criterion-sm dice-lg ea-starwars-lg instagram lucasfilm-lg motive-lg twitch you-tube
July Community Calendar
Obi-Wan Kenobi Community Quests

Why not have the open scale of Battlefield series?

I've heard that the powers that be don't want this franchise to be considered a battlefield game with SW skins but come on.

Right now most of the ground vehicles are confined to limited claustrophobic pathways, the air vehicles have a tiny little ground sector to focus on thus making it a turkey shoot for those on the ground.

I would love to meet the individual that made the call to avoid any designs similar to battlefield. The battlefield series is a time tested and proven game design honed by almost two decades of gameplay. The battlefield series offers a fantastic level of scale that this game sorely could use. Although the map detail and design in this game offers a taste of the scale it could be at it simply doesn't reach it.

BattleField 1 has incredible wide open maps that give their vehicles a chance to breath, why can't this game have that too?

Note: I am not talking about the classes or weapons of this game becoming more like battlefield, I am simply talking about the scale.

Those that doubt this lack of scale need to play GA tatooine load up a landspeeder and see how far you can go and how quickly you will die due to the map constraints.

Load up yavin GA get into a ATST and see how mind-numbingly difficult it is to move anywhere consistently on those super small paths. So so aggravating.

And I haven't even mentioned the silliness of locking down the biggest mode to 40 players. This is a dice engine right? It has proven to handle 64 players quite well on PC so why not have that design and scale of map?

Like I said whoever made that call to steer clear of the battlefield series design is a colossal fill-in-the-blank.

Replies

  • neostar wrote: »
    And I haven't even mentioned the silliness of locking down the biggest mode to 40 players. This is a dice engine right? It has proven to handle 64 players quite well on PC so why not have that design and scale of map?

    Personally, I already have to compete enough with other players wanting to be the hero/villain, an additional 7 players on each side would only make the competition worse. I suppose you could add more vehicles/heroes, but idk...

    I would like to see a couple maps that are a bit larger than the ones I've seen so far, but I'd really just be satisfied with the addition of some SWBF1 Supremacy-type modes where it's not necessarily objective-based, but instead you just try to dominate. I know a lot of people don't like timers, but once in a while they are useful for something like Supremacy.
  • neostar wrote: »
    I've heard that the powers that be don't want this franchise to be considered a battlefield game with SW skins but come on.

    Right now most of the ground vehicles are confined to limited claustrophobic pathways, the air vehicles have a tiny little ground sector to focus on thus making it a turkey shoot for those on the ground.

    I would love to meet the individual that made the call to avoid any designs similar to battlefield. The battlefield series is a time tested and proven game design honed by almost two decades of gameplay. The battlefield series offers a fantastic level of scale that this game sorely could use. Although the map detail and design in this game offers a taste of the scale it could be at it simply doesn't reach it.

    BattleField 1 has incredible wide open maps that give their vehicles a chance to breath, why can't this game have that too?

    Note: I am not talking about the classes or weapons of this game becoming more like battlefield, I am simply talking about the scale.

    Those that doubt this lack of scale need to play GA tatooine load up a landspeeder and see how far you can go and how quickly you will die due to the map constraints.

    Load up yavin GA get into a ATST and see how mind-numbingly difficult it is to move anywhere consistently on those super small paths. So so aggravating.

    And I haven't even mentioned the silliness of locking down the biggest mode to 40 players. This is a dice engine right? It has proven to handle 64 players quite well on PC so why not have that design and scale of map?

    Like I said whoever made that call to steer clear of the battlefield series design is a colossal fill-in-the-blank.

    I wish Battlefield was a re-skin of Overwatch, that'd be sweet.
    #infantrylivesmatter
  • neostar wrote: »
    I've heard that the powers that be don't want this franchise to be considered a battlefield game with SW skins but come on.

    Right now most of the ground vehicles are confined to limited claustrophobic pathways, the air vehicles have a tiny little ground sector to focus on thus making it a turkey shoot for those on the ground.

    I would love to meet the individual that made the call to avoid any designs similar to battlefield. The battlefield series is a time tested and proven game design honed by almost two decades of gameplay. The battlefield series offers a fantastic level of scale that this game sorely could use. Although the map detail and design in this game offers a taste of the scale it could be at it simply doesn't reach it.

