I played a bit at a friends house last night. I really came away from the experience a bit conflicted. The TTK is absurd, you often feel powerless to really accomplish objectives because moving anywhere exposes you so much and 1-2 taps from almost any gun (save SMGs) at nearly any range will kill you. It felt like hardcore mode dialed up even further. There are various comments online that this is a netcode problem but I kind of doubt it. There was a tweet from a Dice employee implying that they TTK changes are coming so I suspect they just went too far with beta->retail changes and need to rebalance it.

Some of the maps are frankly terrible and with only 8 in the launch pool it really puts a damper on things. The desert map I played a few times was especially poor and felt like going to the dentist.

On the positive side I like the changes to the vehicles. Most of the guns felt pretty good and had unique characteristics. Managing recoil is a thing. Squads really need to work together to be effective. Graphics were good, framerate was a bit chunky in places but I didn't want to mess with his display settings. Too many damned tracers flying around though, kind of silly.

Anyways I don't think I will pick it up for awhile until they release some more maps and do some tweaking to the lethality, if I wanted CoD I would just buy CoD. They claim they will address this so I will wait and see.

This comment was edited on Nov 22, 2018, 12:01.

jdreyer wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 21:28:

Muscular Beaver wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 15:07:
I thought female characters wouldnt do much to the atmosphere in this game, but after seeing 2 hours of online gameplay and hearing females scream, yell and cry all the time, this game doesnt feel like WW2 at all. It feels weird. Funny how a little bit of PC can destroy everything. Oh yeah and they also censored the Nazi flag now...
Heil PC!

On the one hand, I'm sympathetic to this argument. It's not going to look or sound like a WW2 documentary. On the other hand, I've heard from women gamers who actually play BF that they are stoked to see avatars that represent them in game.

What women gamers? Streamers? Youtubers? They get the game for free. They wont bash it. Ive seen enough women gamers making fun about it themselves.

Seems a bit rough, but better than BF1 first week for bugs so far!

My group is still all up in the BF1 buisness, not going to suggest noobs get into an unproven game. But the V seems good! I like the low TTK, gives it it's own feel and atmosphere. Big part of why I enjoyed BF1 over 3 and 4 was the wierd new feel of it.

Somehow the menus are worse than BF1, but whatever. Girls in it is weird but doesn't bother me enough to want to remove the ability for people to play them. If the fan-base really hates them that much I'm sure there will be few in any given game to worry about. I didn't notice them at all, just a few voices here and there.

Here are some realism issues I would prefer to see fixed first!

Rarity and types of guns match what is available to each faction.
ditto for vehicles.

More seriously, separate driver, engineer and main gunner role from tanks like in OFP/ARMA. Will make it more fun and balanced.

Of course there are plenty of other realism compromises that make the game better, like closing off most interiors from access and being able to fight at all after taking numerous bullets to the body. But we all know those changes make it a better game.

Just like letting ladies in it.

Slick wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 21:44:
Oh that reminds me, last guy talking about the BF4 desert map, that was Silk Road, and was a part of DLC content many months after launch. They are dropping the "armor heavy" map in like 2 weeks, so better to directly compare then.

Sure, but how the heavens does a BF game not launch with armor focused maps on launch? Technically Silk Road is a DLC map but there were quite a few other maps with heavy vehicle focus from BF4 launch. Namely Lancang, maybe also Zavod.

And compare the games maps (admittedly I only saw conquest large variations) to Siege of Shanghai in BF4. And BF5 lacks an infantry only conquest map like Operation Locker and Metro as well, which is just absurd. But I get why, this gameplay would utterly fall apart on a tight map like Locker.

But hey, you like it and that's great, I don't hate the game, I just don't want to play it anymore after just seeing 4 hours of it...

Gadzooks wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 23:10:

Choobeastia wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 18:40:

Osc8r wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 18:04:

Gadzooks wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 13:32:
The is the closest BF has felt to Call of Duty for me so far.

