Cornbread78
Member
Sounds like they are putting effort into both versions seperately, which is awesome for gamers. I hope the nect gen version looks great!
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Battlefield 6 will be "heavily influenced by Battlefield 3"; also coming to PS4 and Xbox One
kyliethicc
Member
I hope this one is good. Loved Bad Company 1 & 2, enjoyed BF3 & 4 too. BF1/5 didn't interest me much.
I'd love a modern military multiplayer FPS thats focused on vehicles and destruction and larger fights, instead of just copying COD.
And honestly DICE... just don't even do singleplayer modes. Just ship some fun multiplayer.
I'd love a modern military multiplayer FPS thats focused on vehicles and destruction and larger fights, instead of just copying COD.
And honestly DICE... just don't even do singleplayer modes. Just ship some fun multiplayer.
Last edited:
EDMIX
Member
The fact that BFV has all free DLC and BFVI was delayed internally shows they learned.
I'm not worried about BFVI.
I'm ok with a PS4 and XONE version if its by another team and allows DICE to focus on PS5 and Series X.
I'm also ok with BR as that wasn't even done by the main DICE team for BFV, so I get they need to still have those playlist to keep the series relevant. I won't play it, but I understand why it exist and it would be stupid not to tbh.
Day 1 on PS5 regardless for me.
S
Sidney Prescott
Unconfirmed Member
Happy to hear this. Battlefield 3 was fun as heck. I loved Battlefield 4, too. I'm much more of a fan of the modern Battlefield settings. I think the weapons and maps just appealed to me far more.
JerryinSoCal
Member
I wish they'd make a new Bad Company, I know PC purists didn't care for it but it was by far the most fun I've had playing Battlefield MP.
P.Jack
Member
It will probably be great, eventually. I think BFV is excellent in its current state with the best gunplay of any Battlefield.
I think BF3 had the best maps at launch but the launch maps since have been a mixed bag. The last couple of maps for BFV are all good so I’m kinda hopeful.
And maybe, just maybe, it’ll ship with functional matchmaking. Would be really great if it was possible to join a game as a squad on launch day. Or at least within the first year.
Naah, who am I kidding, if there is one thing you can always trust DICE with, it’s broken matchmaking. Maybe this time, at least they won’t remove the option to switch teams or suicide. You’d think twenty years of releasing buggy games with broken matchmaking would’ve made them realize those options are pretty important.
I think BF3 had the best maps at launch but the launch maps since have been a mixed bag. The last couple of maps for BFV are all good so I’m kinda hopeful.
And maybe, just maybe, it’ll ship with functional matchmaking. Would be really great if it was possible to join a game as a squad on launch day. Or at least within the first year.
Naah, who am I kidding, if there is one thing you can always trust DICE with, it’s broken matchmaking. Maybe this time, at least they won’t remove the option to switch teams or suicide. You’d think twenty years of releasing buggy games with broken matchmaking would’ve made them realize those options are pretty important.
ShirAhava
Plays with kids toys, in the adult gaming world
Battlefield 3 was the only one I didn't like the single player was hot garbage (yup its me that one guy who plays battlefield games offline 90% of the time)
Battlefield 4 was like a modern version of BLACK so awesome and I could keep playing BF1/5 for years before I'd be sick of them
If this new one is really a QTE NIGHTMARE like BF3 I might skip it lmao
Battlefield 4 was like a modern version of BLACK so awesome and I could keep playing BF1/5 for years before I'd be sick of them
If this new one is really a QTE NIGHTMARE like BF3 I might skip it lmao
eastcoastkody
Member
BF3 i didn't really play. Was it good? Because I really dislike every game they've made since BF4
ZywyPL
Banned
I both agree and disagree here - yes, BF3 was the absolute peak of the series, that's the game that pulled CoD sales numbers, pretty much everybody was playing it back then like crazy, but somehow EA/DICE weren't able to capitalize on its success, the later iterations felt more like a DLC or mappacks than actually new games, with less content and features. And then BF1 and BF5 came in that pretty much buried the franchise.
Although I personally do think BC2 was a vastly superior title, everything in this game was and still is pretty much perfect, the overall gameplay, the gunplay, the vehicle combat, the maps design, the game modes, I actually launched the game literally about 2 weeks ago via XB BC to refresh the memories, there might have been only 13 people on the map, but fuck me the game didn't age a single day, it's still a fucking blast to play just as it was back in 2010, and I cannot say the same thing about BF3, it wasn't as good from the beginning if you ask me, the lack of destruction, oversized maps, the lacking infantry/vehicle balance, the gunplay etc., it all just wasn't that good and felt like a huge step back from BC2, the audio and visual side is what created all the hype around the game, and since years have past and all that hype is obviously long time gone, I really don't see anything appealing in BF3 that would make me want to go back even for just a single match.
supernova8
Banned
Redneckerz
Those long posts don't cover that red neck boy
No surprise that it is coming to PS4/XBO - shortages of current-gen disregarding. They are still capable machines, the mid-gen refreshes even more so. Its just that the Jaguar cores put a significant limitation on what they can do (hence 32v32 battles).