    BattleField 1 has incredible wide open maps that give their vehicles a chance to breath, why can't this game have that too?

    Note: I am not talking about the classes or weapons of this game becoming more like battlefield, I am simply talking about the scale.

    Those that doubt this lack of scale need to play GA tatooine load up a landspeeder and see how far you can go and how quickly you will die due to the map constraints.

    Load up yavin GA get into a ATST and see how mind-numbingly difficult it is to move anywhere consistently on those super small paths. So so aggravating.

    And I haven't even mentioned the silliness of locking down the biggest mode to 40 players. This is a dice engine right? It has proven to handle 64 players quite well on PC so why not have that design and scale of map?

    Like I said whoever made that call to steer clear of the battlefield series design is a colossal fill-in-the-blank.

    Personally I'd like to see Battlefield be a re-skin of Overwatch. It'd be sweet seeing all that close in action with regular troopers.
    #infantrylivesmatter
  • The current battlefront games weapons with the blueprint of battlefield. Perfect Star Wars game!!!
  • It should be, but EA/Dice stubbornly refuse to make it so. Instead they've created a half baked game with questionable systems, that doesn't quite work, when all along they have the answer staring them in the face - BATTLEFIELD.
  • Battlefront 2015 and Battlefront II 2017 are fun in their own right. However, I really hope that the inevitable Battlefront III truly returns to its roots and embraces the epic, large, open scale battles of Star Wars, and not more of these crammed corridors and linear maps filled with choke points and little room for real flanking opportunity.
  • "I would love to meet the individual that made the call to avoid any designs similar to battlefield. " I would congratulate them for a good decision---#keepgamesdiverse
  • Also, people on here generally seem to dislike battlefield. There is a massive casual crowd around this game which is why they wont go for a battlefield-esque game
    PSN: ibrajoker59
  • ZeroFiveFour
    405 posts Member
    edited November 2017
    This game would be taken to the Next Level it if had Gigantic, Full scale Battle Maps with:

    1: Vehicles all over the map, including AT ATs and LAAT's NOT on rails...
    2: Infantry support all over the map
    3: Atmospheric Star fighters over head
    4: Massive Ground Air invasion simultaneous
    5: LAAT and AT AT used to transport infantry
    6: Multi seat vehicles

    I see that as a leap forward, and an improvement on an already excellent game and gaming experience.

    Cheers,

    054
  • OOM19
    2831 posts Member
    Bah

    64 Player combat is heavily overrated
    OOM-9 FOR BATTLEFRONT 2

    OOM-9 Hero Concept by AzelfandQuilava
    https://i.redd.it/uleh1g22xrhz.png

    Suppor The Latest OOM-9 Thread
    [url="https://battlefront-forums.ea.com/discussion/121855/grievous-vs-oom-9/p1/p1[/url]

    jexdw69dwod3.png
  • F03hammer
    5012 posts SWBF Senior Moderator
    Yes let's give people more room for aerial superiority!
    But I agree, some maps flying is like having to sneeze whilst driving on an icy highway and spilling hot coffee in your lap.
    Over pretty quick.
    Voluntary Star Wars Battlefront Moderator

    28zvwf.jpg
    GT XBOX:
    buyakashak


  • This game would be taken to the Next Level it if had Gigantic, Full scale Battle Maps with:

    1: Vehicles all over the map, including AT ATs and LAAT's NOT on rails...
    2: Infantry support all over the map
    3: Atmospheric Star fighters over head
    4: Massive Ground Air invasion simultaneous
    5: LAAT and AT AT used to transport infantry
    6: Multi seat vehicles

    I see that as a leap forward, and an improvement on an already excellent game and gaming experience.

    Cheers,

    054

    And 64 player Operations battles.
  • Agree with all of you.

    Battlefront by EA is somehow different from the BATTLEFIELD series focusing on team play.
    It is like Call of Duty: Star Wars.
    The newly introduced point system enables a skilled player who gets more points than the goal or
    objective by killstreak to become Jedi, which is like triggering an EMP bomb and nuclear bomb in Call of Duty.
    And I don’t get excited even when I shoot a green laser beam on the “turret” of a LAAT gunship flying on the rail like an AC 130 in Call of Duty.
    I can’t believe I have to sit on the turret without being able to control the LAAT in the first place.
    It is more acceptable to combine BATTLEFIELD with Star Wars, which seems more like Battlefront.

