BATTLEFIELD 1

OEM said:
I'm torn. The game looks awesome and it seems like EA finally optimized the game to not be complete shit on PC.

However, $140 or whatever for the season pass?! They're basically admitting to releasing an incomplete game and telling you they're going to butt rape you later. I've tried looking at it as an expansion pack type thing for WoW...but that doesn't comfort me either because of the insanely short shelf life of the BF games.

I WANT to play it...but I can't justify the rape and the short life span :(
Click to expand...

This goes back to BF3 and before that. I only bought the standard version and will buy premium later when it's close to the new map release.
Just buy the standard version and enjoy. There's no reason to buy the Premium Edition now because of of the benefits has passed.
 
I'll never buy DLC unless it's really promising got burned bad with the COD DLC on steam for the past two years. Usually everyone sticks with the core game DLC is a joke.

I really like BF4s DLC though that was pretty nice with the amphibious assaults.
 
going to play this for a month and if it holds my interest really well then I will buy the season pass. Until then im happy with the base game,
 
Yeah. It is a casual shooter now. I can see it being fun if any large groups get organized and people actually compete as teams.

As a pub game? I am pretty sure I do not want to spend much time or money on it. Still have not bought and am playing through my ten hours with friends.
 
OEM said:
I'm torn. The game looks awesome and it seems like EA finally optimized the game to not be complete shit on PC.

However, $140 or whatever for the season pass?! They're basically admitting to releasing an incomplete game and telling you they're going to butt rape you later. I've tried looking at it as an expansion pack type thing for WoW...but that doesn't comfort me either because of the insanely short shelf life of the BF games.

I WANT to play it...but I can't justify the rape and the short life span :(
Click to expand...
Every game has a short shelf life compared to WoW, but Battlefield tends to have a longer lifespan than most FPS multiplayer games. True Battlefield games tend to have a 2-3 year time frame between major titles and the games themselves have communities for much longer than that. There were BF2 (2005) and BF2142 (2006) servers right up till the collapse of the Gamespy network and DICE refusing to workaround it circa 2011 (6 years). There are still a few BF:Bad Company 2 servers 6 years after release. BF3 (2011) still has an pretty active community (5 years) , and BF4 (2013) still has a huge following even after BF1 launch.

So I'm not real sure what you mean by "insanely short shelf life" regarding the Battlefield games. SW:Battlefront was not a Battlefield game, and Battlefield Hardline was a bit of a fluke and it wasn't even done by DICE. Battlefield isn't Counterstrike, but it isn't Call of Duty either.


As far as the price, I agree the $140 Ultimate Edition is ridiculous, even though it includes all the DLC ahead of time. It's a helluva gamble for someone to take. Even the announced $69.99 for the base title was obscene as its a full $10 more than other AAA releases.
 
CaptNumbNutz said:
Every game has a short shelf life compared to WoW, but Battlefield tends to have a longer lifespan than most FPS multiplayer games. True Battlefield games tend to have a 2-3 year time frame between major titles and the games themselves have communities for much longer than that. There were BF2 (2005) and BF2142 (2006) servers right up till the collapse of the Gamespy network and DICE refusing to workaround it circa 2011 (6 years). There are still a few BF:Bad Company 2 servers 6 years after release. BF3 (2011) still has an pretty active community (5 years) , and BF4 (2013) still has a huge following even after BF1 launch.

So I'm not real sure what you mean by "insanely short shelf life" regarding the Battlefield games. SW:Battlefront was not a Battlefield game, and Battlefield Hardline was a bit of a fluke and it wasn't even done by DICE. Battlefield isn't Counterstrike, but it isn't Call of Duty either.


As far as the price, I agree the $140 Ultimate Edition is ridiculous, even though it includes all the DLC ahead of time. It's a helluva gamble for someone to take. Even the announced $69.99 for the base title was obscene as its a full $10 more than other AAA releases.
Click to expand...

Not quite... the standard edition is $59 buying from Orignin. But I got mine at cdkeys and only paid $43.
 
I'm pretty bad right now. I can barely hold a KDR of 1. I think I just need some time to figure out the guns and the maps and I'll get better. A lot of times there's a lot of stuff going on (explosions, smoke, particles, etc) and I can't really tell what's happening. I guess it's realistic in that sense. If anyone wants to add and play with a scrub, I'm on the west coast with username, "finallyaDr".
 
