Movement speed has gotten more twitchy every subsequent BF game in a bad way: Stats included.

Battlefield V General Discussion
1

First off. I get it. BF is arcade. I’m not arguing that. Its not a mil sim.

Quake is also an arcade shooter and so is CoD and yet they all have different movespeeds that changes the tempo and core gameplay. All 3 games mentioned feel unique/signature and thats largely because of the movement. (Of course there are other factors at play but nothing impacts a shooter more in second to second gameplay than player speed)

The movement speed in BF5 is obscenely fast. Its like olympic level while also negating physics that previous BF titles simulated [Acceleration and Deceleration]. I’m not bring physics into this because realism doesn’t make games better. I’m bringing it into the conversation because its a key piece of info as to why previous BF titles felt like they had slower movement. And I’ll show some of that info below.

There are 3 reasons I’ve narrowed it down to as to why BF5 feels closer to Quake/CoD than older BF titles.
1. The older BF titles had multipliers for other directions besides forward.

BF4 Sprint speed = 4.0 * 1.625 = 6.5 m/s * 1.1 Sprint boost = 7.15m/s
BF4 used a 0.75x modifier for movement other than forward.

BF1 Sprint speed = 3.4 * 1.775 = 6.035 m/s
BF1 used a 1.0x modifier for every direction.

It seems as if BF5 is almost identical to BF1 in this respect.

2. The older BF titles had a lower acceleration and deceleration than BF1 and BF5.

Acceleration: How fast you get up to speed.
Deceleration: How fast you slow down from movement.

What does this mean exactly? BF1 and BF5 have extremely high acceleration and deceleration (you get up to speed extremely quick and stop almost instantly when your finger leaves the key.) This equates to the main and biggest problem I have with the game. It feels floaty. Like quake. It feels cheesy and way too fast.

3. And lastly BF5’s baseline run-speed is higher as well just like BF1’s was.

The thing is I’m not complaining because my reflexes are slow. I’m 26 and they are good. I play all kinds of twitch games alongside other types. Its the fact that it feels off from the BF franchise.

I’ve played 1942, BF2, BC2, BF3, BF4 - BF1/BF5.

And out of all of those, the first 5 mentioned have supremely better movement speeds to me due to the aforementioned mechanics. They were all great games. But this new movement direction is not for battlefield I argue. Especially not for a BF that wants to focus more on squad play, positioning and thought overall.

Hope a dev reads this. I have low hopes of ever seeing a change because people are so resistant to anything other than what they have currently and it’d feel like you were ‘nerfing’ them. But would love to see the series return to an older movement speed philosophy.

Kudos, and I hope at least a dev reads this and could comment.

2

I prefer slower movement. Hopefully they will tweak it.

3

Yeah, the movement speed is stupidly fast just like it was in BF1. People are once again running and vaulting around like maniacs.

I still miss BF 2/2142’s stamina system, which kept players in check and made sprinting more of a tactical decision.

The movement speed causes all sorts of problems. In addition to making the infantry gameplay cheesy, it also makes it harder to stay with your squad/teammates and makes it much more difficult to defend objectives since players are rushing all over the map all the time.

4

If they’d apply the same adjustments to acceleration/deceleration as in BF1, the movement would feel more inertia-based and manageable. Though I can easily see that the current scheme is exactly how the competitive guys like it, out-ADAD-spamming regular scrubs :-).

5

Link to section: I am pretty sure that the movement speed and acceleration sideways is pretty much like in BF1, BF4 was a bit slower and on the “normal” side of the spectrum, but I could be wrong on the first part.I am pretty sure that the movement speed and acceleration sideways is pretty much like in BF1, BF4 was a bit slower and on the “normal” side of the spectrum, but I could be wrong on the first part.

Movement speed forward is likely the same for all titles, the acceleration might change, but only slightly. They could have tweaked the animation so it feels faster, too. Forward is also less relevant in an engagement.
I would agree that the ADAD spam is counterproductive and adds to the mentioned “floaty” feel. Personally it throws me off my aim sometimes when me and my enemy strafe both strafe. I would much rather have the BF4 movement feeling.

6

It doesn’t? What about weapon ballistics, that has gotten more leaning-toward-realism depth with every new BF game and IMO it made the game better.

The problem is that when you make bullets travel much slower than reality and make soldier move much faster than reality you get gameplay where dodging bullets becomes far too easy and anticipating for movement changes when firing at an enemy becomes pretty much impossible and I think that is pretty much the entire problem in a nutshell.

I think this is caused by people who ask for soldiers to move fast, but forget that it really doesn’t go along well with a gunplay ballistics model that lags far behind.
Of course it’s up to the devs to understand such a simple matter and ignore the ridiculous complaints about ‘sluggish movement’ when soldier movement actually resembles human movement (read: normal intuitive traceable predictable movement), but it looks like they didn’t.

I know I’m keeping my cash in my pocket until I see that they return to their senses and patch out these travesties that harm the game.

7

I’m not a fan of the current movement system. Specifcally I feel like the lateral movement is too fast.

This led to the ADAD spam and the whole strafing meta at the core of CQ engagements. Which was also at the heart of SWBF.

I was listening to an interview with David Sirland multiplayer producer and he talked about today’s “high tempo” games versus the slower paced older titles. I inferred from the interview that this is what contemporary gamers expect from a game.

I also suspect the gunplay is directly tied to the movement system, which is why for instance we see the high velocity rifles, so it might not be easy to alter.

8

No no I worded that slightly incorrectly. My meaning was “Realism for the sake of realism doesn’t make games better.” Sometimes a little realism does wonders. I meant implementing because ‘real life’ isn’t a solid reason to do so.

You are correct.

9

The movement speed is very fast just like it was in BF1. People are running and gunning like they are Olympics heroes… this is not pubg … fix it ASAP.

10

I think you have it mixed up. Pubg is trying to simulate a much more realistic approach to movement, akin to Arma. But its terrible and clunky because they went too far, while also having major server issues.

11

I don’t mind the sprint speed, but the acceleration/deceleration/momentum definitely needs adjusting.

ADAD spam is pretty crazy in this game. Especially once you unlock the upgrade for your weapon that allows you to move 60% faster while aiming down the sights.

12

I would love a stamina system, but there would be outrage for sure.

13

Nah, keep it as it is. BF1 was too slow.

14

I think that changes to soldier movement, it’s effect on the tempo of the game and how it altered the whole meta of infantry play was largely unexamined by the community.

15

Each BF title has had different movement speeds, BF5 is closer to BF3’s speed, and BF4’s speed and movement was so clunky and slow at launch that they later sped it up almost to BF3 levels based on community feedback. BF1 was also on the fast side but IMO closer to BC2 and BF2. I prefer the BF3 faster movement since I don’t want to road march for 10 minutes to get to my first objective and then immediately die from a sniper when I arrive at the objective only to have do it again. That’s one of the reasons Operation Flashpoint never resonated with me.