# Can BF franchise succeed in this age of the casual gamer? **URL:** \ **Category:** General Discussion\ **Created:** [April 1, 2019, 4:40pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088 "2019-04-01T16:40:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![MAJWolfcookies](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@MAJWolfcookies](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/MAJWolfcookies)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2019, 11:20pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/21 "2019-04-01T23:20:00Z")
> [@warslag](#): > > They should just go back to a conquest only Battlefield and invest all their efforts into making it a really good game that people want to play. > > Also, I don’t know why you think that younger gamers or this gamer or that gamer is somehow worse. I’m playing Apex Legends and I can tell you that there are a lot of top players in that game. Agreed. Also, “casual gamer” doesn’t mean “worse gamer.” ---
**Author:** ![Noodlesocks](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/noodlesocks/32/101045_2.png) [@Noodlesocks](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Noodlesocks)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2019, 11:32pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/22 "2019-04-01T23:32:00Z")
> [@MAJWolfcookies](#): > > > [@Noodlesocks](#): > > > > It absolutely can but I don’t believe Dice Sweden are the people who can realise it. > > Realise what? The solution that I proposed? Success in this age of the casual gamer. It’s in the thread title. ---
**Author:** ![Titan\_Awaken](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/titan_awaken/32/103849_2.png) [@Titan\_Awaken](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Titan_Awaken)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2019, 12:08am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/23 "2019-04-02T00:08:00Z")
If games like Dark Souls, Bloodborne and Cuphead can succeed in this day and age, so can Battlefield. Those games are anything but ‘ **casual** ’, no matter how you interpret that word. Before anyone tears me to shreds for comparing Dark Souls to BF, I am just simply stating that there is a place in the market for hardcore games with sharp, unforgiving difficulty curves. ---
**Author:** ![kohagan1942](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/k/c5a1d2/32.png) [@kohagan1942](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/kohagan1942)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2019, 11:26am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/24 "2019-04-02T11:26:00Z")
> [@MAJWolfcookies](#): > > A team based FPS requires teamwork (duh) but not everyone got the memo. For the past few installments (esp BF1 and BFV), the servers are infested with oblivious players who don’t know what PTFO stands for. It’s shocking how clueless these players are. Perhaps this is the trend as gamers are becoming more casual, which isn’t necessarily congruous with modes like Conquest, Frontlines etc. > > Here’s a proposed solution: have the game make a suggestion to said worthless camping sniper on Conquest mode: Your gameplay suggests you are better suited for Team Deathmatch (or whatever). Press X to leave this server and to be sent to (whatever server). Worthless player leaves and next player (hopefully PTFO) in queue enters. This process is constant to ensure that right players are in the right servers which enhances experience for all. > > Kind of ambitious I know. Especially if DICE can’t fix the most basic bugs, but one can only hope. The most condescending post I’ve seen yet. Reeks of elitism toward others. Not everybody can commit x amount of hours in a day to the game to be considered hardcore. And for your Information bf3 was the start of the franchise becoming casual after BF2. if you played bf2 on pc, then you’d understand why I say this, so you’re very late to the party on that one. There’s always been campers, stationary players since way back to battlefield 2, whether it’s worthless is not decided by others. You can play how you want. Seeing as it’s generally hardcore players (which is a minority of the whole player base) complaining about casuals, how about they befriend each other through the forums and pisss off to their own matches, not radically change the whole game for a sub group. Can’t make a 32 v 32 hardcore friends? Now why doesn’t that surprise me. ---
**Author:** ![MAJWolfcookies](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@MAJWolfcookies](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/MAJWolfcookies)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2019, 2:14pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/25 "2019-04-02T14:14:00Z")
8 > [@kohagan1942](#): > > > [@MAJWolfcookies](#): > > > > A team based FPS requires teamwork (duh) but not everyone got the memo. For the past few installments (esp BF1 and BFV), the servers are infested with oblivious players who don’t know what PTFO stands for. It’s shocking how clueless these players are. Perhaps this is the trend as gamers are becoming more casual, which isn’t necessarily congruous with modes like Conquest, Frontlines etc. > > > > Here’s a proposed solution: have the game make a suggestion to said worthless camping