Battlefield 6

[J4MES OX4D 10,327]

1 hour ago, Macca89 said:

Seems like you've spent majority of your games playing domination mate, because from HQ on Conquest, it takes a Ballache to get back to where you need to be, similar to BV, Similar to Battlefield 1. 

I never played anything else other than conquest in Battlefield games. Flag to flag on Cairo is no more than 30 seconds on foot and the same can be said for Iberia. The liberation snow one, which is probably the biggest, is still really condensed and there is only two ways to get to the inner flags pretty much so it feels restrictive in that sense too. There is no territorial penalties for squad wipes either because all you need to do is spawn to the nearest flag and the radius is so big, chances are you are 30 seconds off where you want to be anyway. The maps just feel way too compact and the action is boxed-in. Vehicles have no room to breathe in Cairo and Iberia, and you can literally sit on a blind chokepoints in a tank rattle off 40+ kills with ease half the time. 

 

Even the smaller maps on BFV like Provence, Soloman Islands, Devastation, Operation Underground and Marita offer reasonable scale and plenty of room for territorial-focused gameplay. Here, there is no consequence to losing any flag because chances are you are within distance of getting one back instantly. I got 13 captures on my last match and I joined halfway through. 

[crispymorgan 1,069]

Maybe I'm misremembering how it used to be.  But I recall we'd all pile into an APC and bus to the first point, bail out, cover, capture and then unless you wanted to be walking for the next 5 minutes, back in a vehicle.  The driver would wait, or maybe a heli would take a group.  There seemed to be more cohesion.  This seems to me to be a fragmented game of team deathmatch with no real goal.  Remember when (the highest rank person?)  used to get commander role for the whole team?  That was ace.  I fear its gone too far down the fast paced route to back out now.

[phil bottle 10,093]

Yeah @Macca89 I actually set it up before playing with controller suggestions from some streamers. Bad move 🤪

 

Went back to default and it was much, much better and I enjoyed it a lot more : )

 

I'd like to see the bigger maps in the next demo.

[J4MES OX4D 10,327]

57 minutes ago, crispymorgan said:

Maybe I'm misremembering how it used to be.  But I recall we'd all pile into an APC and bus to the first point, bail out, cover, capture and then unless you wanted to be walking for the next 5 minutes, back in a vehicle.  The driver would wait, or maybe a heli would take a group.  There seemed to be more cohesion.  This seems to me to be a fragmented game of team deathmatch with no real goal.  Remember when (the highest rank person?)  used to get commander role for the whole team?  That was ace.  I fear its gone too far down the fast paced route to back out now.

People don't seem to bother with issuing orders now and I don't see the point either. You could literally free for all from any flag and it wouldn't make a difference whereas in the older BF games, you relied on working as a squad, pushing the flag the squad leader assigned, using beacons and also ensuring you don't get wiped because the set-back consequences were dire. Here if you get wiped, you choose any flag you want and then go left, right centre and chances are you'll be contesting a flag with others regardless in less than a minute. I don't even need to pull the map up mid-game anymore because all I have to do is focus on the flag icon that appears on the interface and that tells me all I need to know along with all the other x-rayed UI features. Just feels soulless and cheap this way. 

[Macca89 540]

1 hour ago, phil bottle said:

Yeah @Macca89 I actually set it up before playing with controller suggestions from some streamers. Bad move 🤪

 

Went back to default and it was much, much better and I enjoyed it a lot more : )

 

I'd like to see the bigger maps in the next demo.

Yeah bro, i was having a little trouble at start, was still having fun but was getting blasted left right and centre but loved the chaos, it's warfare, it's not meant to be chill 🤣 I then got my settings, reduced the zoom sensitivity etc, put on performance mode and it felt like a new game, it really doesn't feel like a beta, even tom was saying he took everything back he said about not buying it, it's a solid step in the right direction for battlefield and just glad that I can play a game which isn't gonna be filled with skins from movies, meta people who have meta loadouts, slide cancelling, few tweaks obviously need fixing but yeah for me! Superb!

[Macca89 540]

1 hour ago, J4MES OX4D said:

People don't seem to bother with issuing orders now and I don't see the point either. You could literally free for all from any flag and it wouldn't make a difference whereas in the older BF games, you relied on working as a squad, pushing the flag the squad leader assigned, using beacons and also ensuring you don't get wiped because the set-back consequences were dire. Here if you get wiped, you choose any flag you want and then go left, right centre and chances are you'll be contesting a flag with others regardless in less than a minute. I don't even need to pull the map up mid-game anymore because all I have to do is focus on the flag icon that appears on the interface and that tells me all I need to know along with all the other x-rayed UI features. Just feels soulless and cheap this way. 

