Battlefield Dev Says the Modern Warfare Setting is Getting 'Stale'

[jimykx]

Re: Battlefield Dev Says the Modern Warfare Setting is Getting 'Stale'

Lot of interesting things to do from the past, it's far from being stale, it's just not for the pure PVP FPS genre. All the medieval PVP FPS even with solid melee mechanics aren't interesting. I think FPS will always be WW2 to future/sci-fi with Vietnam, Cold War, modern in between with some weird things here and there.

What? if done well it can be. I loved mount and blade. Imagine a multiplayer game with hundreds of soldiers attacking a caste, trying to survive a rain of flaming arrows

[zuiquan1]

BF1918 was badass, Id love to see a full game like it!

[Infernalis]

Re: Battlefield Dev Says the Modern Warfare Setting is Getting 'Stale'

What? if done well it can be. I loved mount and blade. Imagine a multiplayer game with hundreds of soldiers attacking a caste, trying to survive a rain of flaming arrows

There was countless medieval mods and they never worked for long or never had a big pool of players, all the heavy melee pvp games that work are basically a mix of RPG. Mount and Blade is a mix of TPS/RTS, if you replace all NPC with players then you're back to the games I'm talking in the first place. It is some really niche game and Dice will never do something like that.

[Anarchy1]

Re: Battlefield Dev Says the Modern Warfare Setting is Getting 'Stale'

Plus it is hard to have a FPS when you don't have weapons that shoot

[RYKUU]

Re: Battlefield Dev Says the Modern Warfare Setting is Getting 'Stale'

Plus it is hard to have a FPS when you don't have weapons that shoot

Nonsense, pebbles will become the new n00b-tube!

Where there a n00bs, there will be tubes.

[eradicator8]

The problem with the past is that it is already set in stone. All you lovable nerds will cry "realism" and would start comparing the weapons and cry out when they are too balanced or not balanced enough. The fact is that the Tiger is so much better than what ever the Allies could ever come up with and if the Allies had not destroyed the factories that built them we would all speak German now and that is not even talking about the V2 and we all know that the Germans were the first to use jet-technology.The future lets the devs. balance the shiite out of everything and give them room to invent new things. How about a portable railgun??

[Infernalis]

Re: Battlefield Dev Says the Modern Warfare Setting is Getting 'Stale'

The Tiger had a ton of flaws (mechanical problems, 90° angle everywhere, horrible cost to produce, hard to transport it on train etc), the Panther is actually better. As for jet technology it was too late.

But I don't see your point, most players cry balance when there's a problem in gameplay not because of pseudo-realism, I never heard someone complain about realism in Battlefield.

[Vreki]

Re: Battlefield Dev Says the Modern Warfare Setting is Getting 'Stale'

You have got to be kidding, BF players will complain about absolutely anything.

[Stev0esque]

Re: Battlefield Dev Says the Modern Warfare Setting is Getting 'Stale'

You have got to be kidding, BF players will complain about absolutely anything.

This statement pretty much sums up the battlelog forums.

[Infernalis]

Re: Battlefield Dev Says the Modern Warfare Setting is Getting 'Stale'

They complain but rarely about realism. Most of the time it's "my god the Famas/AEK/M16/etc is op!".

[Vreki]

Re: Battlefield Dev Says the Modern Warfare Setting is Getting 'Stale'

They complain but rarely about realism. Most of the time it's "my god the Famas/AEK/M16/etc is op!".

Tell me if you heard this one before:

"Why cant my .50 kill in one shot to the body? A real .50 can tear of a mans arm just passing within 10 feet of him!"

[Infernalis]

Re: Battlefield Dev Says the Modern Warfare Setting is Getting 'Stale'

Yes, the famous "50. sniper should one shot in body" and some others things but it's rare amongst the others threads. At least when I was on battlelog at the beginning.

[eradicator8]

Re: Battlefield Dev Says the Modern Warfare Setting is Getting 'Stale'

The Tiger had a ton of flaws (mechanical problems, 90° angle everywhere, horrible cost to produce, hard to transport it on train etc), the Panther is actually better. As for jet technology it was too late.

But I don't see your point, most players cry balance when there's a problem in gameplay not because of pseudo-realism, I never heard someone complain about realism in Battlefield.

True true but transport problems are kinda hard to portray in an FPS and so are production costs. It is not civilization, it is an FPS and the devs have to make the game enjoyable for both sides. Thats why it is easier to develop a near future setting. Then they can balance accuracy and rate of fire to match the other side. Just look at 2142. The two sides were almost identical but there was no-one who could justify crying unbalance as they had nothing to compare. And if there was an unbalance EA could just tweak some of the weapons and in the end all the characteristics would be identical and only the look of the weapons would be different.

It is unlike with the Vietnam war. The US had tons of artillery to pound the VC and they only had superior numbers which in the end won them the war. That is also hard to put in a FPS because it would be too un-balanced if one side had 1 billion tickets and the other only 250.000,- and a government who did not wish to invest more young men into the slaughter.

[CptainCrunch]

Re: Battlefield Dev Says the Modern Warfare Setting is Getting 'Stale'

These threads have things about realism today in the last 30 minutes and only on the first page:

http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/#!/bf3/forum/threadview/2832654348112887327/

http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/#!/bf3/forum/threadview/2832654348112985638/

http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/#!/bf3/forum/threadview/2832654489829225649/

http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/#!/bf3/forum/threadview/2832654489833944655/

So, yeah, realism comes up a lot.

[eradicator8]

Re: Battlefield Dev Says the Modern Warfare Setting is Getting 'Stale'

These threads have things about realism today in the last 30 minutes and only on the first page:

http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/#!/bf3/forum/threadview/2832654348112887327/

http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/#!/bf3/forum/threadview/2832654348112985638/

http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/#!/bf3/forum/threadview/2832654489829225649/

http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/#!/bf3/forum/threadview/2832654489833944655/

So, yeah, realism comes up a lot.

And the easiest (cheapest) way to avoid these issues is by inventing a new war i.e. 2142 were all bets are off and you can invent podjumping and see through shields.