Despite all the new tactical and squad play elements, the ridiculous low Time To Kill sorta nullifies them all.

This ^.

Not sure how anyone enjoys competitive multiplayer in games where fights are over in a second flat.

Hopefully they adjust this for the BR version of they can keep it as well. May as well just stick with COD if you want than console gaming experience...

And lol at raytracing in it's current form, 4k makes a much bigger difference than 'cute reflections' (as someone here nailed it) and with a much lower performance hit to boot.

The time to kill actually helps the tactical and squad play. If the time to kill is too long, then your well laid plans only give you a slight benefit. But with the low time to kill, if you get the drop on someone, or have proper suppressing fire laid down, then you can work wonderfully as a squad. I've had more than a few instances where my laying down fire has allowed my team to move into an area, and use their shorter range weapons to clear it out.

At the same time, there are times when our plans don't work out, and someone else has planned better or is doing something that we had no plan for, resulting in us getting killed. Which is as it should be.

Actually helps??!? what?

Here are some of the reasons why a low TTK nullifies tactical gameplay elements

1. Attrition mode - No health regen: You die before you ever have to worry about no longer regenerating health

2. Attrition mode - less ammo: You die, often long before you ever run out of ammo (unless you are camping, which this game rewards)

3. Support Class - Give ammo: Pointless since most people die before running out of ammo

4. Medic Class - Give medpack: Again, most players are dead before this can be tossed at them

5. Hit direction - Most of the time you are dead before you can even tell what direction you got hit from. With the removal of squad spotting (a tactical element), not even being able to call out "Shooting from the east!" because you are dead removes squad tactical gameplay.


The ONLY tactical element (one thats even new) that benefits from the low Time To Kill, is the construct defenses mechanic. Build up defenses, bunker down, camp, and shoot anyone running who isnt behind cover.

I think you're playing with the wrong people. My squad needs health, they need ammo, they use the extra ammo for their gadgets, and we can call out where we're taking fire from because we're listening, and we check those corners so we're usually able to see the person shooting us, or at least their muzzle flash.

I'm playing on the PC. Perhaps it's different if you play on consoles?

It sounds like we have very different experiences. But historically I've played on Hardcore servers for battlefield, so the lack of spotting, high lethality, and similar are all things that I'm used to.

TTK sucks in this game, but the reason why this is is because the maps are TOO TINY, not because the weapons hit too hard or players have little health etc. The problem is that you literally spawn on top of the enemy most of the time.

It's really simple, get bigger maps move the capture points apart. Put more vehicles on maps and allow the squads a breather between wipes. Allow squads to coordinate attacks on capture points, and suddenly you have a proper battlefield game.

Like a few of us mentioned, this game is virtually ALL action, ALL the time, and while that is okay, it does not make for a battlefield experience.

Oh and both sides having exactly the same weapons is basically EA/Dice being too fucking LAZY to do gameplay balancing. Might as well call the teams BLUE and RED for all anyone cares. I mean they bothered with recording german voiceovers, getting uniform details right, (Minus the swastikas) but they throw out the ONLY gameplay affecting historical detail, like weapons disparity.

Choobeastia wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 18:40:

Osc8r wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 18:04:

Gadzooks wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 13:32:
The is the closest BF has felt to Call of Duty for me so far.

Despite all the new tactical and squad play elements, the ridiculous low Time To Kill sorta nullifies them all.

This ^.

Not sure how anyone enjoys competitive multiplayer in games where fights are over in a second flat.

Hopefully they adjust this for the BR version of they can keep it as well. May as well just stick with COD if you want than console gaming experience...

And lol at raytracing in it's current form, 4k makes a much bigger difference than 'cute reflections' (as someone here nailed it) and with a much lower performance hit to boot.

The time to kill actually helps the tactical and squad play. If the time to kill is too long, then your well laid plans only give you a slight benefit. But with the low time to kill, if you get the drop on someone, or have proper suppressing fire laid down, then you can work wonderfully as a squad. I've had more than a few instances where my laying down fire has allowed my team to move into an area, and use their shorter range weapons to clear it out.