CaptNumbNutz said:
I'm glad you mentioned this. :D
The west coast servers have about an extra 10ms of ping to them, yet are mostly lag free for me. That seems counter intuitive for most people if they don't know the difference between ping and dropped packets (which happens to be one of the orange icons flashing on the right of the screen).
.
Click to expand...

OMFG I was wondering why I'm so horrible at this game and reading this just occurred to me that that orange packet symbol is ALWAYS on my screen. (NYC and playing on East coast servers 10-13 ping). Thanks now I have an excuse as to why I'm so fucking bad and everyone's ALWAYS wrecking me no matter what. :shame:
 
blade52x said:
I'm pretty bad right now. I can barely hold a KDR of 1. I think I just need some time to figure out the guns and the maps and I'll get better. A lot of times there's a lot of stuff going on (explosions, smoke, particles, etc) and I can't really tell what's happening. I guess it's realistic in that sense. If anyone wants to add and play with a scrub, I'm on the west coast with username, "finallyaDr".
Click to expand...

Honestly it took me about 15 hours of playing the Dom map rotations with the same gun to get good enough that I am now mostly topping or coming close to topping the kill charts on most maps. There are a couple maps because of my set up (medic using marksman rifles) where i get my ass handed to me though because of super close quarters and just not playing the maps enough. My favorite maps are st. quentin scar, argonne forest, and empire's edge. i suck at, and dislike, ballroom blitz and FAO fortress. in the middle on the rest of the maps.
 
Motley said:
Not quite... the standard edition is $59 buying from Orignin. But I got mine at cdkeys and only paid $43.
Click to expand...
Good catch. I should have clarified.

I said the "announced" price. It's the price they originally quoted for the Early Enlister Edition before the release. $10 more for 3 days early access is retarded. Then they tried to sell EA Access that would give people another 10 hours trial period before that for another $5 monthly subscription.

Hell, they are still quoting $79.99 for the console Early Enlister version, and the early enlistment period is already over.

Fortunately, the game itself now can be found at more normal prices. These pricing gimmicks have gone beyond ridiculous.

I'm so glad I didn't pay for the game. The free copy I won from my Clan contest makes the gameplay even more enjoyable.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SoFGR
like this
0neTwo said:
This has been my entire BF1 experience as medic:

O0aX1jX.gif
Click to expand...
too far away. when I revive someone I get over their body.
 
CaptNumbNutz said:
I should have clarified.

I said the "announced" price. I meant to clarify that as the MSRP. It's the price they originally quoted for the Early Enlister Edition before the release. $10 more for 3 days early access is retarded. Then they tried to sell EA Access that would give people another 10 hours trial period before that for another $5 monthly subscription.

Fortunately, the game itself now can be found at more normal prices.

I'm so glad I didn't pay for the game. The free copy I won from my Clan contest makes the gameplay even more enjoyable.
Click to expand...

I dunno. I think the $5 a month EA access isn't terrible. You get access to most of their titles for free and can play as much as you want. Of course it doesn't apply to brand new games, but if there are some titles you didn't get into when they originally came out, why the hell not? It's $5. They are adding SW Battlefront soon, I never played it, but who knows I might check it out when I get bored of Battlefield eventually.
 
delita said:
I dunno. I think the $5 a month EA access isn't terrible. You get access to most of their titles for free and can play as much as you want. Of course it doesn't apply to brand new games, but if there are some titles you didn't get into when they originally came out, why the hell not? It's $5. They are adding SW Battlefront soon, I never played it, but who knows I might check it out when I get bored of Battlefield eventually.
Click to expand...
It's an interesting concept, no doubt. You're essentially renting all the old games in their library for $5/month. I just don't like how it was sold with BF1.

10 HOURS TRIAL TIME BEFORE ANYONE ELSE!... for $5/month.
EARLY ENLISTER EDITION PLAY 3 DAYS BEFORE ANYONE ELSE! ... for $10 more over regular price
GET ALL THE DLC AND PLENTY OF EXCLUSIVE ADDONS! ... for double price of early enlister version, $70 total for all the DLC which is $20 more than they charged for BF4 Premium initially.


EA seems to be trying new methods of getting every dollar possible out of gamers that aren't paying attention.

 
  • Like
Reactions: SoFGR
like this
Friends peer-pressured me into purchasing it. Not going to lie, EA did really well with this. The presentation compared to other Battlefield title is glorious and nearly gave me a self-conjured episode of PTSD. I felt sick participating in the intro battles knowing death was right around the corner. They truly captured the horror and ultra violence present in WWI extremely well.