    Imagine this.
    The player can take out a gun and shoot while putting own feet up, shoot a green laser beam on the turret while boarding the gunship with friends (which is important), go to destinations with Clone brothers, and fly in a circular pattern so that the gunner can easily take aim like in EP2 Geonosis or Clone Wars TV shows.
    These are the best parts of Star Wars! right?
    ()

    I believe that it is the system of BATTLEFIELD and the production company, DICE, enable this.

    So Battlefrontians, do not lost your hope.

    And remember, Battlefrontians are built on hope!

    (I'm sorry for my bad English. I am a big fan of Battlefield and old Battlefronts.)
  • This Isn't battlefield . what killed the 1st person shooter genre was every franchise trying to be like its competitors I like that this game has its own feel its own game modes
  • DarthJ wrote: »
    Also, people on here generally seem to dislike battlefield. There is a massive casual crowd around this game which is why they wont go for a battlefield-esque game

    I am a casual and been having 150+ hours and lots of fun in Battlefield1. It's a very casual game.

    BF4 on the other hand - that required lots of skill...
  • EvazanJr wrote: »

    C
    EvazanJr wrote: »

    Business would be better for EA right now if they'd of made it more on par with battlefields systems Instead of the poor squad implementation and star card progression crap.

    Reskining the core mechanics of a battlefield game with star wars would not hurt them. People would play both for the different settings.
  • DarthJ wrote: »
    Also, people on here generally seem to dislike battlefield. There is a massive casual crowd around this game which is why they wont go for a battlefield-esque game

    Lol you are making a lot of assumptions there fell
  • bfloo
    14992 posts Member
    The og battlefronts were popular because they were Battlefield reskins.

    The one thing that I don't like about this game is it is so scripted.
    The Knights of Gareth are Eternal

    Pirate of the Knights of Gareth

    h846398gb27k.png


  • yup_yuc
    3 posts Member
    edited November 2017
    EvazanJr wrote: »

    C
    EvazanJr wrote: »

    Business would be better for EA right now if they'd of made it more on par with battlefields systems Instead of the poor squad implementation and star card progression ****.

    Reskining the core mechanics of a battlefield game with star wars would not hurt them. People would play both for the different settings.

    bfloo wrote: »
    The og battlefronts were popular because they were Battlefield reskins.

    The one thing that I don't like about this game is it is so scripted.


    Indeed.
    Actually, Im playing Battlefield 1, 4 and Battlefront 2 by Pandemic on old PS2 now Lol

    I got a platinum trophy on Battlefront 2015(75% of Battlefront 2017 now) but it doesn't mean the both Battlefronts are so interesting for me.
    I just wanted some trophies of Star Wars because I LOVE Star Wars.
    Just 2 weeks after its launch, I'm already getting bored.
    Maybe this is because there is no open scale battle, multi-crew vehicles and meaningful squad system, and Galactic Assault, the biggest mode of BF2017, is scripted.

    My friends has the same condition. They went to other game from Battlefront 2017.....
  • Everyone at EA and Dice WISHES the only complaint they had right now was that their new Battlefront was just a reskinned Battlefield.
  • "Just 2 weeks after its launch, I'm already getting bored.
    Maybe this is because there is no open scale battle, multi-crew vehicles and meaningful squad system, and Galactic Assault, the biggest mode of BF2017, is scripted."

    ...or maybe , just an outside chance that despite you having being shown in beta and countless other sources it was not going to be like that you might just might have decided it would be 'boring' for you and did not follow through with a purchase ? Hmmm
  • Dash
    11568 posts Member
    neostar wrote: »
    I've heard that the powers that be don't want this franchise to be considered a battlefield game with SW skins but come on.

    Right now most of the ground vehicles are confined to limited claustrophobic pathways, the air vehicles have a tiny little ground sector to focus on thus making it a turkey shoot for those on the ground.

    I would love to meet the individual that made the call to avoid any designs similar to battlefield. The battlefield series is a time tested and proven game design honed by almost two decades of gameplay. The battlefield series offers a fantastic level of scale that this game sorely could use. Although the map detail and design in this game offers a taste of the scale it could be at it simply doesn't reach it.

    BattleField 1 has incredible wide open maps that give their vehicles a chance to breath, why can't this game have that too?

