Jump to content
Blakey

Battlefield V

Recommended Posts

Battlefield 2018 to be Battlefield Bad Company 3

 

Quote

While Battlefield 1 just had its latest expansion, Turning Tides, released today, franchise fans (like me) are already looking forward to what Battlefield 2018 will be.

Well, if this recent video is anything to go by, it’ll be none other than Battlefield: Bad Company 3! This info is courtesy of AlmightyDaq, who also leaked a ton of Battlefield 1 info that turned out to be legit. Here’s some of the info we’ve compiled from the video.

Various locations in the campaign will be “mid and post-Vietnam conflict” and not include the Cold War, and will not be “historically accurate.” Game modes confirmed to be in it are: Conquest, Rush, Operations, Domination, Team Deathmatch. There will be a 5v5-centric game mode similar to Squad Obliteration.

Maps will allegedly focus on “tighter gameplay” rather than “all-out warfare” and will be similar to Bad Company 2 and Battlefield 3 maps like Oasis Grand Bazaar, Harvest Day and so on.

Regarding gunplay, there will be Vietnam and Cold War era guns, and the gun customization will supposedly rival that of Battlefield 4, which means it’s going to be robust compared to the more simplistic approach of BF1. The character, gun and vehicle customization will also be improved (think: BF4 than BF1), which should be good news for lots of players who are into that.

When it comes to vehicles, players can expect modern tanks, LAVs, helicopters and the like to make a return, The kits (classes) in Bad Company 3 will be the Engineer, Support, Assault and Recon classes, which, if true, will be similar to BC2. Allegedly, the overall gameplay will be a “faster tempo” than BF1, and will have a higher skill gap.

Finally, microtransactions won’t be a thing (at least for now), and it won’t follow the same path as the highly controversial Star Wars Battlefront II! Let’s hope this is true, and that EA has learned a lesson or two from what happened to BFII.

AlmightyDaq mentions that we should expect a reveal at E3 2018, which is where EA typically announces their big games, and that a lot of YouTubers already know of BC3’s existence though aren’t talking about it for now.

You can watch the video below to hear it all firsthand, but remember: all of these things are rumors, until proven or debunked by EA and DICE. Even if Battlefield 2018 is indeed Bad Company 3, there’s a lot of things that can change which could make the info inaccurate. We’ve reached out to EA and will update the post if and when we get a statement about this.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in two minds over this.

 

Bad Company 2 is probably the most fun I've ever had with an online game. It came at the right time, it came with enough stuff not to be boring but enough to keep it interesting and the gunplay was distinct enough to make the main modes in the game fun to play. The perks allowed you to build a class that was specific to you but also made it so that whatever avenue you decided to go down you were always building a weakness into your strength. There was a real paper scissors stone thing going on, aside from a few things been stupidly OP (hello helicopters) it had a balance that felt good for the most, where being a good squad could turn the battle through good communication and tactics rather than being crackshots. Some of the maps had horrible doglegs in them that would lead to terrible meat grinder situations but for the most it was a game built on a solid foundation of smart design both in levels, kits and controls, all topped off with a smattering of silliness in the delivery.

 

"We take all this into account when we think about the future, and do franchise strategy," Troedsson said. "But there's one thing that lingers with Bad Company that we've been asking ourselves: what is it that the people really liked about Bad Company?"

 

Well let me tell you the steps you took that deviated from a game I, and many others, loved so much before you went and fucked it up.

 

When Battlefield 3 came around it threw the baby out with the bath water. It fucked about with the classes because people complained that nobody played medic (including me),  making it so that the medic could basically do everything, even to the extent of dropping his medic duties and going full assault. That is fucking stupid. They added lots of customisation on kits so you could cover all the bases without having downsides, had terrible maps devoid of the series' now staple destruction, was po faced and maybe most importantly changed the gunplay and how certain mechanics worked. Shooting went from feeling like it had some impact to feeling spongy, but somehow had a quicker time to kill. BF3 became the bastard child of CoD. It fucking sucked, and although it was many people's favourite because it was their first one, those people are wrong. Battlefield 3 was a bad game. Also fuck prone.