sniper on Conquest mode: Your gameplay suggests you are better suited for Team Deathmatch (or whatever). Press X to leave this server and to be sent to (whatever server). Worthless player leaves and next player (hopefully PTFO) in queue enters. This process is constant to ensure that right players are in the right servers which enhances experience for all. > > > > Kind of ambitious I know. Especially if DICE can’t fix the most basic bugs, but one can only hope. > > The most condescending post I’ve seen yet. Reeks of elitism toward others. Not everybody can commit x amount of hours in a day to the game to be considered hardcore. > > And for your Information bf3 was the start of the franchise becoming casual after BF2. if you played bf2 on pc, then you’d understand why I say this, so you’re very late to the party on that one. > > There’s always been campers, stationary players since way back to battlefield 2, whether it’s worthless is not decided by others. You can play how you want. > > Seeing as it’s generally hardcore players (which is a minority of the whole player base) complaining about casuals, how about they befriend each other through the forums and pisss off to their own matches, not radically change the whole game for a sub group. > > Can’t make a 32 v 32 hardcore friends? Now why doesn’t that surprise me. Spot on. This post was undeniably directed at the likes of you. Feel that condensation flow inside of you… Ptfo or play a different model. ---
**Author:** ![MAJWolfcookies](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@MAJWolfcookies](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/MAJWolfcookies)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2019, 2:19pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/26 "2019-04-02T14:19:00Z")
> [@kohagan1942](#): > > > [@MAJWolfcookies](#): > > > > A team based FPS requires teamwork (duh) but not everyone got the memo. For the past few installments (esp BF1 and BFV), the servers are infested with oblivious players who don’t know what PTFO stands for. It’s shocking how clueless these players are. Perhaps this is the trend as gamers are becoming more casual, which isn’t necessarily congruous with modes like Conquest, Frontlines etc. > > > > Here’s a proposed solution: have the game make a suggestion to said worthless camping sniper on Conquest mode: Your gameplay suggests you are better suited for Team Deathmatch (or whatever). Press X to leave this server and to be sent to (whatever server). Worthless player leaves and next player (hopefully PTFO) in queue enters. This process is constant to ensure that right players are in the right servers which enhances experience for all. > > > > Kind of ambitious I know. Especially if DICE can’t fix the most basic bugs, but one can only hope. > > The most condescending post I’ve seen yet. Reeks of elitism toward others. Not everybody can commit x amount of hours in a day to the game to be considered hardcore. > > And for your Information bf3 was the start of the franchise becoming casual after BF2. if you played bf2 on pc, then you’d understand why I say this, so you’re very late to the party on that one. > > There’s always been campers, stationary players since way back to battlefield 2, whether it’s worthless is not decided by others. You can play how you want. > > Seeing as it’s generally hardcore players (which is a minority of the whole player base) complaining about casuals, how about they befriend each other through the forums and pisss off to their own matches, not radically change the whole game for a sub group. > > Can’t make a 32 v 32 hardcore friends? Now why doesn’t that surprise me. Spot on. That post was undeniably directed at the likes of you. Feel the disdain flow through you. PTFO or GTFO. It’s that simple. Play something else. ---
**Author:** ![Lexen](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/b2d939/32.png) [@Lexen](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Lexen)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2019, 2:51pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/27 "2019-04-02T14:51:00Z")
This won’t happen. Maybe in theory it could help, but it would never work. I know it’s frustrating when your team is dinking around doing who-knows-what, but at the same time, there are often assignments and things that pull your attention away from playing the game objective directly. Camping snipers isn’t a very good example either, since the very nature of that classes urges you to set up somewhere and snipe… Also, who gets on everyday and sweats about every single conquest match? Just have a good time. ---
**Author:** ![Squad\_Cohesion](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/squad_cohesion/32/103495_2.png) [@Squad\_Cohesion](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Squad_Cohesion)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2019, 2:53pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/28 "2019-04-02T14:53:00Z")
DICE already largely made CoD out of BF5 looking at the casual shallow gunmechanics so yes, DICE is surely trying to appeal to the K/D self-centered casual crowd. ---
