Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Interview with 4 Dice Veterens.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Interview with 4 Dice Veterens.

    http://blogs.battlefield.com/2012/09...sary-veterans/

  • #2
    Re: Interview with 4 Dice Veterens.

    Interesting read. And great memories of battlefields past. Too bad this article will fuel the fire that the games were better before BC2.
    sigpic


    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Interview with 4 Dice Veterens.

      What fire? They were better, pure and simple. BC to BF3 were a complete exit from the battlefield experience. I bought BF3 and stopped playing a week after beta ended. Went back to Arma and now PS2.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Interview with 4 Dice Veterens.

        Well for BC and BF3 they did focus on a new engine and making infantry/Vehicle combat on par with other games, I mean if BF3 had the infantry and vehicle combat of BF2 it would be a disaster" no commander, your player is pretty much a pile of wet newspaper with a bent pellet gun, the vehicles are weak and useless for 99% of the time"

        Battlefield always lacked in having decent combat, but now it lacks in the tactical side of things.



        Then the amount if players who played BF2 for its tactical side is a "small" part of the total player count, Yes there where a few servers like the TG one, but the majority where nothing different from the majority of servers in BF3, random people not working together running around in a cluster with a constant fight over commander so they could drop jeeps on to snipers.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Interview with 4 Dice Veterens.

          Originally posted by Brainhurts View Post
          Well for BC and BF3 they did focus on a new engine and making infantry/Vehicle combat on par with other games, I mean if BF3 had the infantry and vehicle combat of BF2 it would be a disaster" no commander, your player is pretty much a pile of wet newspaper with a bent pellet gun, the vehicles are weak and useless for 99% of the time"

          Battlefield always lacked in having decent combat, but now it lacks in the tactical side of things.



          Then the amount if players who played BF2 for its tactical side is a "small" part of the total player count, Yes there where a few servers like the TG one, but the majority where nothing different from the majority of servers in BF3, random people not working together running around in a cluster with a constant fight over commander so they could drop jeeps on to snipers.
          I'm so tired of pointing this out, but I will do it again.

          You can take a game with commander and squads and VOIP and play it like a bunch of jobbers. Millions did this with BF2.

          You cannot take a game with these features removed and play it TG style.

          You can drive one person around in an SUV, but you can never ever take 6 on a motorcycle.

          I like BF3, but it's much more of a sequel to BC2 then it is a sequel to BF2.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Interview with 4 Dice Veterens.

            That is pretty much what I said, No where did I say it was a sequel or it can or cannot be played a certain way, I pointed out improvements and flaws with both games nothing more, nothing less.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Interview with 4 Dice Veterens.

              The simple fact is that BC/BC2 were made to combat COD. Thats also where Battlefield turned into the hideous arcade crap we are currently playing. BF3 is more like BC3...

              I miss having to actually TRY to kill people with a chopper or a tank. Now there are so many "Percs" that it kinda kills the fun. And the fact that you never have to re-arm... yah what a joke. They have dumbed the game down so much that any monkey with half a brain can play.

              Most of all though I miss being able to jump onto any server and be able to TALK TO THE FREAKING PEOPLE IN MY SQUAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Anyone who argues this game is better for PC over the previous titles needs to have their head examined. Yes BF2 had issues... But atleast I could talk to the 6 other people in my squad (if they didn't have a mic they could atleast hear me). And I could actually play inf, armor, or air... I didn't feel I ever HAD TO FIGHT ARMOR to even play...

              But either way we shouldn't argue this anymore... There are 2 types of people... COD heads and BF heads. Brain as much as I hate to admit it... You spend all your time in a tank, and you love it and excell at it almost entirely because of the percs you have been given. I like the old BF style the best. If you dont have decent skill in a vehicle or aircraft you didn't belong in that asset. They have taken the COD format and just added vehicles and slightly larger maps.

              None of us are right or wrong, those of us that like or get enjoyment out of the game do so... The rest have moved on. I just wish that EA/Dice would let BF die if they are going to keep destroying the title like this. Same with Trey/Act... Their issue is they keep releasing the same freaking game over and over and over again. I would like to see something new come out that defines a new era of gaming... Its kinda like a book or movie... Once is great... a second time is usually pretty good.... But a third is sorta ok.... The fourth is always dissappointing and you wish you would have burned your money instead...

              And sorry to derail your thread Brain.
              |TG| CrazySob
              sigpic
              Wondering where I am? Look up and wait for the inevitable sound of 2000lbs of death and destruction that is about to ruin your day.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Interview with 4 Dice Veterens.