 

Battlefield 4 came in with a bang. Unfortunately is was the code breaking, it was eventually sorted out but for a period the game was a travesty. Again it was all po faced but this time around they managed to make it feel like you were taking part in a large scale war where a squad could hold down points or go on the offensive, at times it could be a bit of a clusterfuck because points changed hands so quickly it was a step up on the predecessor. Some of the maps were really nice and offered a more varied shooting gallery to the ones found in the last game, instead of shooting down an alley you were open to more tactics. Of course there were shit maps, and it's these shit maps that ended up affecting the balance of the game in regards to explosives and how you were resupplied them via ammo crates. Parts of the game outside of those maps sucked because of those design decisions, the shitty map design in the instance of Operation Locker and its shitty throwback map from BF3 Operation Metro meant that you'd spend fucking ages sitting on ammo crates trying to get explosives back on maps where you'd need them to deal with armour. Vehicular balance went out the fucking window here, they struggled to get the lock on weapons right for the choppers, and then they undercooked them and made each map that had a Blackbird an utter misery for anyone that couldn't ding it with an RPG. On the top of that you had silly decisions like allowing you to repair mid air. It wasn't unusual to see a pilot go 100 kills to no deaths because of that. Destruction took a leap, but the binary-ness of "levolution" was toss. Levels always ended up looking the same because there wasn't enough modular damage to really change how people attacked the game. Inside you were still being funnelled to some extent, and that was a bad thing. Also fuck prone, especially when the maps are bigger than some towns in Scotland.

 

Battlefield 1, then. They managed to fuck up the classes for a start. This is Battlefield, not Battlefront, keep your fucking hero classes out of this shit. If you want to have flame troopers, put it in as a weapon option like you did in BC2: Vietnam. Remember the whole picking a thing that was really good at one thing but had a trade off? Yeah, that. Having any class that has more than the base hp aside from a little boost from chosen perks is terrible. I need to know that if I land 3 shots on a persons head they die. You have to have that consistency, throwing it out so that you can cram stupid classes in that are better than the standard classes is a foolish idea. At least they gave with the other hand and provided us with classes for people spawning into vehicles to use as taxi's, preventing people from pissing away assets so they could get to flags first, or even worse, perches so they could snipe from them. Again there was minimum destruction, but it was much better than what had gone before. Not quite on the level of BC1 or 2, but at least it felt like you had options on some of the maps where buildings were present. Fuck off with your billion gadgets, nobody needs that shit. There's still too much indestructible scenery, and I understand that there needs to be obstructions that block lines of sight, but you're continuing to take the piss with what's going on. On top of this DICE fucked about with the shooting. There's something amiss with what's going on here and I can't quite put my finger on it. It feels off. Also fuck prone, it's a shite idea and as a mechanic it need to fuck off.

 

This is directed at Battlefield 4 and 1. Put your fucking equipment loadouts in the fucking game. Don't make me use a website. Don't make me use an app. I know why you're making design decisions like that, and it's to look at my browsing history and phone usage so you can sell my profile for advertising shit. Put it in the game where I can access it easily, or get to fuck. I haven't got time to be fucking about with an app, what planet are you living on where you think it's acceptable to pull you out of a game so you can tinker with your phone? Absolute fucking idiots.

 

So that brings me to Bad Company 3. If you want it to be good, don't break any of these rules.

 