**Author:** ![xBCxSEALxTEAMx6](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/x/97f17d/32.png) [@xBCxSEALxTEAMx6](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/xBCxSEALxTEAMx6)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2019, 3:05pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/29 "2019-04-02T15:05:00Z")
In a word, no. But that’s where they failed. If folks want to play some HC tactical shooter, they’ll play those dead niche games over on PC. Not a Triple A title BF. In fact, the only more or less hc tactical shooter that succeeded, was R6, but that’s 12 people clearing out rooms. Not a 64 player maelstrom. ---
**Author:** ![Ferdinand\_J\_Foch](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/ferdinand_j_foch/32/101936_2.png) [@Ferdinand\_J\_Foch](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Ferdinand_J_Foch)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2019, 3:14pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/30 "2019-04-02T15:14:00Z")
> [@Trokey66](#): > > @countblah06 you’re funny. Like a bad Lordmang but funny never the less. > > I wonder who’s alt you are? Oh hell … I remember Lordmang … I remember a time where (insert-term-here)-Eyed-Recons were commonplace, people called themselves ‘Johns’, Beholdo Jolumbo was a thing and Lordmang was running rampant on the old Battlelog forums. Good times. ---
**Author:** ![xBCxSEALxTEAMx6](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/x/97f17d/32.png) [@xBCxSEALxTEAMx6](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/xBCxSEALxTEAMx6)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2019, 3:20pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/31 "2019-04-02T15:20:00Z")
> [@TheyHaveScissors](#): > > DICE already largely made CoD out of BF5 looking at the casual shallow gunmechanics so yes, DICE is surely trying to appeal to the K/D self-centered casual crowd. Well, it’s kind of a double edged sword isn’t it. On the one hand, the fast ttk makes it COD, but punishingly slow respawn has more folks taking more caution, and the prone camping, making it more “hc”. So, both of these camps both disenfranchised. They love the fast ttk, but can’t run and gun like COD. While the hc enthusiasts have always been small in numbers. In the end, the COD crowd who came onto BF1 after the Infinite Warfail debacle, went back to COD. The Battle Royale folks went to Apex. The HC enthusiasts…left for no hc mode or rented servers, and the ones left, BF Vets like myself, are wondering what the hell happened to our game. And so, the game ends up dead. That’s my overall synopsis. ---
**Author:** ![trip1ex](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/779978/32.png) [@trip1ex](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/trip1ex)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2019, 4:48pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/32 "2019-04-02T16:48:00Z")
Funny thing is CoD went Premium and higher ttk. While BF did the opposite. Also funny is how the same people that complained about the sudden higher ttk change that happened soon after launch are the same people who enjoy Firestorm where you have a higher ttk because of the armor. ---
**Author:** ![Lexen](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/b2d939/32.png) [@Lexen](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Lexen)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2019, 5:19pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/33 "2019-04-02T17:19:00Z")
> [@xBCxSEALxTEAMx6](#): > > In the end, the COD crowd who came onto BF1 after the Infinite Warfail debacle, went back to COD. The Battle Royale folks went to Apex. The HC enthusiasts…left for no hc mode or rented servers, and the ones left, BF Vets like myself, are wondering what the hell happened to our game. And so, the game ends up dead. That’s my overall synopsis. I’ve been playing BF since BF1942 so you might say I’m a BF “veteran”, and I personally prefer the lower TTK. I think it was an improvement, even though I’m not a fan of CoD. Except the original CoD 1 and United offensive. Can’t generalize all BF Vets as feeling that way. Even with a low TTK I don’t feel that BFV is anything close to what CoD has been. ---
**Author:** ![LOLGotYerTags](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/lolgotyertags/32/101041_2.png) [@LOLGotYerTags](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/LOLGotYerTags)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2019, 5:21pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/34 "2019-04-02T17:21:00Z")
There we go. I have removed all of the trolling / baiting / off topic responses. Let’s keep it on topic otherwise face the padlock. ```auto ``` ---
**Author:** ![parkingbrake](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/p/ee7513/32.png) [@parkingbrake](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/parkingbrake)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2019, 7:50pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/35 "2019-04-02T19:50:00Z")
> [@MAJWolfcookies](#): > > A team based FPS requires teamwork (duh) but not everyone got the memo. For the past few installments (esp BF1 and BFV), the servers are infested with oblivious players who don’t know what PTFO stands for. It’s shocking how clueless these players are. Perhaps this is the trend as gamers are becoming more casual, which isn’t necessarily congruous with modes like Conquest, Frontlines etc. There is nothing new here, it’s been that way for several titles in the series at least. There were camping snipers on the hills in Dragon valley, there were camping snipers on the TV tower in Caspian Border, there were camping snipers on the skyscraper in Siege of Shanghai, this didn’t start in BFV. Along with the clueless newcomers I’m running into players I haven’t seen for years, guys who make a great squad because they’ve been in this series for a decade or more and know what they’re doing. The ratio of good squads to knuckleheads isn’t good, maybe one in five at most, but it’s always been this way. ---
