don't care for the graphics - too color saturated, and every structure looks flat. Plus the player movement is back to waddling like it was in BFBC2. And the perspective from player's view - its all closed in to the face, though it could be widened out in options using Depth. Again, I can't see the enemy that kills me till its done and dead. New game equals lost.
Compared to BF1, with its desaturated look and 3d effect or appearance, of structures, is the model to aim for. This game is a walk back.
Dice's Battlefield team still thinks they are competing with CoD. BF seems to be working to hold onto their market instead of pushing into new and innovative areas. That leaves them open for new games to come in and steal the show.
I think the last Battlefield I really liked was Bad Company 2, that said BF4 was really good by the end of the CTE program. I can't put my finger on why but BFOne was rubbish. You would think they would just reskin BF4 but somehow they screwed it up. I do think they know they did something wrong with BFOne as BFV is quite different. A greater focus on teamwork, removing 3D spotting. I'm put off by the price, these AAA games are getting silly. The worlds most popular games are either free or more than half the cost of AAA games.
Agreed with you on the cost of things for AAA games. It's typically over a $100 per game plus extra content now and from one game to the next it seems they still have the same problems they have had repeatedly as far as using the good things about the last game and keeping them the same on the new one. As we know, these studios, developers, and publishers are businesses first and foremost. I'm just happy there are still indie publishers that are around to make things fun and playable at an affordable price.
I do like the model used by Rainbow 6: Sige. You can get into the game with your friends for very little. I think I paid less the twelve quid. Found that I really like the game as spend more on some extra stuff. For those with really deep pockets, there is the skin's to buy. However, just because my clan mates have not spent any more money than the low entry price it doesn't stop them having fun with the game and it definitely doesn't stop them killing me in game!
Imagine if CoD had stopped with CoD:4 and everything since had been a season pass like R6S. Everyone would have gotten the new maps and could play together but only those that paid the extra would gain the new features and classes. You would be able to grind to earn them but those with money would buy there way to wall running and jump packs. CoD would be the biggest game there is today. But instead, they made separate games that separate the player base diluting it to the point where who plays CoD on the PC anymore? Much the same could be said for Battlefield if it had followed the R6S model.
I don't know what you all are talking about. Never tried BF1 beyond the beta? It's the best BF game ever. Team play is there with 5 man squads. All you gotta do is play the PTFO. And it has been "typically over a $100 per game" since BF3. BFBC2 was the last game to have free premium maps.
BF V has no charge for premium maps - you pay the standard $60 for the game - which is - apart from some console games - is STANDARD.
BF1 has it all - ships, pt boats, dreadnought and airship and train behemoths - gone in BF V - a full array of tankers, artillery trucks, planes and bombers, flamethrowers, trench raider and sentry gun - all pickup kits. My only complaint - and it goes away thru time - is the lack of true hardcore servers. Instead of using player health percentage, BF1 uses bullet damage, and it is set to 100% on all Dice servers, with a few hardcore servers set to 200%, along with some clan or individual rented servers. The bullet damage percentages run fro 100 to 200 - there are 2 middle spots - 125 and 150 or 175 - 200% is ridiculous. I ran a server for a short time at 125, and it was a much better hardcore experience.
Plus the fact that you can only rent a server from Dice - they've been doing some strange re-locating of servers apparently on the fly. You can trace them with a 3rd party app, but for America, you get only Dice servers listed as either East or West. The individual or clan rented servers are usually not descriptive in their server names about East or West. And that there is no 3rd party admin. I'm fearful of what will be taken away from BF V.
But again - BF1 is truly a model of audio/graphic immersion on a gaming experience, only BF2 approaches it for totality, and its 13 years old.
Oh, just for you infos - just about all of the map paks for BF1 have been made free to everyone in the last half year or so.
The initial 9 maps were accompanied by a Dec 20 2016 free map, again on June 20 , july 18 and Aug 21 - all of 2017.
1st map pak - They shall not pass - 4 maps - free from May 2 to May 14.
2nd map pak - In the Name of the Tsar - 6 maps - available starting from May 22 and again available until June 11.
3rd map pak - 4 maps - available until July 17 - my notes show that the 2 water map were released 1.5 months after the Turning Tides release on Dec 11 2017.
4th map pak - 5 maps - Apocalypse - has yet to be made free. At various times, players without premium maps are allowed for a week or two at a time, to play with their friends - friends made thru Origin - on premium maps.
I played BF1 extensively. I found it good - not great. It just seemed very repetitive.
I actually don't have a problem with the price. I basically play one game at a time and if its good I often will play it for a 1-3 years.
With BF1 I was intrigued by the setting and the breadth. But it just wasn't the same level as fun as the prior games (BF4, BF3, BF:BC2). I'm a big battlefield fan. However, I don't plan on buying BF-V unless the reviews are stellar. Its looks similar to BF1 with a new setting. Guess I will continue playing PUBG.