  • No fucking super human classes. No classes that can deviate from their original purposes. If needs be, make another class that can have kit spread to him to make sure all the jobs are covered by the soldiers in the field. Nobody should be able to rambo shit. It's a team game, people should be moving as a unit and covering each other appropriately.
  • Weapon attachments and perks. There must be upsides and downsides. Want a scope on your gun? You're going to have to choose whether you want that over a flak jacket or an extra grenade. No more having 4 attachments on guns and then having perks on top of that.
  • No godlike vehicles. Go back to BC1 like choppers where you could damage them slightly with small arms fire, but don't go all the way and make them like the Huey's of BC2: Vietnam. Make it so that a chopper has to have both skids on the floor to be repaired. Sustained damage on tanks should be harder to repair to prevent walls of armour.
  • Modular damage on all but the most important of buildings. I'm not talking Rainbow 6 Siege levels of modular, but there has to be a big increase over what we've seen.
  • No fucking corridor levels. I don't give a fuck if those maps are the most played, they're shite. Spending 20 minutes fighting over Operation Doorframe is shit. If you want CoD go play CoD, this isn't the place for that shit. Have buildings with similar structures in maybe, but as a maps foundation. No.
  • Don't fuck the ammo economy because you can't design a map that turns into a meat grinder when explosives are introduced. That's not the explosives fault, that's shitty map designs fault.
  • Only gadgets in the game should be mandatory to the class and shouldn't be gimmicks. Heals, repairs, resupplies, anti-armour  and reconnaissance. Anything else is bloat.
  • No hero classes. Battlefront II is that way. Enjoy your fucking microtransactions.
  • No app/website bollocks to alter loadouts. Everything should be able to be tinkered with while you're in the game on the tv screen.
  • No prone, because it's hard enough trying to spot a guy 1000m away when he's crouched, nevermind laid on the floor.

I really want Bad Company 3 to be good if it is true, but I'll be fucked if I think DICE won't make a complete meal of it.  It took Volition to unfuck BF4 to a point of playability, I think the people that were at DICE when BC2 was made have moved to pastures new. That leaves us on rocky ground where maybe the people involved now won't have learned lessons from the past. I'll be watching with great interest, but I won't be surprised if they fuck it up by putting things in that look good on a bullet point on the back of the box. Keep it as simple as possible while being interesting. Being a convoluted mess is what marred the games that came after BC2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I loved Bad Company 2 and had a blast with it online, but I think those days are probably long behind me.

 

I hope they can recapture some of that magic though. They haven't really managed it since.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only jumped in on BF3 but had heard good things about bad company. Is anybody worried that it will be a franchise they love but with a broken progression system that allows a pay-to-win mechanic to take prevalence ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So can you put it in writing that you wont play this if it has any or all of:

loot boxes

modified progression system

any sort of ability to spend real money

some way of a player artificially getting an advantage over another player

 

(this space left blank to add more things)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Sambob said:

Is anybody worried that it will be a franchise they love but with a broken progression system that allows a pay-to-win mechanic to take prevalence ?

 

33 minutes ago, Sly Reflex said:

Only fucking idiots would buy something like that.

 

17 minutes ago, Sambob said:

We will see.

 

8 minutes ago, Sambob said:

So can you put it in writing that you wont play this if it has any or all of:

loot boxes

modified progression system

any sort of ability to spend real money

some way of a player artificially getting an advantage over another player

 

(this space left blank to add more things)

 

 

You might want to rethink your strategy before coming for me, Mr Robinson. Your hands are dirtier than most.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I make no bones about the fact I played it, I dont have a problem at all with the system, its just a game its not like its tested on blind, dying Korean children.

 

I dont see how my hands are dirty, the way I see it you can abstain from playing an enjoyable video game so I dont have to. With that being the case I hope more good games do stuff like this.

 

Just to clarify was that a yes or a no to the list of things I said? @Sly Reflex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends how far it's pushed.

 

3 hours ago, Sambob said:

loot boxes

 

Depends what's in them.

 

3 hours ago, Sambob said:

modified progression system

 

If it's not on an XP to play, then that's a deal breaker. Stuff should come through play and not purchase.

 

3 hours ago, Sambob said:

any sort of ability to spend real money

 

Depends if point #2 is linked to point #1 and #4

 

3 hours ago, Sambob said:

some way of a player artificially getting an advantage over another player

 

Complete deal breaker, especially if all of the above are involved.

 

3 hours ago, Sambob said:

I make no bones about the fact I played it, I dont have a problem at all with the system, its just a game its not like its tested on blind, dying Korean children.

 

The problem is by taking it off the shelf you're encouraging them to do the whole shit they tried. It might be an excellent game, but the fact that they tried to gouge consumers means the best place for the game is in the warehouse shelves. It doesn't matter if you got it for cheap, just playing the game is a win for EA since you're feeding hours into the games ecosystem that is needed to sustain a playerbase, one that could eventually pay to get stuff to get a leg up on the competition. It's a matter of principle. If a game does horrible act, you don't take part in it. You have zero right to complain when everything turns to shit when you supported said games.