P.Jack
Member
Bad Company 2 was designed around the console experience. BF3 was made like a regular Battlefield and got a gimped console version, just like the 7th gen version of BF4. It wasn’t until last gen that consoles got the real Battlefield experience. 32 players is cool and all and Rush was a solid addition, but 64 player Conquest is was Battlefield is all about.
Black_Stride
do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
What would a Bad Company 3 game have that a Battlefield 6 wouldnt have?
ZywyPL
Banned
I personally feel there's actually much lest action going on with 64 players due to larger maps to accommodate such amount of players. Like in MAG, where you never ever felt like you're a part of a huge, 256 player mayhem. Or any BR game for the matter, where until mid/end game where the map narrows and the game actually starts gaining momentum, but at that point half of the players are already dead with again, kind of kills the entire point of having such a huge amount of players in the first place. And that's why I find BC2 to have that perfect balance between not being a typical 4v4-8v8 experience on tiny maps, but not being the other extreme either with oversized maps with little to no action going on just to brag about the player count. If DICE could replicate that feeling of really being on a battlefield with all the crazy stuff constantly going on, but on an even larger scale, that would've been fucking awesome, but unfortunately after latest installments I have little to no faith left in them, if anything, I won't be surprised if they'll cut down the vehicle count even harder so most of those 128 players will actually have to go on foot around those large maps, which is not the type of activity want to be doing when I want to play a shooter.
McHuj
Member
I am a little apprehensive about a 64 vs 64 game mode as far as map design and keeping player count up. I hope it doesn't end up being to chaotic or stop being fun when you can't fill game with 128 players. 32 vs 32 seems a very good balance, maybe pushing it to 40 vs 40 or 48 vs 48 would be a good half step measure before going for higher player counts.
Also, another battleroyale mode seems like a complete waste of time and resources (I know its another team), but I'm not sure there's a market for it. It would have to bring something truly innovative over Warzone to pull players away.
Also, another battleroyale mode seems like a complete waste of time and resources (I know its another team), but I'm not sure there's a market for it. It would have to bring something truly innovative over Warzone to pull players away.
Elektro Demon
Banned
I enjoyed bf3 very much. One of my fav bf games. So if the new one is gonna be similar it's good news to me.
I just don't really give a shit about the battle royale part.
I just don't really give a shit about the battle royale part.
michaelius
Banned
How is that going to work?
Some maps/modes playable only on pc/ps5/xbox and other with crossplay with older gen consoles?
Some maps/modes playable only on pc/ps5/xbox and other with crossplay with older gen consoles?
P.Jack
Member
I get your point but I don’t agree. Since it’s based around squads, typically 4 player squads, it’s more a case of 8v8 squads. It is not unusal to fight together with another squad, facing off against two or more squads from the opposing team, while trying to capture the objective. That’s ’only’ 20 or so players in the same area but throw vehicles into the mix and you got yourself a party. And the point with conquest is to have a couple of battles like that on the map simultaneously and let the players decide where reinforcements are needed. Sure, some maps are bigger than others but if you are walking a lot with no action around, you are either on a empty server or doing it wrong. At least one other player from your squad should be close to the action most of the time.
Besides, outside of conquest there are game modes that actually force 32v32 battles like Breakthrough. And if you want your Bad Company style of 16v16, there is always Rush.
I agree about MAG though, that was pure player-count hype rather than big battles, even though I enjoyed my time with it.
OrtizTwelve
Member
Good. All EA has to do is just keep the original BF3/BF4 flair, no nonsense and political correctness, and they'll have a hit.
Black_Stride
do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
- Conquest New - Nextgen and PC only 128players. Level 12 destruction and environmental effects.
- Conquest Classic - All platforms 64 players. Limited destruction and environmental effects.
- Rush (Grand Operations) - All platforms.
- Team Deathmatch - All Platforms
- Domination - All Platforms
- Battle Royale - 100 players. All Platforms
Deep down we all know every just wants to play Conquest and assuming there are enough nextgen consoles out there by the time this drops Conquest New will be the game mode that outlasts all the others.
BR might be second place because apparently people like this game mode....but I dunno if people will buy the game for it lest they release it Warzone style as F2P.
Black_Stride
do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
What would a Bad Company game have that a Battlefield 6 game wouldnt?