    Note: I am not talking about the classes or weapons of this game becoming more like battlefield, I am simply talking about the scale.

    Those that doubt this lack of scale need to play GA tatooine load up a landspeeder and see how far you can go and how quickly you will die due to the map constraints.

    Load up yavin GA get into a ATST and see how mind-numbingly difficult it is to move anywhere consistently on those super small paths. So so aggravating.

    And I haven't even mentioned the silliness of locking down the biggest mode to 40 players. This is a dice engine right? It has proven to handle 64 players quite well on PC so why not have that design and scale of map?

    Like I said whoever made that call to steer clear of the battlefield series design is a colossal fill-in-the-blank.

    Simple answer, because as much as you think this is a reskin of battlefield, it never has nor ever will be. This is Battlefront. This isn't Battlefield. The mechanics here will always be different by history of the franchise and by design. That's really where it ends discussion wise.
    Origin ID: "NWG_Dash"

    Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyUQ3FFqM-TQd-3xtZmHOGQ?view_as=subscriber
    Link to all my Guides here in Tips & Tricks: https://battlefront-forums.ea.com/discussion/113241/custom-class-hero-loadouts-builds-revisited-pt-2-6-14-2018#latest

    "When you ask for trouble, you should not be surprised when it finds you". - Plo Koon
    rjy4wg9w86wa.gif





  • "Just 2 weeks after its launch, I'm already getting bored.
    Maybe this is because there is no open scale battle, multi-crew vehicles and meaningful squad system, and Galactic Assault, the biggest mode of BF2017, is scripted."

    ...or maybe , just an outside chance that despite you having being shown in beta and countless other sources it was not going to be like that you might just might have decided it would be 'boring' for you and did not follow through with a purchase ? Hmmm

    But you also bought it...
  • I would love a Star Wars game with Arma sized maps, full on battles! bit like Empire at War scale :smiley:
    A Clone Trooper walks into a bar and asks the barman, “Hey, have you seen my brother?”
    “I dunno,” says the barman, “What does he look like?”
  • I could not agree more that this game should have larger maps with more players, vehicles that are not on rails, more vehicles in general, ability to get in and out of all vehicles at will and have multi crew vehicles. I think that basically copying the 2005 game and improving it would have been a better decision than basically making a slightly more in-depth COD style came. I don't give a damn about casual players, they will drop the game in months anyway. What I care about is a deep game with a long life.
  • DarthJ
    6441 posts Member
    DarthJ wrote: »
    Also, people on here generally seem to dislike battlefield. There is a massive casual crowd around this game which is why they wont go for a battlefield-esque game

    Lol you are making a lot of assumptions there fell

    Lol to be fair, you mention making battlefront like battlefield here and you usually get a mauling. So its a fair assumption, to me at least. I love both so I'm happy
    PSN: ibrajoker59
  • EvazanJr wrote: »

    C
    EvazanJr wrote: »

    Business would be better for EA right now if they'd of made it more on par with battlefields systems Instead of the poor squad implementation and star card progression ****.

    Reskining the core mechanics of a battlefield game with star wars would not hurt them. People would play both for the different settings.
    But they wouldn’t make as much money
  • This game would be taken to the Next Level it if had Gigantic, Full scale Battle Maps with:

    1: Vehicles all over the map, including AT ATs and LAAT's NOT on rails...
    2: Infantry support all over the map
    3: Atmospheric Star fighters over head
    4: Massive Ground Air invasion simultaneous
    5: LAAT and AT AT used to transport infantry
    6: Multi seat vehicles

    I see that as a leap forward, and an improvement on an already excellent game and gaming experience.

    Cheers,

    054

    And 64 player Operations battles.

    Indeed!

    Cheers,

    054
  • HippoZoned
    215 posts Member
    edited November 2017
    EvazanJr wrote: »
    EvazanJr wrote: »

    C
    EvazanJr wrote: »

    Business would be better for EA right now if they'd of made it more on par with battlefields systems Instead of the poor squad implementation and star card progression ****.

