Battlefield games

…are something I just don’t get. I mean, I can understand how they could be fun for other people, particularly when playing with friends, but every video and gif I see of the gameplay - it just strikes me that there is too much going on on the overlay screen for me. The constant stream of messages, goals, points, objectives, who killed who, who spotted who…doesn’t that drive you guys crazy?? I mean, I’m the guy though that is absolutely livid that every cable TV station has a “tag” on the bottom of the screen…and that particularly annoying stations do pop up advertising in the middle of a movie (thus - I don’t watch movies or cable TV shows)…so I can see why all the stuff on the PC screen bothers me.

Anyway, it just seems like both information overload and just kind of spastic - is it getting worse or is it just me getting older and more grumpy? :older_man:


You learn to filter a lot of that out. Only some of it is relevant at any given time. Depending on the game mode, some of it can be REALLY important.

It was a bit much the first few rounds I played, but I quickly got used to it. That being said, the games themselves have been pretty bad the past few iterations (though I hear BF1 is much better), with horrible netcoding and awful hitbox detection. Makes for an extremely un-fun game when lag is the determining factor over who wins a firefight. Your superior aim means nothing when the other dude is lagging enough that your bullets literally pass through him :slight_smile:

1 Like

Older and more grumpy :laughing: With 100 hours in on the new one so far, I can at least say that I don’t pay much attention to it, mostly other than a few key bits. I had to go back and check out videos and gifs of it to specifically look at the overlay because playing it, I don’t notice much of it at all.

You forgot the obligatory “get off my lawn”…



Crosshair is a pixel off, you’ll miss :slight_smile:

If it’s an exaggeration but it works, it ain’t an exaggeration.


I stopped after BF3,
I played Endless hours in BF3, but when BF4 launched and was a mess, it just killed my need to want to play,
BF3 Servers on PC are sparse, and BF4 is still more or less a joke, and now less playing between SW:BF and BF1.

I moved to ArmA III and never looked back.


It’s psychology.

For a while the AAA developers were sweating when they looked over their shoulder and realized browser and smartphone/tablet based games made by the likes of Zynga and SuperCell (Farmville, Clash of Clans, etc) were raking in just as much if not more dough than they were. Consider the difference in development cost and you can see why this was a point of high-tension.

Long-story short, an underlying part of AAA game design these days is built-in validation, and you can take the pessimistic or the optimistic view on why they’re doing this.

Optimistically: They’ve distilled things to perfection. Do you honestly want to spend hours of your precious time being frustrated or useless before you can start winning? Of course not. Hence, useful aids like hit markers, mini-maps, floating icons, streamlined map design, etc. Modern game design delivers fun to you NOW.

The average age of gamers is going up. The pesky job/career thing tends to take away from gaming hours. Most games are designed to deliver maximum enjoyment and then be dropped in the course of an hour. Working your way up a learning curve is a luxury, so the developers have graciously streamlined everything down to muscle memory and basic reflexes.

Pessimistically: Have you noticed this crap’s been funneled in right around the same time as micro-transactions and map-packs? All the text and pop-ups on your screen are optimized to minimize the time you spend being confused or frustrated, which research says are the two big reasons why you’ll stop playing the game. If you stop playing the game, you won’t stick around to buy more DLC.

Selling the game itself doesn’t give a lot of ROI. AAA games have a huge development cost. On the other hand, selling those skins/textures the intern made for $5 a pop? Fantastic.

Realistically: We’re in a bit of an echo-chamber here. I don’t think you’re going to get a lot of unbiased opinions asking these things on a forum where one of the top threads is populated by a bunch of enthusiasts going nuts over learning the ins-and-outs of a fighter jet with systems possessing all the grace of 1970’s computer hardware. :laughing:

1 Like


I’m seeing the Battlefield series migrating more towards the twitchy Quake/Call-of-Duty experience, as opposed to the squad-based class shooter that BF1946, BF2, BF2142 was. Although I miss the good ol days of being a sapper supported by assaults going behind enemy lines to take out the Commander’s resources, I do appreciate that there are a lot of folks that like that fast-paced accurate-reflex experience and the latest Battlefields are certainly giving them that kick.

The death by DLC is a gaming-wide issue - it’s sad to see it come into any one genre, but it’s so prevalent, I just expect it now. Doesn’t mean I like it, but I expect it. I’ve been lucky in that I’m able to enjoy most of the games I like without heavy investment in DLC - either the paid-for-content is worth the cost to me (e.g., DCS modules, Rise of Flight aircraft, Elite Dangerous Horizons, FSX-SE aircraft/weather, etc.) or it’s purely cosmetic and I can live without it (ED skins and bobble heads, etc.).

1 Like

I dunno. I stopped playing Battlefield because BF3 couldn’t match the fun I had with Bad Company 2, and when it came down to choose between it and Arma 2 for what would get my limited time, Arma won handily on the strengths of it’s editor and content.

I picked up BF1 on a lark, and I feel like it could be fun. However I have a problem with that game I’ve complained about previously where I can almost feel my brain constantly shifting gears between playing the game and foaming at the mouth from the gross ahistoricalness of it all. I feel like if BF as a series stopped trying to weigh their games down with this massive attempt at authenticity while purposefully working against it for gameplay reasons, I could enjoy it more. As it is, I can’t let the game have it’s cake and eat it too.

Also there’s another game out there that has awesome shooting mechanics, an infinitely powerful editor, and doesn’t shove my brain into the uncanny valley. The game is Arma III.

1 Like

I have always enjoyed the BF games, they are more fun if you play as a group with the same guys all the time. I tried the demo for the newest one, and I did enjoy it, but just dont know if I have the time to get into it right now.

Sounds like though we need a BF1942 night here :smiley:


Best BF mod ever. I said it. Eat your heart out Project Reality.


I dunno, I’d pay for an Eagle Dynamics Bobble head… put it right on my A-10C Dash.


Yeah, I played BF3 w/ my brother and 5 or 6 other guys DAILY, lol, for hours, then BF4 Happened.

I didnt have an issue with BF4, I wasnt keen on the DLC/subscription stuff, but not much you can do, its the way of the world now. Gameplay was still fun, again if you play with a good group and the groups play the game the way they should…

like Virtua Cop?

Well there is. We could stop paying for it. It’s a bit silly how far the pendulum has swung from “part of the core game” to “lol we can earn another $200 for stuff that is core.”

But something we can do and something that will be done are very different.

1 Like

I bet half of you have $2k - $3k in FSX add-ons LOL, not to mention the entire DCS catalog.

1 Like

Hey, it’s about perceived value! Can’t say I am too big on whatever came after Battlefield 3/Bad Company 2. Those were fine but didn’t live up to Battlefield 2. Battlefield 1914(1) looks interesting but it looks messy and they don’t explain what all the variants do and don’t have. The comparison page presumes you know already… So I spend that money on DCS.