Operations is seriously such a breath of fresh air for the franchise, and for FPS as a whole. Even though my heart is set out for Conquest almost always, I don't mind the lengthy battles that are coming from the new game mode.

Seeing zeppelins crash to the ground is never going to get old. The scale of which their designers/developers can work with has found another peak, and I don't know how they'll surpass this in future titles.

Not getting the DLC, unfortunately, but I did sell my soul in purchasing another EA title. The origin UI update is pretty sweet as well, except for the fact that hitting the minimize friends list button results in a dropdown that forces you to click another button in order to minimize it. God damn that pisses me off for some reason LOL. Cheers to EA for adapting (and stealing) the new and fresh ways of Discord's interface.
 
I got into BF4 after all DLC had been released, which was great. Now being on the other end of it I now realize the hatred I have for it. Waiting 2+ years and paying more for what will eventually be the complete game.

Greatly enjoying it but too bad my friend hasn't really got into it yet; this is his first Battlefield and he was having trouble killing anyone but quickly learned how to die. So I might be doing it solo.
 
Gabe3 said:
too far away. when I revive someone I get over their body.
Click to expand...

That wasn't the issue. the issue was his teammate gave up before he could revive him, you can tell because the revive skull disappeared.

This pisses me off so much when people do this. right in the damn left corner of the screen it shows in real time how far away medics are. that guy could literally have seen the counter go down from 10m to 9..8..7..6.. and the guy gives up when he's 1m away about to revive. this is very annoying in Operations since your waves are based on your teams lives. you start with a certain amount and when enough people die you lost that wave. so giving up when a medic is right on top of you is outrageously stupid.

Anyways speaking of operations.... theyre awesome. such a great game mode. I always loved attack and defend modes in games like UT.... so fun. something about trying to defend against massive amounts of enemies is just satisfying in a way that general run and gun and cap is not, like TDM and conquest.
 
Ya I'd say about half the time I'm running to revive someone as a medic, they skip revive and waste my time.
 
Is there anyway on random game to actually declare on which side you want to play - apart from "change team"? I refuse to play on US side, and sometimes the only option not to play as Yank is to leave the game.
 
CaptNumbNutz said:
It's an interesting concept, no doubt. You're essentially renting all the old games in their library for $5/month. I just don't like how it was sold with BF1.

10 HOURS TRIAL TIME BEFORE ANYONE ELSE!... for $5/month.
EARLY ENLISTER EDITION PLAY 3 DAYS BEFORE ANYONE ELSE! ... for $10 more over regular price
GET ALL THE DLC AND PLENTY OF EXCLUSIVE ADDONS! ... for double price of early enlister version, $70 total for all the DLC which is $20 more than they charged for BF4 Premium initially.


EA seems to be trying new methods of getting every dollar possible out of gamers that aren't paying attention.
Click to expand...

You know, after having spent the last year+ playing World of Warships - and I had never played any kind of MMO before, even though it's not really an MMO - I find it hard to get agitated about EA's pricing here.
 
Well, he is Polish. We do have a lot of Polish jokes.

Respect Poland. Great beer and bbq. Plus Witcher.
 
WorldExclusive said:
But still on US forums.



This definitely calls for a very different type of gameplay. Too much movement in this game will result in death. Patience and accuracy wins.
Click to expand...
Patience and accuracy wins unless you are playing assault. They just run around with shotguns and it's a mess. 9 times out of 10 I die from assault shotgun spammers.
 
0neTwo said:
I am 100% positive I am the only person in BF1 that spots enemies.

Im also sure im the only one that has ever revived a teammate.
Click to expand...

What's more annoying is having all the squads locked up to only have a few of the "left overs" group up. Not many options when there is literally one squad open with three or four players in it. Lol

CaptNumbNutz said:
It's an interesting concept, no doubt. You're essentially renting all the old games in their library for $5/month. I just don't like how it was sold with BF1.

10 HOURS TRIAL TIME BEFORE ANYONE ELSE!... for $5/month.
EARLY ENLISTER EDITION PLAY 3 DAYS BEFORE ANYONE ELSE! ... for $10 more over regular price
GET ALL THE DLC AND PLENTY OF EXCLUSIVE ADDONS! ... for double price of early enlister version, $70 total for all the DLC which is $20 more than they charged for BF4 Premium initially.


EA seems to be trying new methods of getting every dollar possible out of gamers that aren't paying attention.
Click to expand...