                I agree with you crazy, they dumbed it down but that is why the game sold 15 million copies in 4 months"BF3" and not 3 million copies over 7 years"BF2"


                More people have access to the game and more can actually play it for fun, nobody has to play it for 300 hours in order to drive a tank or fly a jet.


                BF2 was much like an old NES title, Artificially made harder, The hit boxs sucked, the guns sucked, the vehicles sucked, and to use any of them you had to practice and be skilled with them, that might take you 300 hours to actually not die in a tank or a helicopter or a jet.

                BF2 was "great" because everything in it sucked so hard you had to be good in order to use any of it.

                Just like a NES title once you became "good" it was really easy, I mean pretty much any Mario game can be beaten in less then 3 hours if you know what you are doing, Same with BF2, once you know what you are doing anyone with less "skill" then you is completely and utterly ****ed.




                Crazy, you might be a hipster.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Interview with 4 Dice Veterens.

                  Without going to deep here I think its 3 main things that have been lost on the series.

                  Lowering the bar, the removal of skill based teamwork oriented gameplay.

                  Shift of focus from combined arms all out war experience to meat grinding super fast paced infantry combat.

                  Map design. All maps have been designed to be in line with the lower bar and infantry focus.

                  BF3 is not a bad game as it excels at what they set out to do. But it is NOT a Battlefield game. Instead of being a leader and innovating, DICE went the safe route abandoning their roots.

                  With all that said, I REALLY enjoyed the article. As somebody that thinks 1942 was the best Battlefield game of the series (And my person fav game of all time), I loved to read their insight on making the game. Loved loved LOVED the article.
                  Last edited by Greasy Mullet; 09-30-2012, 01:19 PM.
                  Battlefield Samurai 'Banzaaaiii!!!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Interview with 4 Dice Veterens.

                    2142 was so amazing because they took the layout of BF2 and improved on it... then they took those rules and flipped them upside down lol. They took such a radically different battlespace and implimented awesome gameplay. And you have to think here... BF2 was only released on PC... As a PC game it kep on going through till BF3 was released and then some. BF3 wont live that long. Like you said greasy, they took the safe road and took basic BF'ish gameplay and mixed it with fast paced COD... They were able to pull in both markets, keep the game small enough to pull in console aswell. Thats why they sold so many coppies... The console numpties.

                    Thats not to say I dont enjoy playing BF3... I love both battlefield and COD. I was and still am hoping for a true battlefield to come out... I dont care if its a modern setting future or WWII.... But im not gonna hold my breath
                    |TG| CrazySob
                    sigpic
                    Wondering where I am? Look up and wait for the inevitable sound of 2000lbs of death and destruction that is about to ruin your day.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Interview with 4 Dice Veterens.

                      Ok I made another post in the other thread about this that explains a lot more,

                      EA/Dice will never make a "true" Battlefield game again, because the market is just too small for that, It would not fly on consoles as they are today, and selling 4-5 millions copies is **** all for EA, Thats why there is no Mirrors Edge two, It sold 4 million copies and was a "flop" for EA.

                      If BF3 sold 4 million copies, they would have just barely made back the money they spent on the game.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Interview with 4 Dice Veterens.

                        Originally posted by Greasy Mullet View Post
                        BF3 is not a bad game as it excels at what they set out to do. But it is NOT a Battlefield game. Instead of being a leader and innovating, DICE went the safe route abandoning their roots.
                        Originally posted by CrazySob View Post
                        Like you said greasy, they took the safe road and took basic BF'ish gameplay and mixed it with fast paced COD...
                        The logic of this escapes me....

                        You are telling me that they were cowards for NOT making a game EXACTLY like their previous versions and instead radically altering the formula to appeal to a new market?

                        Right. That seems safe.

                        The point is they took huge risks to provide more game in BF3, such as:

                        CO-OP
                        Battlelog as a html based stats and server browser system (this is actually a many part development since it includes party based voice support, join preferences to put you ingame with your friends, many many more filters based on regions, slot availability, specific maps).
                        64 players on largely destructible maps (not done in BC2 or BF2)
                        Teamwork focused devices and perks (SOFLAM is worthless to the user, what other BF has that? Squad perks... no other BF has that)
                        Context audio cues for a single button press (in BC2 granted).
                        3D Spotting system (in BC2 but vastly improved in BF3).
                        Disable vehicle as a tertiary state (for better or for worse going beyond alive or dead polarity).
                        Hardcore mode (BC2 as well, but better done in BF3).
                        More alterable variables that will still keep a server ranked.
                        Support for third party RCON tools as a focus of development
                        etc., etc., etc.