    Reskining the core mechanics of a battlefield game with star wars would not hurt them. People would play both for the different settings.
    But they wouldn’t make as much money

    How do you figure this. Id argue it they made more of a battlefield-like star wars game it would have sold double what the 1st(2015)game sold
  • bfloo
    14992 posts Member
    HippoZoned wrote: »
    EvazanJr wrote: »
    EvazanJr wrote: »

    C
    EvazanJr wrote: »

    Business would be better for EA right now if they'd of made it more on par with battlefields systems Instead of the poor squad implementation and star card progression ****.

    Reskining the core mechanics of a battlefield game with star wars would not hurt them. People would play both for the different settings.
    But they wouldn’t make as much money

    How do you figure this. Id argue it they made more of a battlefield-like star wars game it would have sold double what the 1st(2015)game sold

    I think he means the Battlefield 2018 sales
    The Knights of Gareth are Eternal

    Pirate of the Knights of Gareth

    h846398gb27k.png


  • DarthJ wrote: »
    DarthJ wrote: »
    Also, people on here generally seem to dislike battlefield. There is a massive casual crowd around this game which is why they wont go for a battlefield-esque game

    Lol you are making a lot of assumptions there fell

    Lol to be fair, you mention making battlefront like battlefield here and you usually get a mauling. So its a fair assumption, to me at least. I love both so I'm happy

    Got me confused with someone else? I post about NOT making Battlefront like Battlefield ONE with SW skin . I was pointing out the general statement "people on here generally seem to dislike battlefield" . I think people respond to the make it like Battlefield one posts , not the same as disliking battlefield ONE. I think both games should remain different for different player tastes
  • HippoZoned wrote: »
    EvazanJr wrote: »
    EvazanJr wrote: »

    C
    EvazanJr wrote: »

    Business would be better for EA right now if they'd of made it more on par with battlefields systems Instead of the poor squad implementation and star card progression ****.

    Reskining the core mechanics of a battlefield game with star wars would not hurt them. People would play both for the different settings.
    But they wouldn’t make as much money

    How do you figure this. Id argue it they made more of a battlefield-like star wars game it would have sold double what the 1st(2015)game sold
    Battlefront might make more individually yet overall DICE will make less since they’d be taking some people from the Battlefield franchise.
  • EvazanJr wrote: »
    HippoZoned wrote: »
    EvazanJr wrote: »
    EvazanJr wrote: »

    C
    EvazanJr wrote: »

    Business would be better for EA right now if they'd of made it more on par with battlefields systems Instead of the poor squad implementation and star card progression ****.

    Reskining the core mechanics of a battlefield game with star wars would not hurt them. People would play both for the different settings.
    But they wouldn’t make as much money

    How do you figure this. Id argue it they made more of a battlefield-like star wars game it would have sold double what the 1st(2015)game sold
    Battlefront might make more individually yet overall DICE will make less since they’d be taking some people from the Battlefield franchise.

    Why is that id buy both games id play both games depending on my fix, you have both battlefield 3, 4 and 1 and i play and own them all depending on my mood. Not to mention i really don't think one will directly impact the other
  • Sledgehammer recently said that he had open maps and modes in his reports for EA/DICE. Therefore EA 100% know that we want a game with higher replayability and finally better vehicle combat.
    For General Ahsoka Tano!
    h3d5nuo8y0jq.png

  • DarthJ
    6441 posts Member
    edited November 2017
    DarthJ wrote: »
    DarthJ wrote: »
    Also, people on here generally seem to dislike battlefield. There is a massive casual crowd around this game which is why they wont go for a battlefield-esque game

    Lol you are making a lot of assumptions there fell

    Lol to be fair, you mention making battlefront like battlefield here and you usually get a mauling. So its a fair assumption, to me at least. I love both so I'm happy

    Got me confused with someone else? I post about NOT making Battlefront like Battlefield ONE with SW skin . I was pointing out the general statement "people on here generally seem to dislike battlefield" . I think people respond to the make it like Battlefield one posts , not the same as disliking battlefield ONE. I think both games should remain different for different player tastes

    I think we are both confused, when I said 'you', I didnt mean actually you as a person specifically, more in general ie. If I came on and said it.

    I dont mind they are different, just get that vibe from a lot of people on here.
    PSN: ibrajoker59
  • I think a lot of people forget the backlash when Dice first got named as making the new BF games. All sorts of people freaked out because they thought would just be a battlefield clone with a StarWars skin. So they made it a point of saying it would be different, and made it different, now people complain that it's not battlefield.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!