Are you complaining if you didn't even buy it?
Lol, jk.
Let's look on the bright side here folks, numbnuts only has to spend $50 now for the entire game including the seasons pass.

I'd only be worried if these "gimmicks" were a scam and or a trick.

Keeping the deluxe edition on sale still makes sense.
Only that they're naming it wrong. You still get battle packs and skins up front that the standard version won't offer. And this type of deluxe edition has been offered atleast since BF3 was released.

If they changed the name to "deluxe version" then it wouldn't really matter.
 
spaceman said:
Well, he is Polish. We do have a lot of Polish jokes.

Respect Poland. Great beer and bbq. Plus Witcher.
Click to expand...
It still doesn't make sense. It's a fictional game set in an alternate universe. When I played Battlefield 1942 which was set in WWII, playing as the Germans didn't mean I was associating with Nazi's or condoned their real world actions and politics. WWI was even more of a political wash as by modern viewpoints no one side was truly evil.

Eshelmen said:
Are you complaining if you didn't even buy it?
Lol, jk.
Let's look on the bright side here folks, numbnuts only has to spend $50 now for the entire game including the seasons pass.

I'd only be worried if these "gimmicks" were a scam and or a trick.

Keeping the deluxe edition on sale still makes sense.
Only that they're naming it wrong. You still get battle packs and skins up front that the standard version won't offer. And this type of deluxe edition has been offered atleast since BF3 was released.

If they changed the name to "deluxe version" then it wouldn't really matter.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. :D
I do see how people think I really shouldn't complain since I got the game free.

I figure I would speak up for those that do buy it. I'm also concerned if this starts becoming a trend for the future. It seems like another way to nickel and dime people is all, and it will likely only be an issue for those who don't pay attention.
 
Last edited:
I'll wait to buy this game until after they nerf snipers. I hate snipers in basically every game and after watching that video it makes it sound like they're OP.
 
CaptNumbNutz said:
It still doesn't make sense. It's a fictional game set in an alternate universe. When I played Battlefield 1942 which was set in WWII, playing as the Germans didn't mean I was associating with Nazi's or condoned their real world actions and politics. WWI was even more of a political wash as by modern viewpoints no one side was truly evil.
Click to expand...
Ohhh how I love history.

Agreed.

I don't think you can really say this or that nation was the 'bad guy' or the "evil one" in WW1, who deserved to lose/should have lost, etc.. WW1 was a conflict that was not as intentionally provoked as WW2, the outbreak of war was the cause for celebrations in many European capitols. The world was lusting to go to war... young people had been brought up with tales of war and glory, and how great it would be to die for your country. Military parades and nationalist rhethoric was a part of everyday life, and in fact many regarded the long peace before 1914 as a 'stale' peace, as a twisted and sick period of time where people had to live boring, dull lives devoid of all the action and excitement. And of course the vast social changes in every western European country and in Russia were seen by many as disturbing and unnatural, and totally in contrast to the romantic 19th-century world view. Socialism and anarchism were seen as the logical consequence of these unnatural social changes.

When the war came, many saw it as the thunderstorm after a depressingly hot and humid day, as the summer tempest that would clear the air.

Now, governments may have acted in a manner which we would call irresponsible, and which would today be looked upon as violations of international post-Nuremberg law. But that doesn't mean that these nations were the 'bad guys' in a way that Nazi Germany was the bad guy in WW2.


Although what's interesting -

According to the Treaty of Versailles, Germany takes full blame for the war and is the "bad guy". However...

Austria-Hungary can be blamed for the "blank check", while Russia can be blamed for mobilising, which practically made war a forgone conclusion.
 
DirtyB said:
I'll wait to buy this game until after they nerf snipers. I hate snipers in basically every game and after watching that video it makes it sound like they're OP.
Click to expand...
Nerf snipers? They can't be nerfed anymore than they already are.

Their scopes have had glint since BF4. You can spot a sniper bearing down on you from a thousand meters away almost like their scope is a newborn star. That in of itself is unrealistic, but it does help balance them because their bodies eventually disappear into the terrain due to poor draw distances with the game or the videocard's limitations.

It takes some serious skill to use sniper rifles and even more to use one while on the move. Unlike other FPS games (COD, Counterstrike, Overwatch), the maps are large enough for the physics to come into play meaning you have to account for bullet drop and movement by your target. Snipers in battlefield games are not a point at head, click, then dead affair.

