Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[kilakan]

I've played battlefield 1 for about 60 hours at this point and it's ridiculously fun, it is also the first battlefield I've played.  Honestly I think it boils down to the atmosphere you want your game to have between the two:
Sci-fi giant robots
or
Mud filled pits of smoke, screaming and the wet squishy sound of someone having his head bashed in with a shovel.

They are both very good looking games.

[Flying Dice]

I don't think anyone's contesting that the BF1 campaign is a pile of trash. But nobody buys BF or CoD for the campaign anyways, one would think.

[Man of Paper]

To be fair, even though they were originally always focused on the Multiplayer, Bad Company showed us, or at least me, that they can also do a single player campaign that's fun and engaging.

[Retropunch]

I enjoyed the game, and it did bring some interesting things to the table, but I can't really think of any aspects that made it more than just a jumpy CoD with titans.

Isn't that a little reductive though? These kinds of mainly multiplayer FPSs are all about movement and shooting, plus a few extras. The BF games add larger maps and a few vehicles. Titanfall adds completely new dimension to movement and customizable Titans that everyone can use, not just the people that get to them first. It's pretty big as far as these kinds of games go, in my opinion.

I wouldn't really call wall-running/parkour 'a new dimension' - Brink did it in 2011, three years before Titanfall. Similarly, there were titans (obviously not exactly the same) in Battlefield 2142 with a mode where everyone got them.

I enjoyed Titanfall a lot, and I do think it was a very fluid, very fun MP - it did bring some new stuff to the table, and definitely upped the game in terms of fluid gameplay. However, in my eyes, the small amount of content took away from that pretty harshly. Yeah, I could customise my titan, but not very deeply. Yeah I could enjoy zipping round maps, but there were only a few to go at.

[Neonivek]

I don't think anyone's contesting that the BF1 campaign is a pile of trash. But nobody buys BF or CoD for the campaign anyways, one would think.

The way I've seen it is that without a single player campaign you don't entice enough people so to speak.

There is something about a single player campaign that makes people all the more desperate to play multiplayer... as well as enjoy multiplayer all the more.

[Retropunch]

I don't think anyone's contesting that the BF1 campaign is a pile of trash. But nobody buys BF or CoD for the campaign anyways, one would think.

The way I've seen it is that without a single player campaign you don't entice enough people so to speak.

There is something about a single player campaign that makes people all the more desperate to play multiplayer... as well as enjoy multiplayer all the more.

It probably also works as a good lead in to the multiplayer. There's a sort of 'floor limit' with these sorts of games which you really need to be above to enjoy the MP properly, and the campaign helps get you there.

[Chiefwaffles]

The way I see it the Campaign also allows for some variety in the game, so people have more than one option (multiplayer) and just get quickly burned out.
The BF1 campaign is pretty cool, though. I'm not a huge fan of the disconnected nature of it. It's somewhere around 6 (complete guess) or so 2-hour independent story things with different characters.) But the story and gameplay inside those disconnected storylets are well done.
Definitely better than recent Battlefield games' campaigns.

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

Yeah, I could customise my titan, but not very deeply.

It's a shame there's only humanoid titans.  Why not a hound or some other quadruped with weapons built into the carapace?  Or maybe a scorpion-like one with a laser mounted as the stinger?  Or even just some regular tanks roaming around for a bit of contrast...

Really wish I knew of one mech game that give a large variety, but the ones I know of tend to stick with the humanoid template.

The way I see it the Campaign also allows for some variety in the game, so people have more than one option (multiplayer) and just get quickly burned out.

Since it is on its own maps that are longer, it does help cleanse the pallet from the constant repetition of the multiplayer maps, while still being able to play the game.

[KingofstarrySkies]

You know, perhaps I'd like Battlefield 1 more if it felt like it was actually committed to the idea of being a historical war FPS? It feels so goddamn gross and not at all WW1 to me.

muh historyboner

[Cthulhu]

All I've said being said, I picked BF1 when it came time to actually buy one.

[Dostoevsky]

Holy shit, no, no fucking way, unless they completely removed (among other things) the light tank from the game after the beta. Shit was the most broken thing I've ever seen, every single match where I got into one ended up with me waaaay at the top of the scoreboard with at most one or two deaths if I got extra ballsy and camped in town for a long time. Didn't do badly out of it, but that thing was a free ride to points and basically unkillable if played properly.

I don't think I saw anybody else address this, but the FT-17 did get pretty nerfed between open beta and release. It's quite flimsy now, and you often don't see light tanks survive too long when used. (For that matter, you don't see too many Mark Vs either - mainly A7Vs, which is funny considering only 20 were built and the Germans used more captured British tanks than they did German tanks.)

As to what others have said, it really is an early dieselpunk shooter instead of a WW1 shooter - but in my opinion that's pretty darn awesome. Not a perfect game by any means, but good fun. I do kind of wish they allowed all the classes to use scopeless bolt action rifles, but eh.

In the absence of something broad like that, I'd be interested to see servers blocking the use of SMGs and self-loading rifles. Assaults have to use shotguns, medics have to stick with pistols (the pistols are pretty good in this one, by the by). LMGs are in a pretty awkward place in general, being more 'weak assault rifle' than 'light machine gun', but the latest patch has done a bit to incentivize using them as stationary weapons.

[Yoink]

Battlefield 1 deformable terrain and destructible buildings are really well done IMO.

I have to admit, the destructible terrain does look really nice from what I've seen.

[Flying Dice]

Yeah, you can get deep enough to have proper craters to hide in. Building destruction is still kinda wonky, but at least it's not "okay everything is now flat" or "okay everything is now a mound of rubble which fits perfectly within the old floor plan".

[Yoink]

I hear that there are still occasional building bits that inexplicably can't be destroyed, which is disappointing, but it's still a huge improvement over previous games.

[Flying Dice]

I just wish they'd done all bolt-actions for everyone but the LMG class, made LMBs worse to tote around and hipfire but much better when deployed, and given assaults the option of taking a trench gun. The recon distinction should be >scopes<, not being able to use bolt-actions at all. The plethora of SMGs and semiautomatic rifles and carbines is annoying and fucks with the pace of gameplay.

By the by, did they fix bayonet charges post-beta? They always felt weird and didn't work half the time.