc that last bit is supremely unlikely
never don't not be afraid to be yourself
I hope the rumours of it being a WW2 game are true, i've seen a few people say things like "WW2 is overdone we've seen it all, it should be modern day!" but WW2 actually offers far more potenial variety in things like locations, armies, weapons, vehicles, battles etc than a later time period would. There are all sorts of things with it that haven't been seen in video games much or at all.
I think those hoping for BC3 multiplayer to be similar to how it was in BC1/2 (smaller scale battles, less vehicles, infantry focus etc) sort of miss why the games were like that in the first place. Wanting BC3 for the singleplayer campaign i can understand, but the general multiplayer gameplay being similar to how it played in those games doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
The whole reason for the Bad Company series in the first place was to bring the Battlefield experience games to console players in some form. The latest game before BC1 was 2142, a PC-exclusive released quite a few years before BC1 that played entirely different because of the engine and such. The game was designed with a console focus in mind to cater to that group of players who weren't used to Battlefield games - that focus bought with it certain caveats, such a no prone.
The Battlefield series has since then found it's way onto consoles without that console-based gameplay approach. The usual Battlefield gameplay is now accepted as the norm even on consoles, with games being pretty much unchanged between the PC and Console releases. Designing the game to be intended for consoles is no longer something that makes that much sense as for the past 3 (technically 4) games those players have been playing the typical full Battlefield gameplay rather than a more limited, smaller version.
The games were and are fun, but the multiplayer gameplay has gone in other directions since then - Bad Company 1 and 2 were intended to introduce X360/PS3 players to the series with more console-specific gameplay and an experience designed specifically for them. That reason for the gameplay being like that in the first place is no longer there.
The original rumor before the BFV one was that it was going to be BC3, then it was changed to a WW2 game in 2018, and BC3 two years later.
To be honest im up for anything as long as its good
This is just my opinion, but I don't think they're going to be able to pull off the hype that they did with BF1. That reveal was almost perfectly executed to generate excitement for the game, partially because it was set in a time period that wasn't really done often at all.
WW2 isn't going to get that sort of excitement. It was just done for the thousandth time with CoD WW2, and while they died off for a bit, WW2 games are abundant and there isn't really much they'll be able to do to make it different enough to be exciting.
If they pull off some sort of massive switcheroo and it turns out they purposefully leaked fake information and it's actually 2143, Bad Company 3, or even just Battlefield 5, that would probably grab more hype. Especially if it's 2143. People would lose their minds.
$60 for a re-skin of BF1. No thanks. I'd rather play Solitaire.
It's probably never gonna happen, but I always wondered if they ever considered doing a completely out there fictional setting, like a mixture of fantasy and sci-fi with magic vs space tech sort of deal, and dragons vs. spaceships and the likes.
I don't play EA games but I thought BF1 was generally accepted as a good game?
Why would you think a WW2 setting would be a "reskin of BF1"? Battlefield is a series that has a specific style of gameplay with the theme being what primarily changes between titles along with a few adjustments to that experience in order to fit the theme properly. A WW1 and WW2-Battlefield game are going to play roughly similarly because they're still a Battlefield game and that's just how a Battlefield game without things like lock on weapons plays. Of course the core gameplay is going to stay the same, that doesn't make the game a reskin.
Hell, Battlefield 1 basically played like a ww2 game with a ww1 skin. Though even in WW2 SMGs weren't so prolific, though they were definitely more prolific than they were in WW1
I'm probably the minority here, but I wish there was a more realistic WW1 game. And I know someone would mention Verdun, but that game has people just bunnyhopping around with bolties trying to dodge other people who are bunnyhopping around. Pretty sure that's not how it went back then either
Battlefield: Vertigo
Vertigo from the amount of cash they will be making from lootboxes.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
