Does this mean that we will not be able to repair bridges or walls? Or even the tanks and vehicles we will be driving?
There will ne a tanker class which I Imagine will be able to repair vehicles. If not then it must be the support class
Will that mean that I will need to get a tanker to jump out of his tank to repair my jeep, or does it mean that the support will have even more responsibility?
What I fear is that DICE makes the tanks similar to the AT ST in Star wars Battlefront. That one picks it up like a battle pick up and then hops out when its about to explode with no ability to repair it. Only to have to go find another battle pick up.
I think there is no way that’s how they designed that. Remember Battlefront isn’t battlefield. It’s not how it’s ever been in a battlefield game and it would make very little sense.
Tanks will be controllable with 99% probability.
My only concern is the number of them.I don’t want to play a 64 player CQL match with 3-4 tanks on each side when there is no RPG
DICE has developed Battlefront and the chances that they will carry over certain aspects to Battlefield 1 is very likely. What does EA care about? That as many people buy the game and play it. How does one get as many people to play the game? Make it easy to get into it. Little skill to do certain things in game and make it easy to get to do things. In Battlefront the largest vehicle was on tracks! All one has to do is aim and rain death on to the opposition. How does one get a tank/AT ST, find a Battle pick up!
EA is not the only one that is trying to make it easier for low skill players and newbs to win at the game.
I understand that EA is not making Battlefield 1, but it is the one to make the final decisions when it comes to what goes into the game and what does not. What is their main objective with Battlefield 1? Make money. And that means making the game accessible to everyone and giving everyone a chance to win at the game. (Make it easy)
I probably am just overacting and being very pessimistic but I cannot be ignorant to the changes that DICE has made to the franchise in the last few releases. The decrease in squads size, the removal of the commander position, the redeployment of the commander position as a easy mini-side game for people on their tablets, the increase in lock-on weapons, the addition of super bright suns on the scopes of snipers so that it is easy for the newbs to spot the sniper, the addition of all these nonsense gadgets that distract players from playing the objective, the lack of incentive to win the Battle and the increase of incentives to get the most kills.
All these things point to one thing. Making Battlefield a game one can just hop in and get some kills without having much skill or working with ones team.
Then again I may just be overacting…
Dude wth are you talking about.
You really think Dice is going to put tanks on rails? That makes zero sense.
BF1 is going to be nothing like Battlefront. They are two completely different games set in entirely different universes. People need to stop with this foolishness.
Sorry did you read my whole post or did you just stop after the first paragraph?
The Battefront comparisons are just ludicrous. The game didn’t do very well so why would Dice bring elements from that game that were not only disliked, but have no place in the Battlefield formula.
I didn’t really need to go past the first paragraph honestly. The stream is hours away so hopefully all this silly Battlefront speculation can be put to rest once and for all.
#Facepalm
“Critics praised the game for its gameplay, visuals and high production values but was criticized for its lack of content on both single player and multiplayer modes. Despite this, it was a commercial success, selling over 13 million copies.” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_Battlefront_(2015_video_game))
It sold 13 000 000 copies. It sold 13 000 000 copies. It sold 13 000 000 copies. Please do not be ignorant of the facts…
Someone in another thread broke down the success of the game. It was mostly due to it being a DICE and Star Wars product. Not because it was actually a great game.
The same article you post as a sign of success explains how lacking the game was in content.
Battlefront and Battlefield have very little in common. Stop comparing them.
Tanks on rails. Lol sure.
What does EA care about, what does EA want?
It sold well but how could it not ? Casual and star wars fan were gonna buy it for sure. It’s not a game that was meant to last. With a WW1 theme they know they better bring it content and gameplay wise.
Battlefield games have depth to them. Battlefront doesn’t.
So that means that EA will not push DICE to make is casual, easy to play, low skill barrier?
People who played it said there will be a bigger skill gap than in BF4. Game won’t come close to a simulation off course, it will be fast paced and action packed but it won’t be pick up & play for noobs. Every battlefield games last in time because they have depth even though they are on the casual side. There isn’t millions of WW1 fans like there is star wars. People will judge gameplay and content before buying.
Let us hope that it is so.
People please stop comparing Battlefield and Battlefront. They are different games.
DICE made Mirror’s edge too, does that mean we’ll see parkour in BF1? Nope.
Exactly.
Vaulting over a wall was not in previous Battlefields, yet after Mirror’s edge it was added.