We got it, tried it. We lasted about an hour or two and decided neither of us like it for our style of game.
I don't know how to convey the feeling. It IS too cramped feeling. But I haven't played a BF game in years (15+ years) maybe they all have been like that latest versions.
But the maps, only way I can put it is it feels: An open layout, corridor shooter. Even in the open areas of the maps, it encouraged/funnels you into narrow lanes of 'action'. the openness feels a bit like its there only for the visuals of being open. A lot of areas for "Can we go over there? Oh yea..no point to, but its not blocked from going there".
Hard to describe the vibe we got. But that is as close as I can get to it.
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
Hell Let Loose is pretty much a first-person war (WW2) simulator, which Battlefield never was, not even the first ones in the series, so yeah, if you prefer that kind of experience (and have the time) go for that one (or Squad in a modern setting).
It's a hell of a game (no pun intended ), I just don't have the required time to invest in a single session to get shit accomplished.
Sure, we can agree on that, main point was Battlefield (the stock experience that is) never got anywhere close to that level of realism and tactical gameplay.
Not sure what game you are Nodrim playing, but you need teamwork in this game same way as in the previous ones, im enjoying it with full squad of friends.
Have to say, graphics do not look good. The old engine is showing. Crude LOD popups, animation warps, terrible screen space reflections, low poly geometry in general, etc. The video speaks of how ahead of its time the engine was with BFBC2 and BF3; yeah, like 15 years ago? The idea is to stay ahead, not dwindle in it until you lose the edge. Not a good place for the industry in general. UE5 is terrible, and that seems to be used more and more, while in-house engines are either old and dated or private and limited to PS5 these days.
Have to say, graphics do not look good. The old engine is showing. Crude LOD popups, animation warps, terrible screen space reflections, low poly geometry in general, etc. The video speaks of how ahead of its time the engine was with BFBC2 and BF3; yeah, like 15 years ago? The idea is to stay ahead, not dwindle in it until you lose the edge. Not a good place for the industry in general. UE5 is terrible, and that seems to be used more and more, while in-house engines are either old and dated or private and limited to PS5 these days.
Devs can't do anything right these days
With more modern graphics people are gonna complain about the performance. With older tech, people complain it doesn't look good enough.
Think the devs were smart to make a game that just works on most systems. People prefer FPS over eye candy these days. And every derp with a >3 year old rig wants max settings 120 FPS or the game sux.
@friketje
I'm with you. They are stuck in a cannot please all the people all the time situation.
It's battlefield, a game that is mass market appeal. If they go 'Crysis mode' the casual gamers with rigs 3+ years old still rocking gear that was mid grade when new...the equal of 'steam average user specs', that runs the rest of their casual shooters like Counter Strike, will complain it runs like shit.
If they streamline it to match those same specs as playable, people expecting more than what the 'pleb' specs can run will complain 'why no cutting edge?'
The little we played, it looked..fine for what it is. It's a twitch MP shooter aimed at average denominator players. Looks good enough someone with a 1080 can play it.
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
Game already looks great as it is (minus a few potential subtle tweaks) tyvm, + it's the first BF game in nearly 2 decades that comes out with with proper performance since day 1.
So yeah, I rather have it this way even if they're not raising the bar in the gfx department.
I don't know why you are glazing this so much. The game looks slightly above average and sounds just as bad.
"Glazing", talk about hyperbole , anyways, I just give proper credit to a good product, especially nowadays when it's so rare that a game comes out in good shape. If that worries you, well, I'm afraid I can't help you with that.
Have to say, graphics do not look good. The old engine is showing. Crude LOD popups, animation warps, terrible screen space reflections, low poly geometry in general, etc. The video speaks of how ahead of its time the engine was with BFBC2 and BF3; yeah, like 15 years ago? The idea is to stay ahead, not dwindle in it until you lose the edge. Not a good place for the industry in general. UE5 is terrible, and that seems to be used more and more, while in-house engines are either old and dated or private and limited to PS5 these days.
Devs can't do anything right these days
With more modern graphics people are gonna complain about the performance. With older tech, people complain it doesn't look good enough.
Think the devs were smart to make a game that just works on most systems. People prefer FPS over eye candy these days. And every derp with a >3 year old rig wants max settings 120 FPS or the game sux.
Some stuff just requires a new engine arch, not necessarily more performance. Like gradual LOD replacement techniques. We have these ultra fast loading capabilities in modern PCs and consoles, but these engines were engineered 15-20 years ago, and are still stuck in ancient tech.
Also I remember the grand ole times when games offered real settings, that made even potato PCs play them at reasonable speeds. Not these "Low preset runs at 70fps while ULTRA MEGA SUPERMAX runs at 55fps while looking practically the same as the console 'optimized' preset" type of nonsense settings of today.
Also I remember the grand ole times when games offered real settings, that made even potato PCs play them at reasonable speeds. Not these "Low preset runs at 70fps while ULTRA MEGA SUPERMAX runs at 55fps while looking practically the same as the console 'optimized' preset" type of nonsense settings of today.
Give back the setting that was in Duke Nukem 3D, Shadow Warrior etc... where you could make your screen size of a stamp while keeping UI elements fullscreen
It was a creative solution to a problem when there was nothing else to do. But eh, you have that these days; it's the "render scaling" that exists in most games. It's basically the same thing. But in modern games, that's the lazy cheapout.
It was a creative solution to a problem when there was nothing else to do. But eh, you have that these days; it's the "render scaling" that exists in most games. It's basically the same thing. But in modern games, that's the lazy cheapout.
Also I remember the grand ole times when games offered real settings, that made even potato PCs play them at reasonable speeds. Not these "Low preset runs at 70fps while ULTRA MEGA SUPERMAX runs at 55fps while looking practically the same as the console 'optimized' preset" type of nonsense settings of today.
In the grand ole times you needed a <1 year old PC to run the new FPS and everyone with older systems settled for choppy 30FPS or worse.
Modern graphics settings suck indeed, insane that you need a guide to optimse performance and devs are inable to present some sort of standard settings for your hardware. Even if this is available, those "optimised" settings give very poor performance or terrible visual quality.
So does anyone of you actually enjoy the game or play it?
It is great, dont understand why old "BF veterans" are hating on it, guess they cant keep up with the faster gameplay and are making excuses . What goes for graphics, i find it funny people are saying it looks like shit, c´mon wtf
So does anyone of you actually enjoy the game or play it?
It is great, dont understand why old "BF veterans" are hating on it, guess they cant keep up with the faster gameplay and are making excuses . What goes for graphics, i find it funny people are saying it looks like shit, c´mon wtf
Im an old "bf veteran" and I do enjoy it. Unfortunatly i've not had the chance to play it as much as I want so far.
shitloads of new stuff in my pc. Cant keep track of it all.
So does anyone of you actually enjoy the game or play it?
It really brings back the Battlefield fun but overshadowed by maps that are too congested for so many players and hit detection issues (and some of the bloom effect) that really robbed me from having a really good experience. It's horrible when you can come up behind a player for once and could easily kill them or knife, you shoot them 3 times and still get killed.
so I'm waiting for fixes on the latter, grinding a few attachments/challenges in solo bot lobbies to make some progress over there in the meantime.
But overall I had a couple fun moments even if I kinda suck, coming back after ages.
Last edited by harry_theone on Wed, 15th Oct 2025 13:42; edited 1 time in total
Yep, DICE has already announced that they're working to fix some bugs related to the increased bullet spread cause it's true that weird shit happens in some encounters where it feels that bullet hits are not registering.
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
), I just don't have the required time to invest in a single session to get shit accomplished.