 

3 hours ago, Sambob said:

dont see how my hands are dirty, the way I see it you can abstain from playing an enjoyable video game so I dont have to. With that being the case I hope more good games do stuff like this.

 

You hands are dirty because you bought into something that isn't consumer friendly. You jumped in knowingly that you had no idea how it would turn out. I don't get what you're trying to say in the second sentence.

 

For all we know MTX might get reinstated with a few tweaks to make them look benign, but they won't be. Of course it could have gone the complete other direction and they could be removed completely. Consumers would have had more leverage on the situation if the game completely bombed out the gate, since EA would have had to act even quicker to placate the people that refused to buy. Voting with your wallets changes how the marketplace works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said to Sly in MH, there are 3 basic ways of making extra money in multiplayer games.

 

1. The BF2 way with progression tied to loot boxes and currency.

 

2. The Overwatch way of loot boxes containing only cosmetic items.

 

3. Selling expansions and map packs.

 

Now the first is pretty shitty and the worst of all. The third is also not great because you split the players up. The second option is definitely the best of a bad bunch but I have no real problem with people paying for skins and emotes.

I would expect EA to go down that road as Battlefield is all their own so they don’t have the excuse of having some other corporation telling them what can be canon and what can’t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Hendopeople paying for random loot crates is never really on imo, even if it's cosmetic. Overwatch dodged most of the shit it deserved because people liked it, it was a full price game after all 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah but there’s absolutely no reason to buy them so I’m fine with it. Not everyone is but I think even if it wasn’t regarded so well, that would still be the best option available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Hendo said:

Yeah but there’s absolutely no reason to buy them so I’m fine with it. Not everyone is but I think even if it wasn’t regarded so well, that would still be the best option available.

I suppose it depends on what you mean by expansions. I don't think there's anything morally wrong with map packs per se, just that it does end up splitting the userbase of multiplayer games. 

 

Something like the Witcher 3,Fallout New Vegas, even the most recent Deus Ex, those kind of expansions are the ideal imo. Not that they're especially helpful from a multiplayer point of view 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, DANGERMAN said:

@Hendopeople paying for random loot crates is never really on imo, even if it's cosmetic. Overwatch dodged most of the shit it deserved because people liked it, it was a full price game after all 

 

This is what I said, we've been conditioned to think cosmetic is alright. 10 years ago when Oblivion did the horse armour people were frothing at the mouth over it, 240MSP for a skin. What is this insanity?

 

Now we're totally fine that lootboxes cost anywhere between 99p and £1.50 and can literally have nothing in them we want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn’t say I don’t baulk at the idea of buying them but it’s certainly the lesser evil.

If people want to pay for the slim chance of getting something they want, good for them.

Paying for an advantage in a full price game is a little different.

 

Edit:

We’ve come a long way from horse armour, but we’ve also come a long way from when people used to go mad at the idea of paying for maps and modes.

It’s all a moving goalpost and 10 years from now it could be completely different all over again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I see it is that you don't have to buy the in game purchases, and if you don't then you are just paying a price for a game... Same as anything other. 

What battlefront 2 tried was diabolical however what it launched with was actually no worse in fact id say it was better than what Overwatch had... 

 

You cannot spend real money in it, that's an improvement. You get cosmetic items for free, that's the same. You get lots of free content released steadily, that's the same. The progression system was at launch artificially slowed, in my book the fact it has a progression system is actually a plus and its now been fixed. 

 

Unfortunately your arguments don't hold any weight in this case because games like overwatch are lauded from the rooftops, destiny as well and the systems are actually worse when you compare them side by side, the difference is that battlefront 2, quite rightly took a public wallopping for what it attempted and it was the focus for all gamers that don't like this sort of thing and again it was rightly so the straw that broke the camels back but in my opinion it is so hypocritical for so many gamers to suddenly be up in arms for this shit when really we have all been a part of the route to get here. 

 

Tldr people have short selective memories at the moment, and even so not buying a game isn't going to do shit to theses corporations, a change in law might do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...