**Author:** ![Redstripe101](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/redstripe101/32/103252_2.png) [@Redstripe101](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Redstripe101)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2019, 7:54pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/36 "2019-04-02T19:54:00Z")
Has nothing to do with casual gamers, the reason BF5 is trash is because DICE failed to capture the base of the series. Gamers havent changed, go log into BF4 and you’ll see why your BF5 matches are so miserable and boring. Those players still play, just not on the current title. ---
**Author:** ![munkt0r](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/f08c70/32.png) [@munkt0r](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/munkt0r)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2019, 10:34pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/37 "2019-04-02T22:34:00Z")
> [@Titan\_Awaken](#): > > If games like Dark Souls, Bloodborne and Cuphead can succeed in this day and age, so can Battlefield. Those games are anything but ‘ **casual** ’, no matter how you interpret that word. > > Before anyone tears me to shreds for comparing Dark Souls to BF, I am just simply stating that there is a place in the market for hardcore games with sharp, unforgiving difficulty curves. To be fair, everything after DS1 in the souls franchise became very casual. Demon’s Souls and Dark Souls 1 were all about being alone in a horribly vicious and cruel world, which then became “Summon 3-4 friends to run with you everywhere!” ---
**Author:** ![DCAT627](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/dcat627/32/106591_2.png) [@DCAT627](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/DCAT627)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2019, 10:48pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/38 "2019-04-02T22:48:00Z")
I’m not sure what a casual player is, anyone have a definition? I think anyone who is not being paid to play BF (or competing for money) is casual (so essentially everyone). I think the more important distinction is PTO vs non-PTO players, I consider myself the former and find the latter highly annoying no matter what their K/D is. ---
**Author:** ![munkt0r](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/f08c70/32.png) [@munkt0r](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/munkt0r)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2019, 10:52pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/39 "2019-04-02T22:52:00Z")
> [@DCAT627](#): > > I’m not sure what a casual player is, anyone have a definition? I think anyone who is not being paid to play BF (or competing for money) is casual (so essentially everyone). > > I think the more important distinction is PTO vs non-PTO players, I consider myself the former and find the latter highly annoying no matter what their K/D is. The two most common approaches are as follows: Casual as a time investment → How often do you play? Is it your only game you play? Is it something you dedicate all your free time to playing? No? Casual. Casual as a skill setting → Is your K/D top tier? Do you know every map back and forth? Are you familiar with all the best/meta weapons? No? Casual The funny part, to me, is it no longer even has an equal opposite - it’s just a pejorative. It’s not even a comparison anymore in the sense that one is “hardcore or casual” it’s just casual or not lol. I hope you enjoyed this explanation that is completely 100% accurate and impervious to any prodding for holes in the aforementioned logic. ---
**Author:** ![Redstripe101](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/redstripe101/32/103252_2.png) [@Redstripe101](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Redstripe101)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2019, 11:28pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088/40 "2019-04-02T23:28:00Z")
> [@DCAT627](#): > > I’m not sure what a casual player is, anyone have a definition? I think anyone who is not being paid to play BF (or competing for money) is casual (so essentially everyone). > > I think the more important distinction is PTO vs non-PTO players, I consider myself the former and find the latter highly annoying no matter what their K/D is. k/d is now a highlighted stat at EOR screens, even assignments designed around it. DICE has done little to give incentive to PTO players in this title compared to previous [Previous page](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088.md?page=1) [Next page](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/can-bf-franchise-succeed-in-this-age-of-the-casual-gamer/254088.md?page=3)