At the same time, there are times when our plans don't work out, and someone else has planned better or is doing something that we had no plan for, resulting in us getting killed. Which is as it should be.

Actually helps??!? what?

Here are some of the reasons why a low TTK nullifies tactical gameplay elements

1. Attrition mode - No health regen: You die before you ever have to worry about no longer regenerating health

2. Attrition mode - less ammo: You die, often long before you ever run out of ammo (unless you are camping, which this game rewards)

3. Support Class - Give ammo: Pointless since most people die before running out of ammo

4. Medic Class - Give medpack: Again, most players are dead before this can be tossed at them

5. Hit direction - Most of the time you are dead before you can even tell what direction you got hit from. With the removal of squad spotting (a tactical element), not even being able to call out "Shooting from the east!" because you are dead removes squad tactical gameplay.


The ONLY tactical element (one thats even new) that benefits from the low Time To Kill, is the construct defenses mechanic. Build up defenses, bunker down, camp, and shoot anyone running who isnt behind cover.

https://youtu.be/tjf-1BxpR9c

here's another cool RTX demo that many have not seen.

DangerDog wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 18:36:
I guess nobody remembers when Quake Wars attempted ray tracing in their engine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtHDSG2wNho

They should have spent more time on the AI for the single player than this nonsense RTX gimmick.

I just want AIX 2.0 in a modern game engine.

It's the V1 and JB-2 rockets as the squad unlock for 41,500 points, not the V2. And people aren't spamming it every 5 minutes, that's hyperbole. I know there are some rare squads that can rack up the points really fast, but it's not common, most squads will struggle to get one V1 by the end of a round.

And as for the "it's CoD" or "it's the most battlefield battlefield"... I find it curious that it's having such a polarizing effect on people.

To me it's very "battlefield". I played competitive 5v5 and 8v8 BF for 15 years, and it was always with 3d spotting disabled, so for me this is "THE" battlefield experience. For others at the least I'd say it's closer to mil-sim than any other battlefield. I don't understand how it's CoD, other than the fast TTK. Seems to all be about strategy and tactics now. It rewards smart play better than other BF games where you could just "run and gun". You can't run and gun now, you have to be thoughtful of your every move.

Ionno, just my 2 cents. I like it, but I agree that it's too bad that there are no "iconic" WW2 maps from popular culture at launch.

Oh that reminds me, last guy talking about the BF4 desert map, that was Silk Road, and was a part of DLC content many months after launch. They are dropping the "armor heavy" map in like 2 weeks, so better to directly compare then.

Muscular Beaver wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 15:07:
I thought female characters wouldnt do much to the atmosphere in this game, but after seeing 2 hours of online gameplay and hearing females scream, yell and cry all the time, this game doesnt feel like WW2 at all. It feels weird. Funny how a little bit of PC can destroy everything. Oh yeah and they also censored the Nazi flag now...
Heil PC!

On the one hand, I'm sympathetic to this argument. It's not going to look or sound like a WW2 documentary. On the other hand, I've heard from women gamers who actually play BF that they are stoked to see avatars that represent them in game.

HoSpanky wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 14:51:
The hit you take from raytracing is brutal, there are plenty of tricks to get “more than good enough” reflections in games. Forza Horizon 3 and 4 can put reflections on every single car, ones that look very convincing. Maybe they’re not perfect, but at 120+ mph, who can tell anyway? Even at the starting line, rotating the camera around your car shows you the reflection of everything around it. The new Hitman game also apparently does spectacular reflections without raytracing.

RTX is gonna need to do more than just some reflections to sell me on the value of the tech. Good art teams and programmers have already pretty much solved the issue years ago. I guess if you want it to be SUPER accurate, Ray tracing will give you THAT, but is it truly something noticeable? I’d really like to see Forza Horizon or Hitman with a raytracing option for their reflections and see what the real difference is.