You do realise spawning on any flag that your team has captured has happened on at least the last 2 or 3 battlefields before this bro.

[J4MES OX4D 10,327]

9 hours ago, Macca89 said:

You do realise spawning on any flag that your team has captured has happened on at least the last 2 or 3 battlefields before this bro.

Yes but you've completely missed the point of everything said. Spawning on a flag you've captured when the next flag is just 30 seconds away in BF6 is a world of difference than what we've seen previous whereby you don't need to apply any forwarding tactical strategy or squad teamwork whatsoever. The squad system has been completely obliterated since 2042 and the developers still don't understand the core design philosophy that made it so pivotal in the likes of 2, 3, 4, 1 and V.  There's no consequence to squad wipes or any territorial focuses when the maps are this compact. Conquest on Cairo and Iberia is practically domination as it is, and breakthrough is an unbalanced shambles. Spawn beacons are pointless now because unless you play them as a tac-insert for yourself, you literally just save yourself 15 seconds and create self-inflicted chokepoint that the opposition can sit on. These in old Battlefield games were critical to maintain a territorial push in a safe haven when spawning with the squad was risky. Now they are nothing more than a Call of Duty tactical insertion. This is why small linear shoebox maps don't work well. Metro and Locker do because they were meticulously designed but here they've just created a layout and prioritised destruction.

[GazzaGarratt 11,234]

Coming from a player that's never really enjoyed Battlefield over the years, I must say its probably been one of the best beta offerings I've played that I can remember. You may probably say that proves the point that BF lovers aren't overly enthused about the game, but I am struggling to see why there is so much disappoint in this thread so far. I must have played with c.8 FGers on it over the weekend and everyone was really enjoying it. The hours on it alone you could see that.

 

One criticism I would agree with? TTK. It felt too quick almost immediately and its one thing I think I can see why on a Beta they go quicker so they know they can dial it back on launch or next beta weekend. Breakthrough and Conquest felt very strong as game modes. Most maps felt like they had moments for attack and defence, which is a good thing overall. Domination not so much, as i felt that was introduced purely for the CoD players giving it a go.

 

It looked extremely polished.I enjoyed the UI. The Medic being able to resupply health and ammo is a great shout and I found in the 3-5 hours I played it, I can see why in Battlefield you really do need to work together in your squads to try and win the match. That will switch alot of CoD players off eventually leaving BF6 in a reasonably good state.

 

The only one thing you all know I want in this game to see it as a true success is if they fix it so more than 3 of your friends can play in the same match. Its impacted pretty much most BF games in the past and probably why CoD has still survived. They've got to get this right on launch.

 

N.B. I didn't play it on original settings. @igotmollywhopped Josh helped update my settings before I played and I can only assume those changes helped me have a really enjoyable time on it - but equally I can't say how different it is to the default settings.

[MrBiron 1,498]

13 minutes ago, GazzaGarratt said:

One criticism I would agree with? TTK. It felt too quick almost immediately 

 

I watched a video last night from XclusiveAce and he said that it seems like there's some server de-sync. So it feels like you die with one bullet but the enemy actually hit you with 5 bullets. This is one feature I wish they hadn't copied from COD 🤣 Hopefully they'll get it sorted the full game.

 

Personally I really enjoyed the beta. Movement is great and didn't feel sluggish. I didn't like that mountain map with the rock in the middle that has 20 snipers on it every game 😡 

 

I just hope all of the COD players that don't wait for revives just fuck off back to COD when BO7 comes out.

[phil bottle 10,093]

When you're forking out 70 quid plus for a video game I think you're allowed to have opinions on it, be they positive or negative. That's what a forum is for. 

 

Those with criticism have made it quite clear in their posts what they're unhappy with, so i'm not sure what there is to understand.

 

No-one needs to take it as a personal insult that others aren't necessarily happy with something they themselves are happy with.

 

Everyone's opinions on the game are equally valid, please reflect on that 😘

[GazzaGarratt 11,234]

50 minutes ago, phil bottle said:

Everyone's opinions on the game are equally valid, please reflect on that 😘

 

Totally agree on that ❤️ I think I just found it more odd catching up as everyone who played online over the weekend were really happy that the game seemed in a decent spot. Maybe its because I didn't hear that online and then read something different here.

 

We'll see what the next weekend will bring. Macca mentioned they are working on TTK which is a good sign its already been acknowledged.

 

15 hours ago, crispymorgan said:

This seems to me to be a fragmented game of team deathmatch with no real goal.  Remember when (the highest rank person?)  used to get commander role for the whole team?  That was ace.  I fear its gone too far down the fast paced route to back out now.

