I have been playing many games like cs go, so I have very good aim but I really dislike constant combat in battlefield atm. If you compare bf4 vs cs go in gameplay, cs go is like FIAT and bf is like ferrari. You constantly spawn, kill few opponents if you are good and die. You have to watch every angle 360 degrees, its really killing gameplay. I would enjoy hardcore mode to be different. I mean no ui, less health, slower respawn, more recoil and longer reload. I know that most players want 64 vs 64 or even more “warfare” beacuse it sounds fun, but its really killing gameplay. I see bf1 gameplays and its going to be another chaos atleast on conquest. Please hardcore mode slower respawn and reload.
I understand the OP but i think that it is not the pace of the game that changed.
I think what you lack here is the tactical dimension you had in BF2. Bigger maps, a squad could sneak behind the ennemy team and change the battle. That’s not happening anymore since BF3.
Yes, it’s more “intense”, not faster, because of the map design. Ofc i’d probably prefer it to be a little slower since it’s supposely ww1 based, but that ain’t happen. Due to the number of automatic guns i saw in the live, this game is just a reskin with few adjustements of BF4.
Anyway, the tactical side of BF has been thrown away, and it’s not coming back anytime soon. I won’t buy this game for this reason and also for the fact that Dice is treating us french as a minor faction in multi (DLC ?! you’re kidding me).
How many fedoras do you own?
It’s hard to be slow paced when someone can put a red triangle over your head for all your enemies to see across the map. Play hardcore you’ll have a better time if they put some decent balance to the sniper class where one shot to the toe kills you.
Lmao what are you smoking. BF4 is not fast paced at all.
They had to kick out France to make room for u.s even though u.s played a small role. Most sales will be in America and most Americans are ignorant towards other countries and don’t care.so this is how that happen
I agree with this. Battlefield has become an obnoxious constant barrage of noises and ADHD running around, with gunfights every few seconds. There are no dynamics, and it’s too much of one constant flavour. Classic Battlefield has much better pacing, due to non arena-style map designs, large maps, limited sprint…
I’ve just been playing some Battlefield 2 on a server which has modified the game to have unlimited sprint, and I have to say that I wholeheartedly, and in every way prefer playing with limited-sprint. With unlimited sprint, it’s an entirely different play-experience, and a much more boring one. The camera is always moving at the same speed, everyone is constantly zipping around everywhere, there’s much less tactics happening… it’s overall a much, much cheaper experience.
I really hope that DICE is planning to give those of us who would like a richer gameplay experience the option for limited-sprint as one of the server settings.
it is a trend in the era. everybody want fast enjoyment, bypassing the need for a learning curve. “i was blasted” said many youtubers. apparently this is the new way game are designed, so that casual can join and have fast and cheap fun.
hah, try Arma3 then - with all that stamina and progressive weight impact things on players 
that a “slow-paced”(reasonably and tweakable(on mission, server and character-levels).
faster games have a higher learning curve.
^^^
Yep
Put a newb into BF4 and UT and see which one he does better in. My vote and money goes on BF4.
BF1942 through BF2142 were all filled with dolphin diving, quickscoping, and run & gunning. Battlefield was never really a slow paced shooter… unless you are comparing it to Quake or Unreal Tournament.
Prime118_PL, Turbo_Siats and heast1,
You guys really got I wanted to get acrossed. And saw how Casualization of gaming turned everything upside down, and now, we have a new era indeed, another one, and I’d like to call it The Fast-food of Gaming.
I mean… Did you guys see the flares on sniper’s lens? W… T… F…
They are consistently punishing people for choosing a different playstyle.
Only Bf2 had dolphin-diving, and it was patched out early on. And none of those games have run’n’gunning. How could they? The run speed wasn’t that fast, and in Bf2 there was stamina.
And I don’t know how quick a person could quick-scope in those games, since those games didn’t have great net code, and half the time there’s lag when switching to a zoom scope.
Battlefield wasn’t originally as slow a game as Arma, but it also wasn’t anywhere near as fast a game as Battlefield 3 and 4. And Battlefield 1 also shouldn’t be as fast a game as Battlefield 3 and 4, because those games were way too one-speed, and became tiresome and monotonous because of it.
THE SOLUTION
Make different game modes such as Normal, Classic and Hardcore.
Each community will be able to change and add what they deem necessary.
Adds to the game. People can find what suits them best.
No need to take each other out. We all are Battlefielders.
Battlefield FOR THE WIN!
The gameplay really hasn’t changed much. BF2, BC1 and 2, BF3, BF4, Hardline…the gameplay in all of them is about the same granted a few minor tweaks here and there and differences in maps…the maps is probably the largest difference. People think the game has DRASTICALLY changed…but it really hasn’t.
Also…you imply that face paced games=you don’t use your mind…which isn’t true even remotely…you just have to use your mind a little faster.
What you’re MORE LIKELY referring to is the fact that in the newer games there are more frequent/consistent engagements. BF2 had a lot of down time between engagements. (frankly, I find that boring. Doesn’t feel like a Battlefield to me…feels like a series of small skirmishes or a wave based game.) From BC2 and up there’s less downtime between engagements unless you’re teams good and locking down the map.
So what you’re ultimately arguing is that you want a game where there are SIGNIFICANTLY less engagements and a lot more “down time” so you can take your time thinking through and executing your “strategies” and tactics. The way that’d play out is basically playing a massive 64 player map 12v12 or something like that. It actually would be the opposite of “all out, full scale war” Which is supposedly what Battlefield is about.
Here’s the thing though…you say…“It’s just a completely mad rampage of dudes running around killing and dying at the same time, respawning freaking fast and doing the same again. There is no more caution, thinking, being afraid of getting exposed and getting shot from a player that is better positioned”…
All the stuff you say “is no more” is DEFINITELY still in the game…and has been in every game.
How you play the game is up to you. You can play any of the BF series games strategically, with caution, thinking about your tactics and positioning and use that to your advantage (those are the people that actually do well in the games)…OR you can just run around aimlessly killing and dying never paying attention or actually learning anything…which plenty of people do. But that’s not the games fault so it’s pointless to say the game needs to change. There will always be those players.
Oh Geez, Mang is back.
We’re doomed.
We’re missing the twist of the bayonet.