It's a lot of work to do light and reflections in software. Eventually RTX will make it easier to build environments for games. That being said, it will be a good decade before game devs will be able to avoid doing software reflections and lighting. It will take that long for the new technology to achieve market saturation.

Jackplug wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 14:44:
No map editors not interested.

What modern FPS ships with a map editor? Serious question.

Well I was one of the Twitch watchers today and had a few laughs along the way, yeah, the female screams were fucking hilarious at first, extremely distracting. To the point where the dood I was watching couldn't stop mentioning how distracting it was every single time he heard it, and it was 83 ! times in a round, chat counted

Then the tiny maps and their retarded war story AI it's literally everything I never wanted in a Battlefield game. And as I said previously. I own ALL the Battlefield games, this one is the first I skip so hard that EA can't even see my shiny butt with binoculars.

Battlefield has become an atrocity made for ADHD suffering pre-schoolers. Or so it seemed. Nothing from the beta has really changed except the female screams (and that is really not a good thing)... which surprised no-one I guess.

Overall, last game from Dice from me will remain BF4 apparently. And while watching on twitch today I also saw squad unlock abuse already rampant on pubs. To the point where they spammed V2s every 5 minutes killing 20+ people with it since the maps are so tiny and cover is apparently NOT a thing Dice provides anymore, if you don't have a griefer-level engineer with you then you will die exactly 2 seconds after trying to peak around a corner, because what else they didn't add is a limit to FUCKING SNIPERS.

Ps: yeah, I know V2 is not a "squad" level up unlock, I saw the squad vehicles too, and they obviously racked up a 50:1 KDR give or take... this is what happens with staggered release. Some doods were level 30+ with all the weapons completely PWNING everyone else. I suspect not many of these pwned will return.

Last thing I noticed after seeing all the maps, no large scale vehicle focused map makes this not a real Battlefield game. Even the only big one I saw (some fields or another) was tiny compared to the maps in BF4 and there were never 6+ tanks around ever. Compare to this to BF4's famous desert vehicle map where you could have 12 ! tanks and 6 APC's on the map at any time, including helicopters and bombers, jets and bikes, quads and AA.

I just never really saw it going that way with BF5, all the matches seem tiny

People still play this stuff? The genre died with BF2

Osc8r wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 18:04:

Gadzooks wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 13:32:
The is the closest BF has felt to Call of Duty for me so far.

Despite all the new tactical and squad play elements, the ridiculous low Time To Kill sorta nullifies them all.

This ^.

Not sure how anyone enjoys competitive multiplayer in games where fights are over in a second flat.

Hopefully they adjust this for the BR version of they can keep it as well. May as well just stick with COD if you want than console gaming experience...

And lol at raytracing in it's current form, 4k makes a much bigger difference than 'cute reflections' (as someone here nailed it) and with a much lower performance hit to boot.

The time to kill actually helps the tactical and squad play. If the time to kill is too long, then your well laid plans only give you a slight benefit. But with the low time to kill, if you get the drop on someone, or have proper suppressing fire laid down, then you can work wonderfully as a squad. I've had more than a few instances where my laying down fire has allowed my team to move into an area, and use their shorter range weapons to clear it out.

At the same time, there are times when our plans don't work out, and someone else has planned better or is doing something that we had no plan for, resulting in us getting killed. Which is as it should be.

I guess nobody remembers when Quake Wars attempted ray tracing in their engine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtHDSG2wNho

They should have spent more time on the AI for the single player than this nonsense RTX gimmick.

Gadzooks wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 13:32:
The is the closest BF has felt to Call of Duty for me so far.

Despite all the new tactical and squad play elements, the ridiculous low Time To Kill sorta nullifies them all.

This ^.

Not sure how anyone enjoys competitive multiplayer in games where fights are over in a second flat.

Hopefully they adjust this for the BR version of they can keep it as well. May as well just stick with COD if you want than console gaming experience...