CuteFaceJay
Member
"PS4 and Xbox One"
That's red flags for me. They tried to release BF4 on 5 platforms when Xbone and PS4 were released and ended up with a DOA that another studio had to fix up over the coming year.
They NEED TO DROP PS4 & XBOX ONE for a smoother launch. I'm calling it now this will be a repeat of BF4 launch.
manfestival
Member
The ww2 hate makes me sad. I get it... I just wish they did it right instead of doing it the right way. The path seemed so obvious to turn the game basically into a 1942 remaster and people would've been so happy.
Fortunately a modern setting won't have historical restraints that will hinder them from their agenda unless they decide to be way too extra about it.
Fortunately a modern setting won't have historical restraints that will hinder them from their agenda unless they decide to be way too extra about it.
SantaC
Member
Bf4 launch was same as ps4 launch. This will be one year later.
Marcus Aurelius
Banned
The peak in popularity maybe. The GOAT Battlefield is still BF2.
wolfboy203
Member
I'm just glad that some ppl think logically in this thread. Like do people seriously think that EA will spend millions upon millions of dollars for a console base thats barely at the 3 million mark let along the 4 million mark. Hell No! There are not enough next gen consoles to justify that mostly thanks to limited supply, piece of shit scalpers who sell them for 3 grand or more and the pandemic ain't helping out either.
Vaelka
Member
Comedy.
The art direction is also a bit thicker based on what I remember, looks a little more stylized and cartoony.
I remember it feeling very differently to play.
GenericUser
Member
Why not. Just make sure to include WAAAY more vehicles, aircrafts, boats and shit and get rid of the woke-shit from bf vagina. Gritty modern warfare, big tank battles, dogfights in the air, desctructable environments, give me that shit and we're talking. I remember when battlefield was good and I want the game to become great again.
bighugeguns
Member
Yeah, crossplay would really be a gamechanger with frostbite, if they can't get Fifa to use crossplay, there's no way they'll be able to get BF6 to work.
I really hate frostbite, I bet EA does too, internal engines are such a meme. There's horror stories of EA having very limited frostbite subject matter experts, so when there's an issue with their big cashcows like Fifa, the team has to drop everything and focus on supporting a cashcow.
You've got limited expertise available because the engine is in-house, it's not like Unreal etc which has a shitton of talent on the market. It's a strategic blunder from EA and it's downright embarrassing the more competing games get features like crossplay etc while they just keep pumping out their relatively janky stuff each cycle.
Black_Stride
do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
Is there any reason Battlefield 6 couldnt have comedic war stories being that its going to be a fictional near future they have no "respect the troops" obligations.
BC2 -> BF3 the gunplay got alot better.
Id actually argue that by modern standards BC2 gunplay and movement isnt up to snuff for a multiplayer game.
The novelty of the weight of every action runs out very quickly if youve played any of the BF games after BF3 hell if youve played any modern FPS.
Now give us massive maps and BC2s movement......no thank you.
As for the art style.....WTF are you talking about?
Did you actually play the Bad Company games....BC one was slightly stylize but BC2 was basically of-gen right down to the bloom.
Heck BF3 looks like a direct sequel to BC2 on some maps so not sure what you are remembering but the artstyle certainly in MP wasnt some cartoony shit.
Maybe you are thinking of Battlefield Heroes?
^Literally just looks like a sequel to the game.
Im even more confused now than I was before at you asking for Bad Company 3 instead of Battlefield 6 since it seems you dont even know what you liked about Bad Company and cant explain why Battlefield 6 cant fulfil that role.
ZywyPL
Banned
To each their own, I for one love slower paced shooters like BC2 or KZ2, the shooting just feels so much more satisfying and rewarding when every single bullet counts, unlike in all those fast paced, twitchy shooters where you kill with not even a third of the clip, which then gets reloaded in split of a second.
True to that, although keep in mind that in BC2 pretty much every single team member was always leaving the base on some sort of a vehicle, it was the later iteration there the player count has risen while at the same time the vehicle count hasn't change or even dropped, which dramatically slowed down the pace of the matches. So despite the movement speed increase, I'd say the maps are already way to big, BF simply needs a shit-ton of vehicles, that's what made the franchise stand out of the crowd in the first place.
Thinking about it as I write this, the most popular military shooter right now, and by a huge margin, is CoD Warfare, which does have large maps, huge player count, and lots of vehicles, and on top of everything is F2P, so I think if BF6 won't introduce anything new, different that will make it truly stand out, like environment destruction, large vehicle count, or something else that hasn't been done before and is not present in other shooters, it'll have a really tough time to fight for the players attention.
jezhumphrey75
Banned
I can't see them going woke ish this time, this'll be proper big scale warfare no holding back, macho manly, no women no trannys no lgbtq.... This one's for the chads
Black_Stride
do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
DICE?