 

 

I think this is totally down to the younger gen Cod players giving this Beta a go and not really understanding what team mechanics are about 😅 Matt told me on the Conquest games to tag a flag being squad leader and that got us extra points. I think not many people play the FG way online 🤣 - which is why I'll be serious disappointed if they don't make it really easy to get more friends in the same game.

[phil bottle 10,093]

If enough ppl buy the game, I'll probably pick it up too, and on console as my PC can't really handle it. Would be a fun FG team play game if we have enough interest.

[GazzaGarratt 11,234]

Just now, phil bottle said:

If enough ppl buy the game, I'll probably pick it up too, and on console as my PC can't really handle it. Would be a fun FG team play game if we have enough interest.

 

I'm in the same boat mate. Feels like it has momentum, but we have to see what happens. I even saw some older FGers on it from around the world too, so its clearly peaked some interest out there.

[phil bottle 10,093]

Quite a well rounded review imo

 

 

[J4MES OX4D 10,327]

3 hours ago, phil bottle said:

When you're forking out 70 quid plus for a video game I think you're allowed to have opinions on it, be they positive or negative. That's what a forum is for. 

 

Those with criticism have made it quite clear in their posts what they're unhappy with, so i'm not sure what there is to understand.

 

No-one needs to take it as a personal insult that others aren't necessarily happy with something they themselves are happy with.

 

Everyone's opinions on the game are equally valid, please reflect on that 😘

Yep, after all, it's carefully constructed and valid criticism from the Battlefield community which is why this game even exists. Had the community not salvaged 2042 for 3 years straight, the entire Battlefield brand would be dead by now. Let's also not forget back in 2014 when the community saved Battlefield 4 after at the time, the worst launch in videogame history bar none, so criticism is absolutely critical going forward.

 

Whilst not much can be done at this stage in regards to some of the design choices as the maps are already finished, it is good to get on paper what people may want to see in the future. For instance, it doesn't look like we're getting a water map which is almost criminal🤣 If we end up doing what Treyarch did to COD, every map will start shrinking and they'll make decisions based on data and not logic. Gotta keep everyone happy and not just the COD incomers who are already demanding battle passes and e-sports!

[crispymorgan 1,069]

 

this is pretty much where I'm at.

[GazzaGarratt 11,234]

20 hours ago, crispymorgan said:

 

this is pretty much where I'm at.

 

This is so strange to me. Everything he said was for me what you want out of a Battlefield game 🤷‍♂️ TLDR - I think what I'm seeing is what happened to people talk about Destiny. They want something fresh and evolved but once they do, they don't like it.

 

Clearly small and medium maps dictate his thoughts. For me, if we have way too much open space like alot of older Battlefield games, in this era we will just get 40 snipers taking people out anywhere between 1-5 minutes of running from original spawn points. Thats just so annoying and a real turn off if you can't get into gunfights and flanking early. He said about Snipers doesn't work as they're downed - but that doesn't make sense. If you're good enough to get headshots, there in no respawn so thats a huge bonus. If you down them he says its pointless but thats a great thing to happen to stop the enemy flow. I hate snipers with a passion, but thats surely their use - and also impacts the ticket system in a good way for your team.

 

I didn't see many diamonds in my game, maybe that will happen more as people start spotting people more and more so lets give him that point. On a game like this to get control points, I actually think we need to do what he thinks is wrong, which is tactically play in your group, make your way to the area you want to control. I can't see any of our beta games were like 'gungame' as he mentions. Gungame is no way near this game.

 

Maybe its time Battlefield fans have to understand it has to evolve to stay in the limelight. The larger maps sound like a good way to see where the game is long term. But I do hope there is lots of cover, like there has been in the few maps we tried. Working in teams and to try and take a control point seems a far more enjoyable way to win a game than sit back and let snipers take you out like Lemmings walking off a cliff.

[phil bottle 10,093]

2 hours ago, GazzaGarratt said:

 

This is so strange to me. Everything he said was for me what you want out of a Battlefield game 🤷‍♂️ TLDR - I think what I'm seeing is what happened to people talk about Destiny. They want something fresh and evolved but once they do, they don't like it.

 

Clearly small and medium maps dictate his thoughts. For me, if we have way too much open space like alot of older Battlefield games, in this era we will just get 40 snipers taking people out anywhere between 1-5 minutes of running from original spawn points. Thats just so annoying and a real turn off if you can't get into gunfights and flanking early. He said about Snipers doesn't work as they're downed - but that doesn't make sense. If you're good enough to get headshots, there in no respawn so thats a huge bonus. If you down them he says its pointless but thats a great thing to happen to stop the enemy flow. I hate snipers with a passion, but thats surely their use - and also impacts the ticket system in a good way for your team.

