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!
I don’t see what’s wrong with having a slower pace of game, given that A) it means you actually have to think about what you’re doing B - it allows the game to actually have an atmosphere because there’s downtime between gun fights C) it fits the time period. So far all I’ve seen is DICE wanting to use the WW1 period because it’s something different but literally just using it as a skin for another BF 3.5
You still need to think about what you’re doing in a fast paced game, if not more so.
atmosphere can be accomplished in any setting.
I mean, all their games are just different settings on the same template. are you surprised?
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!
^ you know what I mean. With a completely new time period they had the chance to really do some unique things with it. Yes atmosphere can be achieved in fast paced games as well, but give me a conflict that was constant running around and shooting at people. There’s always been down time, even in the middle of battles sometimes. That’s what was great about the older BFs. Fighting like mad for a couple of minutes then feeling the lull as the enemy were pushed back and had to re organise. I don’t get that feeling in the newer titles.
Also you can’t deny that the faster a game becomes the less it revolves around tactics and strategy and more about who can shoot faster. Don’t get me wrong I want a skillful game, but I want a balance as well.
We must just remember that what we think is the best Battlefield is not what others think is the best Battlefield. Sir-xer21 and a great many other people have their fixed ideal of what is best for Battlefield and Sir-xer21 is very passionate about his fixed idea. So too do I and you.
The solution is that DICE gives us different game modes that suit certain groups of people. Casual group, the fast pace group and the classic group. Choice is best.
You do realize some of us you are talking about have been playing Battlefield longer than most others I bet Sir-xer21 is an old school BF player.
I certainly am heck I played (CODENAME EAGLE) before you Google it.
CODENAME EAGLE was the game that made Battlefield what it is (back then Dice Stockholm saw a game and decided to purchase it (CodeName eagle) made by Refraction studio’s if I can remember and had an engine (refraction engine) I think. the game and it’s idea’s turned into Battlefield and it’s engine into the Frosbite engine.
So yes everyone is different and all have their own ideal’s on what a battlefield game should be but we all agree on one component of every battlefield game (it should be FUN to play)
This is a huge factor in game-immersion, and in finding what’s right for movement speed. When the movement speed is too fast, it causes player tunnel vision, where all they can see is their movement path. And then nothing else about the game is absorbed or enjoyed.
It’s a waste for DICE to put so much effort into their environments, and things like sound, and then have a non-dynamic and too fast movement system that reduces the entire experience into tunnel-vision, where it’s like the player is simply racing down a liner corridor, too busy focusing on their movement to feel and experience anything else. That was already happening to the experience in Battlefields 3 and 4, and I hated it.
I’ve been playing Battlefield 2 lately, and I played on a server which had modified the run speed so that it’s endless, and I also found that to be very immersion-spoiling, very unnatural-feeling, and very uninteresting to play. After a short while, I left to find another server that didn’t have modified stamina, because playing on the server with unlimited sprint made the whole experience felt cheap and reduced into one constant, predictable thing.
At the very least, DICE, please provide us with the server option for limited sprint.
That would be great. A speed modifier, and a server option for limited-sprint would solve thing for players who’d like faster play as well as players who’d like slower, and more dynamic play.
If you look at momentum like that you could argue that gravity is also game breaking because it restricts your movement to ground level, but I do understand what you’re trying to say. I think the exaggerated visual effects like the blood spatter in your eyes, red tint, color loss, screen blur and screen shakes are game breaking because it obscures/impacts and limits your view every time when you need it the most. Same with suppression, no actually suppression is even worse because it also limits your shooting capability.
I brought this up because I don’t understand these contradictory gameplay aspects. They are using different sorts of effects and mechanisms to put an emphasis on immersion through a sense of realism, but at the same time they do stuff that breaks immersion. They should make up their minds and take one direction, not two opposite ones.
It’s simply the same movement as the movement of SWBF, it looks horrible, way too fast and doesn’t fit. I’m talking about the animation speed of course, not the maximum runnin speed of a soldier.
Did people have slow reactions in WW1? Why doesnt fast animation suit WW1?
Back when I played COD4 on the PC, there was a server that forced you to move around in crouch mode (i.e. excruciatingly slow movement). This was done to promote a more “tactical, thinking gameplay”.
It was the most boring time that I’ve ever played COD4. I left that server, never to return.
I completely disagree. Looked fine and natural like a dude running in combat.
The “twitchiness” that you are apparently talking about is simply because it was played with a mouse and keyboard and high sensitivity. PC always looks ridiculously twitchy because of mouse and keyboard.
I’d say its the complete lack of momentum. Running speed seems fine to me, but there is no gradual increase/decrease to reach max speed and slow down to a halt. Our eyes and mind can’t anticipate such movement because that’s not how humans move, and being able to anticipate soldier movement seems pretty important to me in a fps game that tries to immerse the player.
What you call ‘fat guy suit’ was nothing but a bit of momentum to soldier movement to make the movement look and feel more normal. People didn’t ask for slower movement prior to release, it was a design choice of the developers alone and IMO it was a good one because instantaneous movement doesn’t fit BF games that try to immerse the player with an arcadey sense of realism (blood spatter, screen shakes, suppression blur, ballistics, etc) and warfare strategy. That kind of movement belongs to fantasy matrix-style bunnyhop ADADAD-spam run&gun twitch-aim shooters.
Also, getting killed because your character moved too slow had nothing to do with the movement. Getting killed shortly after moving behind cover is and has always been a latency issue, I can say that with 100% certainty because I have gotten killed like that countless times even after the movement ‘correction’ and all the netcode improvements.
And no, BF4 has become a P.O.S. game because of the movement changes, not to mention they scammed people (like me) who bought the game because of the fact that it had more natural movement than BF3.
Another reason I hate the movement change is that players who prefer low fire rate class weapons have gained a greater disadvantage due to the counter-intuitive movement that you get without momentum to it, it is impossible to anticipate movement for accurate aiming when soldiers can make direction changes in mid-air and take sharp turns or even a 180 turn while maintaining full speed without any momentum. The so called skilled players simply exploit this erratic movement model to dodge enemy bullets. So tell me, do you honestly think that this matrix-style movement fits a game like BF? 
answer is in the question. some want matrix style, that is, for them, the fantasy of dodging bullets and the feeling of narcissistic invulnerability is of greater importance than any deferred satisfaction in realism and tactical elaborations.
while i wouldnt say that the tints nd screen blur are necessarily game breaking in the same sense, i generally agree, especially about suppression.
its fit BF for literally every entry in the series, and if you cant track an unpredictable target, that’s not the movement’s fault, its the aimer’s fault.
or the designer fault
Nope. aim better. If people can accomplish this in every other mainstream FPS, so can BF players.