I'm not sure what you are expecting when it comes to snipers. The biggest issues are don't run out in the open, don't peak out windows for more than a few seconds or several times in a row, and never be in the same spot for a long time. If you have to move great distances, move faster using a vehicle. Even when I do run out in the open, I rarely get headshotted. Most single shots aren't immediate death. Always charge to your objective by moving between pieces of cover.
 
CaptNumbNutz said:
Nerf snipers? They can't be nerfed anymore than they already are.

Their scopes have had glint since BF4. You can spot a sniper bearing down on you from a thousand meters away. That in of itself is unrealistic, but it does help balance them.

It takes some serious skill to use sniper rifles and even more to use one while on the move. Unlike other FPS games (COD, Counterstrike, Overwatch), the maps are large enough for the physics to come into play meaning you have to account for bullet drop and movement by your target. Snipers in battlefield games are not a point at head, click, then dead affair.

I'm not sure what you are expecting when it comes to snipers. The biggest issue is don't run out in the open. If you have to move great distances, move faster using a vehicle. Even when I do run out in the open, I rarely get headshotted. Most single shots aren't immediate death. Always charge to your objective by moving between pieces of cover.
Click to expand...

Yeah it's kind of hard to counter you here. But I will say, instead of nerfing snipers, I'd say maybe having a limit of snipers would do good. Most snipers are pretty shitty and are generally worthless when it comes to taking team objectives, but again that's not really what they're built for. Picking off soldiers, reducing player tickets and the good ol spot enemies from a distance. But at times, I do wish there were default servers that do indeed limit them. I mean, how many times can you honestly say "that sniper on our team won the battle for us"? Not many in my experience. Lol

But, this is battlefield, there are no rules here. Lol
 
Last edited:
It's not the snipers that are the problem, some of the maps in recent BF games have poor map design via the lack of cover that they implement, on many maps it's so sparse cover wise it's almost impossible to not get shot at when trying to move across the map. Usually only some of the maps have this problem, unfortunately it seems most of the maps which shipped with BF1 have this design flaw.

It's so bad that the most effective way of playing some maps is to park a tank on a hill somewhere and spend the entire round doing nothing but "sniping" at targets hundreds of meters away. Yeah, sniping with tanks. I expected this going in, so I'm not too bothered by it anymore. I really wish there would be more close quarters maps, the close quarters expansion for BF3 was great imo.

Basically the snipers are not the problem, they are just a symptom of the poor map layout, (not enough cover for players who want to play the objectives), and any players trying to play the objective (rather than camp in a bush or on a rock in the middle of nowhere) have to spend too much time exposed in completely outdoor areas with no cover.
 
Eshelmen said:
Yeah it's kind of hard to counter you here. But I will say, instead of nerfing snipers, I'd say maybe having a limit of snipers would do good. Most snipers are pretty shitty and are generally worthless when it comes to taking team objectives, but again that's not really what they're built for. Picking off soldiers, reducing player tickets and the good ol spot enemies from a distance. But at times, I do wish there were default servers that do indeed limit them. I mean, how many times can you honestly say "that sniper on our team won the battle for us"? Not many in my experience. Lol

But, this is battlefield, there are no rules here. Lol
Click to expand...
I came into the game fully expecting to put most of my time into playing a sniper, after my first 10 hours or so I switched to medic and haven't turned back. The optical weapons medics get IMO are far more friendly to use at close to medium range and are all semi automatic and most have pretty high mag capacity, certainly unrealistic for WWI. And I've been playing mostly rush and domination maps so I find snipers COMPLETELY worthless in both of these scenarios unless you are playing with friends and 1-2 other people always have your back, because as a WWI sniper with a gun that you have to pull the bolt back on after every shot, 1 miss and you are dead meat. And if you come up against more than 1 person in a close to mid range scenario you are also dead meat.
 
delita said:
I came into the game fully expecting to put most of my time into playing a sniper, after my first 10 hours or so I switched to medic and haven't turned back. The optical weapons medics get IMO are far more friendly to use at close to medium range and are all semi automatic and most have pretty high mag capacity, certainly unrealistic for WWI. And I've been playing mostly rush and domination maps so I find snipers COMPLETELY worthless in both of these scenarios unless you are playing with friends and 1-2 other people always have your back, because as a WWI sniper with a gun that you have to pull the bolt back on after every shot, 1 miss and you are dead meat. And if you come up against more than 1 person in a close to mid range scenario you are also dead meat.
Click to expand...

Just wait till hardcore my friend. It's going to be effing brutal ahahah

#snipersrevenge lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top