 

I didn't see many diamonds in my game, maybe that will happen more as people start spotting people more and more so lets give him that point. On a game like this to get control points, I actually think we need to do what he thinks is wrong, which is tactically play in your group, make your way to the area you want to control. I can't see any of our beta games were like 'gungame' as he mentions. Gungame is no way near this game.

 

Maybe its time Battlefield fans have to understand it has to evolve to stay in the limelight. The larger maps sound like a good way to see where the game is long term. But I do hope there is lots of cover, like there has been in the few maps we tried. Working in teams and to try and take a control point seems a far more enjoyable way to win a game than sit back and let snipers take you out like Lemmings walking off a cliff.

 

If its not Battlefield anymore they should give it a different name innit 😉

 

But yeah, this is how you deal with snipers in Battlefield:

 

[J4MES OX4D 10,327]

I've pretty much watched all the content creators thoughts post-beta and without the sponsorships and it seems a lot of them share similar feelings. To sum it up briefly:-

 

- the game looks great and is mechanically decent

- gunplay feels good

- the game is very fast paced

- gameplay has devolved more into Call of Duty and they will sacrifice logic and series values to appeal to those players as a priority

- vehicles don't feel great and they don't work effectively on the smaller style maps

- maps are too compact, linear, mostly urban, lack elevation and play too similarly

- the squad system may as well not exist from a tactical or strategic standpoint 

- sniper glint may need to be toned down 

- classes are plied with too many weapons and gear that completely devalue choice and impact

- destruction looks impressive but it doesn't radically change anything and is inconsistent (the upcoming new beta map has huge issues with the latter apparently)

 

The class system needs a total overhaul IMO - the fact Assault can carry a primary, a shotgun, a rocket launcher, flashbangs, a deployable shield grenades and a stim is just ridiculous and almost Treyarch levels of generosity. This devalues the class choice completely and makes you stupidly overpowered. Also sod the shield and stim - that bollocks belongs in COD. Knee sliding and and tac sprint was rejected so not sure why the stim made it. The shield is acceptable I guess. 

 

3 hours ago, GazzaGarratt said:

They want something fresh and evolved but once they do, they don't like it.

I don't think any Battlefield or FPS fan wanted something fresh - they just wanted Battlefield back i.e 2,3 and 4 especially after the disappointments of BFV and 2042. BF6 achieves that to a degree, but then let's itself down with some questionable design and strange conceptual choices. This is also what happens every time with Battlefield - Call of Duty fucks up spectacularly and then Battlefield fails to capitalise with some surprise errors and misses an open goal. Everyone then leaves Battlefield after a month and returns to COD irrespective of how garbage it is that year.

 

Whilst it's great to see how far the game and series has come under the new leadership in such a short space of time, it would be very disappointing to see the game make easily avoidable mistakes and brainless design choices like 2042 did. The community have spent well over a year helping build BF6 and this is off of 3 years of relentless feedback on 2042 so when the developers go against the grain and dominant advice, it can alienate the community a lot worse than if it was just bad independent choices. 

[GazzaGarratt 11,234]

4 hours ago, J4MES OX4D said:

The class system needs a total overhaul IMO - the fact Assault can carry a primary, a shotgun, a rocket launcher, flashbangs, a deployable shield grenades and a stim is just ridiculous and almost Treyarch levels of generosity. This devalues the class choice completely and makes you stupidly overpowered. Also sod the shield and stim - that bollocks belongs in COD. Knee sliding and and tac sprint was rejected so not sure why the stim made it. The shield is acceptable I guess. 

 

Agree with this. I only did Assault and didn't feel like i needed to do anything else as others were running Medic.

 

4 hours ago, J4MES OX4D said:

- the game looks great and is mechanically decent

- gunplay feels good

- the game is very fast paced

- gameplay has devolved more into Call of Duty and they will sacrifice logic and series values to appeal to those players as a priority

- vehicles don't feel great and they don't work effectively on the smaller style maps

- maps are too compact, linear, mostly urban, lack elevation and play too similarly

- the squad system may as well not exist from a tactical or strategic standpoint 

- sniper glint may need to be toned down 

- classes are plied with too many weapons and gear that completely devalue choice and impact

- destruction looks impressive but it doesn't radically change anything and is inconsistent (the upcoming new beta map has huge issues with the latter apparently)

 

I read that as good feedback overall. Some good, some bad.

 

Whats helpful is the last 2 BFs haven't been at this level at the beta stage.

[Macca89 540]

What FG is about right! 💪💪❤️❤️