You think DICE is a dumpster dev team?
Its not that im confused its just that im very very confused.
DICE are in the top 1% of dev teams.....hell when DICE announces they are at SIGGRAPH or GDC other higher level teams take notice.
BFV has been their weakest title outright in a long time.
BF3 was great, just plain great rubberbanding be damned.
BF4 End Game was brilliant and probably best team MP game of lastgen.
BF1 started really slow due to limited customization, but they kept supporting it and eventually gave all the DLC for free.
BFront was outright a great title
BFront II beyond the mtx debacle at launch was actually a good game....once they fixed the mtx situation its probably the best Star Wars game since like forever.
Vaelka
Member
Is there any reason Battlefield 6 couldnt have comedic war stories being that its going to be a fictional near future they have no "respect the troops" obligations.
BC2 -> BF3 the gunplay got alot better.
Id actually argue that by modern standards BC2 gunplay and movement isnt up to snuff for a multiplayer game.
The novelty of the weight of every action runs out very quickly if youve played any of the BF games after BF3 hell if youve played any modern FPS.
Now give us massive maps and BC2s movement......no thank you.
As for the art style.....WTF are you talking about?
Did you actually play the Bad Company games....BC one was slightly stylize but BC2 was basically of-gen right down to the bloom.
Heck BF3 looks like a direct sequel to BC2 on some maps so not sure what you are remembering but the artstyle certainly in MP wasnt some cartoony shit.
Maybe you are thinking of Battlefield Heroes?
^Literally just looks like a sequel to the game.
Im even more confused now than I was before at you asking for Bad Company 3 instead of Battlefield 6 since it seems you dont even know what you liked about Bad Company and cant explain why Battlefield 6 cant fulfil that role.
I dunno why you're acting as if I insulted your baby or something, I also said A LITTLE more stylized and cartoony and I never said that Battlefield couldn't be comedic.
If you actually look at the pics you used the proportions are slightly bigger in Bad Company, they're not super stylized but they're a bit chunkier than in Battlefield and irl.
I am just talking about tone and all I said was that I miss the games...
The mainline Battlefield series just feels more like a typical military dudebro shooter to me while the Bad Company games felt quite different and a bit more arcadey perhaps I dunno how else to explain it they just have a different feel.
I don't need to be able to explain it in great detail to you to have that opinion, you can't always explain it sometimes some things just feel better to you simply because they do.
Edit: I seriously dunno how you can look at those two pics and not see it.They look totally different...
The saturation in particular is way up in Bad Company.
Last edited:
Black_Stride
do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
The nuance of text is weird.
But im not taking this any more seriously than any other discussion i would be having.
Dont read too much into it and assume this is a light hearted conversation.
On topic.
The Bad Company games actually play alot slower and more deliberately than the mainline Battlefield games.....the exact opposite of being "more arcadey" BF3 forward are much more arcadey titles than the BC titles.
Remember all the weight the games had to pretty much every motion, how it was actually possible to crouch and be stuck on a rock because your characters legs couldnt stretch far enough to walk over it.
So again it seems your memories of Bad Company are different to what Bad Company actually is.
Its on Gamepass right now download them and give them a go.
I very recently went through them (okay it was like late 2019) and while the novelty of the games is great actually playing them, the gameplay of them isnt something I would want right now in a Battlefield game.
If you think BFs communities die off quick as is.....the slowness of a Bad Company 3 would have people drop the title in days instead of months.
And I actually did adore them both at their respective launches....Battlefield 3 did everything better.
The screenshots perfectly illustrate how the look of BF just moved with the generation BC2 had that over-bloomed effect that all the games of that time had, when devs remembered games could be bright they bloomed the hell out of them.
BF3 was lens imperfections everywhere....again an effect games were using at the time.
But the core of both games looks is pretty much identical and the usual ilk of generation to generation sequels.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
At least they have two different teams working on their respective versions.
PropellerEar
Member
Was big fan until BF3.
Now I can't get excited about Battlefield, this series is pretty much dead to me.
Now I can't get excited about Battlefield, this series is pretty much dead to me.
Jaxx_377
Neo Member
Even if they just remastered BC1 & BC2 and release them together with all maps and the vietnam pack I would be happy.
S
Sidney Prescott
Unconfirmed Member
A mixture of Bad Company 2 & Battlefield 3 would be the sweet spot for me. There were things from both of those games I really liked.
A Modern setting really does a lot to get me excited about Battlefield again. I hope the Campaign has a bit more thought put in to it though. Honestly can't remember anything from the BF3/BF4 campaigns.
Last edited by a moderator: