Anyone else feel from watching the live stream that they were watching a WW2 game? The pacing seemed off (too fast), everyone was running around with auto or semi auto weapons. I feel like Conquest in its current form also doesn’t fit the theme at all very well. I think Rush would feel far more authentic. Felt more like just a skin of WW1 rather than being in that time period.
Also just as a side note for the scrubs, just because Bf4 is fast paced doesn’t mean that Bf1 has to be. Especially considering the time period it’s set in.
I don’t see how it doesn’t make sense? I felt the game didn’t feel like a WW1 game watching the stream because it felt too fast paced and everyone was using rapid fire weaponry. Did the heavy emphasis on automatic and semi auto weapons not bother you?
It felt like they haven’t changed the core game enough to match the setting and instead just added a load of other (admittedly cool) stuff on top.
I dunno, as I said maybe it’s that seeing people in a world war 1 battle that’s not in trenches is odd, but I was hoping they’d at least slow the pace of things down a little?
Just curious about your line of thinking,..How does the game being fast paced make it for scrubs and it being low paced make it for,..not scrubs? I guess?
You’ve confused my meaning a little. I’ve seen people basically use the argument that because Bf4 is fast paced then it’s fine that Bf1 is fast paced, so I wanted to address them before they use that argument here as its frankly ridiculous.
So to clear up, I’m not saying a fast pace of gameplay is for scrubs at all, I’m just saying that it would be nice for the pace of the game to match the time period.
Slower gameplay does not immediately equal simulator. I’m not asking for one shot kills and such, just for it to feel a little more authentic that’s all.
And you’re okay with that? Sounds a lot like another franchise people like to bash on these forums. Bad company Vietnam felt more authentic and that was an expansion pack.
Yea, and these weapons were in existence during WW1. Some of the LMG’s are now able to be carried, instead of being emplaced… but the weapons are not made up
I am ok with that. That is exactly what I wanted. I love battlefield 4. I loved BF3. I don’t want the devs to feel pressured to make a new game. I want them to copy their previous successes and while continuing to build on them year after year. Perfect.
Well, for starters, people who bash CoD are just ignorant because 99% of them havent played a CoD game since CoD 4 and most of them dont understand the intricacies of the game (yes, they exist) and just use it as a blanket insult when they cant manufacture a better one.
Second, BF pretty much IS CoD…and that’s not an insult, or a mark that the series changed. They’ve always been closely related and they borrow things from each other all the time. Why do you think they even compete against each other? It’s because they’ve always been similar enough to do so.
Okay you want the game to match the setting/theme more. So, you didn’t like seeing so many fully or semi auto weapons.
There are bolt actions and single shot rifles in the game, you just saw the majority of players using the weapons with a higher rate of fire because they are easier to get the feel of and it was some of the player’s first go at the game.
Coming from the success that Dice/EA had in bridging the CoD community with BF4, did you not realize they were going to try and make BF1 appeal to as many folks as possible, also?
I think we should just wait for gameplay Operations game mode. From the sound of it is a slower game mode since it takes place over many different maps. Reminds me of Red Orchestra 2s multiplayer campaign game mode.
Conquest is always going to be conquest its a general staple in the Battlefield franchise and it will play like Conquest. That’s why it doesn’t seem like a WW1 game.