And lol at raytracing in it's current form, 4k makes a much bigger difference than 'cute reflections' (as someone here nailed it) and with a much lower performance hit to boot.

SirKnight wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 11:58:

pagb wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 11:05:

El Pit wrote on Nov 20, 2018, 11:00:
I am waiting to read about raytracing in BFV - how good does it work with 2070/80/80Ti?

Guess you didn't even look for it. It runs terrible. Stable 1080/60 on the 2080ti only terrible.

Are you insane? Since when is 1080/60 terrible? The visual difference from ray tracing is pretty spectacular despite only a few effects of ray tracing are being used. And it's only going to get better real quick. Also, given it's ray tracing (which you obviously don't understand at all) it's almost a miracle that it runs at anything faster than a powerpoint slideshow anyway. A slide show is pretty much what it would be by doing ray tracing purely in compute on previous architectures without dedicated scene traversal acceleration and deep learning. Forget about using the CPU for ray tracing. Want to render one frame? That'll be several hours...

Also, just because you're not running at 4K doesn't mean suddenly we're back in the days of CGA. 4K is not the be-all end-all solution for graphics. The jump to 4K makes little difference, other than needing less AA. But everything else still looks the same.

For a website that is pretty hardcore PC, it's amazing the number of people that are so technology illiterate.

Unfortunately, RTX hardware is no "miracle" when it comes to its supposed marketed features like RTX, otherwise known as real-time ray tracing @30 fps +. Rather, it's a miracle these products are not being universally panned because of this preposterous marketing claim.

Ray Tracing a full 3840x2160 frame in real-time @ the rate of 30-60fps is absolutely and irrevocably *impossible*...;) Don't worry about doing that with an RTX GPU because you can't. If you bought a 2080Ti for real-time ray tracing, *cough*, you are *not* going to get it.

It doesn't take a degree in physics to understand why nVidia did not ship any real-time demos with any of its RTX products--regardless of what they are asking people to pay for them. Instead, nVidia shipped 2d videoclips compiled from prerendered frames--frames that were not even rendered on their RTX hardware, but on *four* Volta systems, each with 16GBs of ram, and specialized ray-tracing software like LightWave, etc...;) How long it took nVidia to render all of those frames on the Voltas is an enduring mystery--nVidia isn't telling...;) Of course. But *any* modern 3d card can playback a *2d videoclip* compiled from pre-rendered frames at a decent frame-rate--nothing to it. But that has nothing to do with real-time ray-tracing whatsoever.

Basically, nVidia is telling its customers, "Well, we cannot utilize the real-time ray-tracing components in our own RTX GPU products to the degree that we can provide our RTX customers with a real-time ray tracing demo they can run on their local machines to test them. But, hey, here's a 2d videoclip of what some enterprising game developer might be able to do with our products at some point in the future! We earnestly hope a game developer will be able to figure out how to do it...!

Bottom line is: no one--no one--should be buying an RTX product thinking it is going to ray trace entire scenes in real time @ 30-60 fps. None of the RTX products come close to being able to do this at all. Of course it's your money and your choice--and if you think those prices are worth it sans the ludicrous marketing of "real-time ray tracing" that nVidia marketing is using to promote these products--hey, feel free to throw all the money you want. Caveat Emptor, my friends...;)

I disagree that there aren't tactics and strategy, but I will say that the maps do seem to be, on average, a bit smaller.

The only CoD thing from it, in my opinion, are the squad rewards, and I very much wish that they had stuck with callable deployables, not the V2. The V2 should be something that is a reward for map control, and should likely only be on the german side. Other sides should have other rewards. Not behemoths, but something else.

This is the most battlefield a game has been since BF2, or Bad Company 2 in my opinion. My biggest complaint would be map size, and the lack of a commander, which results in a lack of team cohesion. Sure, very few people listened to the commander, but a good commander and some squads that listened could make all of the difference in the world previously. I'd love to see them bring commander mode back.