Very nice!
There is a current issue which is tracked that causes players to end up in the incorrect region when matchmaking - this is most likely the cause of this happening more.
There is a current issue which is tracked that causes players to end up in the incorrect region when matchmaking - this is most likely the cause of this happening more.
Also, if you have this issue - you should restart the client fully (and it should fix itself).
Neat!
Also, nice humble brag :)
Here we are witnessing the mating dance of a wild corsair and higgings boat, we approach cautiously to not disturb the intimate moment
Nothing better than a speed run with 3 squadmates with fliegers + panzerfausts to show the BF sandbox who's king :). We did this in the capture event where Jackfrags and friends played a couple of weeks ago. Much fun, and this kind of stuff I've personally been missing, it's about the fun!
Would you look at that sandbox :). Hope you guys are having fun!
This is awesome! Great work!
That looks.. interesting. If you expecience issues, please turn on the netgraph and the netstatus bar (options/gameplay/advanced) - it will help us see what is going on, and narrow down issues much faster! Thanks!
Glad you are back! I continue loving the game even without these modes (i have already 600 hours on Bf5). But having fan favorite game modes like Rush and Frontlines permanently on the game it will bring ppl back and a lot of us we will play the game more. Maybe you could add them for 1 month and check the population of these modes. Also as Bf4 fan, in that game you had LOTS of 32 player game modes (Rush, Domination, CTF, Obliteration etc). ATM in Bf5 we have none.
I miss the mid size in between option too, yeah.
It's an empty message.
Sorry, but there is nothing good to entertain anyone here.
He's not even capable of promising anything.
It's the good old "there is more and more to come" message that we hear from the beginning guys, don't be fooled again, lads, PLEASE.
It was a dialogue starter - I understand the trust needs to be rebuilt for this to mean anything to some players.
I do believe the actual act of communicating honestly is worthwhile doing anyways though, but in your case (and many others I assume) - let's continue this "dialogue" through things improvements you can play in the game, deal?
I had left the game months ago, considering returning in the coming months after reading this post. Transparency is key, and the type of content that your core player base demands is essential. We admire your devotion to the BFV vision, and we are willing to accept the limitations of your work, but the devs have to know by now what it will take to re-earn our trust. All of you at DICE have heard the criticisms a thousand times, but many of us crying the loudest are the most devoted to your former achievements. The potential for BFV was/is impeccable. I donโt know if this game is salvageable, but we know youโre better than this DICE, you should know that too.. please donโt let us down again.
Thanks for the feedback - and I absolutely understand what is asked for and why. Most of that can be rectified - the question is in what order, and how fast (and is that fast enough for the players).
I promised myself to not talk about hypotheticals or promise anything before you can see it, so let's take this discussion up again once we start showing movement and talk about that (and you can play it).
Oh man, thank god you're back. I still believe in this game, but it's been tough hanging in there, all this time. And tougher still defending what I feel is good about it to the angry mob
At it's core, you have a great game here. But there are a lot of cracks in the foundation and ancilary issues that build up to something not so ancilary. I don't need to list them, you already know what they are. I really hope you can get them fixed and get this game to a state where everyone can start enjoying this game to the maximum level of it's potential
Because that potential is there my man. You just have to chip away the things that have infected it and keep adding the things it's sorely needed and you can get there
I agree completely. At the core this is a very solid foundation. Just needs some much needed TLC in the most important areas.
So what are your thoughts on removing frontlines?
I wouldn't call not featuring a game mode removal (it's still there, but unavailable).
I agree to the practise if it means players find more games to play - but we really need a way to spawn our own experiences (so if there is gaps in what is featured for the current week - you can always at least spawn a server running what you'd like to play)
The King is BACK on the throne,
Or should i say Mr FIX he gets the job done Glade you are back Mr Sirland .
One thing i noticed when playing on LOW res is that you only see half of a player from far away and also rock's are invisible until you ADS , So you see the players behind the rock then you ADS and see half the player . It's strange .I have to play all low to get the best FPS .
Please do something about TAA Give us a command to turn it off in console please .
Thanks man ,
As a fellow "max-FPS need more speed" player I've noticed these as well.
TAA is a favorite of mine to allow turning off. It makes little sense to me to limit this and force people to use "sharpen" or similar functionality on PC. I'd say if you want a smoother experience on any platform - we should allow you to turn that kind of functionality off. Allow for gameplay first.
Not sure if I'll convince all the stakeholders on the merits of that though - but I'll try!
Glad to have you back, and thanks for this very honest and straightforward response! I hope your time with your newborn was fun, it's wonderful you got time off for that! :)
I don't really expect a response here, since you're already being flooded with replies, but since the team is looking to address some of the QoL/etc issues the community has had for the past few months, I've got a couple to consider passing on to the team that aren't the usual "authentic uniforms / vehicle cosmetics / unreleased stuff in the files" that we tend to see around here.
Back in BF4, even before CTE started, I was regularly on comms with one of the LA animators (Ryan / AnimationMerc), and through BF4 and BF1 we got pages and pages of fixes, changes, and improvements done to weapon animation, function, and even name correction done through BF4 and BF1, especially BF4; he gifted me the DICE Friend dogtag in BF1 too. :D However, he moved on from DICE a few months back, and passing on some of this stuff has been extremely difficult since then, partly because I don't know who on the team actually handles / is passionate about this sort of stuff.
While technical function/gameplay errors are drastically lower in BFV (as well as BF1 at launch) thanks to members of the team constantly upping their standards, there are always things that slip though (incorrect damage models, magazine capacities, etc).