                        Those are just the ones off the top of my head. What people here are moaning about are really just two main things that are missing from BF2 and 2142 (not all other BF titles):

                        1. No server voip.
                        2. Lack of commander roles.

                        Put those two in and people here would think it is a "true" BF game because DICE would have designed it around how they want to play it. Now I would also like those features, but I don't pretend like groups of 4 friends who want to quickly get into a fast paced combined arms game don't exist just because I prefer the large community/clan based approach. These types of players are a large part of the market now and DICE sought to support them.

                        Quite honestly, DICE did it smartly. While the two big missing features for players like us make the game annoying it is playable. If you want to see attempts to draw a new market flat ruining a game take a look at RO2. Took them over a year to make that playable for the core fans....not even supporting specifically how they want to play, just playable as a game. At the same time, RO2 could failed to attract new players because they didn't really understand how to make their game appealing to the less hardcore.

                        Do I wish we could have VOIP in game for better teamwork? Yes. Can I count on one hand the servers other than TG that I ever had people using ingame voip well in BF2 and 2142? Also yes.

                        I also remember how annoying Commander was with spot spamming. I remember hackers/exploiters ruining servers with infinite jeep spawns. I remember no one following orders except on the TG server.

                        So let's remember, when you are claiming they abandoned a fanbase... you are really claiming they abandoned a minority (teamplayers) of a minority (PC Players) of a fanbase.


                        As to BF3 creating infantry grind? Karkand IO was what? Knife / pistol servers were what? All BF3 has done is magnified that group. There are more people who get into infantry grind play than in combined arms play. Not really surprising, how many people do you truly expect to be interested in being the fodder for 6-8 people on the 64 man servers with the powerful vehicles?

                        BF3 vehicle design, especially perks, and its map design leave something to be desired I will admit, but claiming the game is "selling out" to the console crowd is failing to recognize all of the added bonuses, features, and aspects of the game and letting two features that only affect the way YOU like to play the game determine if it is a "true" BF. Let's not forget that the brilliant piece of tech that was BF 2142 (bugged as all hell, but quite creative), sold poorly and was shunned by "true BF players" for its lack of planes and weak vehicles. I even remember reading in BF2 about how the lack of submarines and movable naval vessels made horrible compared to 1942. Everyone just picks the one thing they liked that is missing and decides that was the only thing that made it a BF game.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Interview with 4 Dice Veterens.

                          I agree with Misnomer completely , The true "fans/Veterans" where just a small amount of the total players and to cater to them would be just insane.

                          You see them on forums and making posts about it because those are the type of people who actually use that function in the game, You rarely see your average player go on to a forum and talk about the game they play.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Interview with 4 Dice Veterens.

                            Originally posted by Misnomer View Post
                            I even remember reading in BF2 about how the lack of submarines and movable naval vessels made horrible compared to 1942. Everyone just picks the one thing they liked that is missing and decides that was the only thing that made it a BF game.
                            Originally posted by Brainhurts View Post
                            I agree with Misnomer completely , The true "fans/Veterans" where just a small amount of the total players and to cater to them would be just insane.
                            And yet we have an official promotional article where the developers of BF1942 highlight this feature as something great and battlefield specific. Why is it crazy for the players of these games to be critical of such features being gone from later BF titles?

                            STEFAN: I donít know. I think thatís one of the coolest aspects of the game; that you can drive EVERYTHING.

                            LARS: Not to mention the submarine.

                            EVERYONE SAYS: Yeah!
                            sigpic


                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Interview with 4 Dice Veterens.

                              I was talking more about Commander and squad leaders and such, I mean for someone who wanted those features it bad, but the amount of people who actually used them and cared for them is a tiny fraction of the player base, Of course new players might not have a chance at using them and could be counted, but overall it would have turned out the same way as BF2, Most of the people playing random servers never using a lot of the features that are "missing" so why spend time and money on features only a small percent of the player base is ever going to use the way its meant to be used.

                              Then you have to think about how consoles have the extreme majority of players, Consoles 12 million copies, PC 3 million copies, They just aren't going to focus on 5% of the Pc players.


                              That is why I say find someone to make a game the way you guys want it to be, Have the game targeted for you, don't expect EA or DICE to make a game targeted towards a few hundred thousand players out of a few million.

                              Thats what DICE did with 1942, they made a game with the features they wanted, the game series started to get popular and those features where no longer the ones the majority of players cared about so they started dropping them.

                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X