However, BFV's largest weapon authenticity type issue is naming schemes/standards. Or lack thereof. But the issue here is that because names are just a UI thing (zero gameplay relevance), because names have to go through Legal to be changed (which is doable, we got names changed in BF4), and because it's not something I think any devs active on reddit/twitter/etc actually handle themselves... I've had about zero luck even finding a dev that might handle this, let alone actually being able to talk with them.
Battlefield, since at least BF3, has been stellar about authentic and correct names for weapons and vehicles, but BFV has been... a total mixed bag. In BF3 we had, for example, the F/A-18E Super Hornet and Su-35BM Flanker-E, which are stellar examples of Battlefield's high-quality/authentic naming standards.
Meanwhile, in BFV, we have things like Lee-Enfield No.4 Mk I, Ag m/42, and Panzerbรผchse 39 (stellar), to VGO and M1911 (too basic, ditching the variant designations like the Lee-Enfield includes), to Boys AT Rifle and Kar98k (colloquialized names), to Trench Carbine (entirely descriptive, no actual name) all in the same weapon pool.
On top of that, we also have errors clearly made by grabbing one of the first Google results, a couple that are simply incorrect entirely, and a general lack of consistency among weapons of the same nation/military, like MP40, FG-42, and MG 42 all in the same game (letter-letter-space-number-number is the correct German style).
In addition to all that, the vehicle devs seem to still be on the "NAME EVERYTHING IN ALL-CAPS" train that we finally got away from in BF1. Being all-caps was BF3/4's biggest name issue, as plenty of names and designations depend on a mix of upper/lowercase letters to actually be correct; BFV has the StG 44 (perfect) sitting alongside the FLAK38 and PAK40 (instead of FlaK 38 and PaK 40). This also makes the short-form/acronym and roman numeral elements harder to identify and more confusing for casual / less knowledgeable players, for example SPITFIRE MK VA instead of Spitfire Mk Va.
Vehicles also entirely omit the accents and special characters that the weapon names in BFV do use, which leaves us with things like Panzerbรผchse 39 and STURMGESCHUTZ IV (instead of Sturmgeschรผtz IV, with the umlaut) in the same game. We also have omission of key elements of names, such as PANZER 38T instead of Panzer 38(t), with the brackets and lowercase, and so on.
Given we're about to get a bunch of Japanese weapons and vehicles, which are probably the most "complex" to get correct/consistent, my experience tells me those might end up being a bit messy too.
I don't believe it's that any of the devs "don't care" or "are lazy" or anything like that, but there definitely seems to be a lack of standards set for naming in BFV, like maybe all the different devs that work on these things are individually naming their own work, which gives wildly inconsistent results. I have a Google doc running with a whole list of corrections for this stuff, but it's never gotten any traction, with all the devs that actually post around here being in other departments and such.
I realize this is pure QoL and ultimately not overly "important", but I do feel it's this sort of detail that's made Battlefield great over the past decade, and it's also definitely something the vocal parts of the community wanting "authentic uniforms" and such would appreciate.
Sorry to bother you with this, but if you actually read the whole thing, thanks. :)
Hey! I'd consider improving things like this as part of a QOL thing for sure. But names, as you say are not easy to get what you want all the times. Most of the time it's a legal risk assessment that stops us from using the "correct" names, or similar things. In many cases it's not deemed worth it.
It's also a tricky thing to rename something after the fact (many regular players could get confused with a rename) - but that said, I am all for trying if there is something we can do here too.
There is another organized group of hack users on NA servers playing under the clan tag HKR (get it, hacker, funny, right?) who show up every day individually or in groups to run up impossible scores, talk about how many times they've been banned but it doesn't matter because they can get all the cheap accounts they want, and generally laugh about spoiling the game for everyone else. It is simply unacceptable that the anti-cheat system takes so long for troll cheaters like these to be banned. If PUBG can ban such cheaters in a day or two, there is no good reason it should take EA weeks (if not longer).
New content is a waste of time for PC players if the cheating issue is not dealt with more effectively. Like the still unfixed team balancing problem, if this is not dealt with I for one would see no reason to buy any future BF games. This is something that every DICE dev should be expressing to management as often as possible.
I agree on the hacking issue, there is some ample room for a more aggressive stance here (we have in the beginning not been the most hard hitting). I'm not fully up to speed with where we are at the moment from a anti cheat POV (they are for obvious reasons a little more secretive with what they do) - but I'll make note of looking that up and seeing if there is anything we can do short, mid and long term to improve the experience when it comes to this.
Absolutely, the regular first person on tanks being entirely unusable really hinders their ability up close and in hectic situations. While Assault's AT burst-damage is also probably a tad too high at close range (while tanks also do rather low damage to other tanks), I feel that the sensitivity/delay issue is definitely the worst thing tanks have to deal with right now.
Please give me more detail - what exactly is the issue you describe? I think I have an inkling of a clue, but let's make sure we talk about the exact same thing.
especially the focus it took away from the good stuff
It's funny because your team did the opposite and willingly enforced the entire controversy and blew it out of proportion. Valid complaints about the game were blatantly ignored and the team acted as if everyone who disliked what they saw was a misogynist even if they never spoke a word about women. Yes, the new gameplay mechanics are great but on literally every other level the game is incredibly lacking, I'm sorry, but that's just the way it is. It seemed you were sore about the fans not liking what they got and chose to stay in denial about it and find some extremely weak excuse for it and even mocking your playerbase while doing so.
When I say team - I mean dev-team, as in the devs making the game and the content for it - just for posterity.