criterion-sm dice-lg ea-starwars-lg instagram lucasfilm-lg motive-lg twitch you-tube
November Community Calendar
Double XP Event

Jackfrags plays Battlefront 2 for first time since Nov 2017

24

Replies

  • MyLittleGreenFriend
    3541 posts Member
    edited April 29
    Who?!?

    He has over 2m subscibers on Youtube.

    And the guy who made this video has over 18 million. Who gives a damn?

    :D :D :D :D
  • He played ONE game of CS (and luckily on the LS team) so he doesn't know much at all about what's going on with this game and the imbalances (and being on the DS team now). Funny some of you think this brings legitimate supportive praise back to the game. He hadn't even seen Geonosis yet, he was googling at graphics.

    Bingo
    41st.org Founder "Where the Game is Winnable."

    are-you-threatening-me-gif.gif
  • Cadoth
    1182 posts Member
    I honestly don’t think that video will bring back a lot of players, I mean maybe a few who knows. Btw his reaction while playing the game seemed genuine but I don’t have a damn crystal ball so I can’t know it but whatever
  • Xerogon wrote: »
    I like Jack Frags well enough be he’s not a star wars guy that I’m aware of. Battlefield 5 must be doing bad lol, that’s how these guys work.

    Before this video he posted one on Starwars Republic Commando reviving the first time he played it when he was 19. So, he's not a kid and apparently he likes Starwars...

    I bought BF2 a week ago and enjoying... Having almost 3000 hours on Battlefield 4 I can only say Capital Supremacy is my favourite although Galactic Assault has some nice maps. If only these where wider and played for longer. Rounds just seem a meat grind...

    Gameplay wise, there is challenge to it and Aerial troopers are soooooo fun 🙂

  • Xerogon wrote: »
    I like Jack Frags well enough be he’s not a star wars guy that I’m aware of. Battlefield 5 must be doing bad lol, that’s how these guys work.

    Before this video he posted one on Starwars Republic Commando reviving the first time he played it when he was 19. So, he's not a kid and apparently he likes Starwars...

    I bought BF2 a week ago and enjoying... Having almost 3000 hours on Battlefield 4 I can only say Capital Supremacy is my favourite although Galactic Assault has some nice maps. If only these where wider and played for longer. Rounds just seem a meat grind...

    Gameplay wise, there is challenge to it and Aerial troopers are soooooo fun 🙂

    Welcome to the fray 😁
  • Finest_Banana
    1802 posts Member
    edited April 29
    Gameplay wise, there is challenge to it and Aerial troopers are soooooo fun

    What?!? It's the least challenging game I've ever played. Typically, Battlefield players are more skilled. Is it because you aren't used to third-person?
    My name is Bob

  • DarthLando wrote: »
    DarthLando wrote: »
    >Posts something seemingly positive about the game

    All the snowflakes on the forum

    vfgq4vm9owk8.gif

    That's actually you whenever someone doesn't suck up to DICE
    DarthLando wrote: »
    >Posts something seemingly positive about the game

    All the snowflakes on the forum

    vfgq4vm9owk8.gif

    That's actually you whenever someone doesn't suck up to DICE

    The proverbial “No, you!” elementary response.

    Color me shocked

    Dice sucks & this game has a plethora of issues, so..swing & a miss on that one.

    You used the "triggered" snowflake gif. That's an elementary insult, no?

    Indeed, but those who label and slander often are the MOST defensive...after all getting their own medicine is something they can't accept. Psychologists refer to it as a low self esteem issue.
  • I don't get the hype around a few content creators briefly playing Battlefront. The game was released in late 2017 and has high name-recognition. Most gamers have already formed their opinions on BF17 at this point. It would be one thing if Shroud started playing regularly, but he only played once. Ninja briefly tried several niche BRs, and none of them gained sustainable long-term popularity. Playing it regularly would attract new players, but playing it once or twice is unlikely to bring in more than a minuscule amount of newbies.
    My name is Bob

  • Empire_TW
    6532 posts Member
    Draco_RSA wrote: »
    unit900000 wrote: »
    he actually liked CS? are you sure this guy is drug free? Lol

    I have a feeling he was paid by EA to do this video for publicity.

    Wouldn't surprise me, along with youtubers who work with Bethesda, youtubers who work with EA are considered to be paid off by many.
    Janina Gavankar/Iden Versio Fan
    First Max Prestige Iden Versio
    hojevrxvarht.png
    PSN: Empire_TW. Twitter: Empire_TW. Youtube: Empire_TW.
  • Empire_TW
    6532 posts Member
    GenxDarchi wrote: »
    Empire_TW wrote: »
    Empire_TW wrote: »
    Empire_TW wrote: »
    Empire_TW wrote: »
    Big YouTubers playing a game doesn't necessarily mean that game is gonna get a better population.

    For example, back around December, a youtuber called isorrowproductions started a series of videos for a game called Victoria 2 which only had an active player base around 1000 players, his videos all got a view count of 300,000-500,000 views. One even made it to the youtube trending page. Despite all that Victoria 2's population didn't change in the slightest, no new surge of new players.

    I'll use another example that involves Jackfrags, he has made videos about BF4 and PUBG too yet there hasn't been any new surge in new players there, not any that I've heard of nor am I hearing anything about BF4 or PUBG having big surges back into popularity.

    LOL!! Ironically, BF4 has a healthy online community despite no content support since 2015. I still regularly play on PS4. Many consider it the best Battlefield on current consoles. PUBG is still one of the most watched games on Twitch with a thriving community.

    Like it or not, something tipped him off to even watch Battlefront Updates and get interested in the game. It's more of the positive trend in recent months. Jackfrags is very well known among Battlefield players. If he keeps making videos of Battlefront 2 as he said he might, then he will absolutely bring people to this game. Battlefront 2 is not dead, it's still recent, still getting active support, and seeing a YouTuber with influence like Jackfrags enjoying the game is often all it takes for someone to give it a shot.

    I don't see how a video about a game people have been very well aware of would change anything, seeing a video of a game doesn't make me want to play a game.

    So you've never watched gameplay of a game you were interested in? There's a lot of people who are interested in a good Star Wars Battlefront game. People who passed on this game due to the loot box controversy. They may see Jackfrags having fun playing it and decide to give it a shot, especially since it's usually heavily discounted.
    I guarantee DICE knows who Jackfrags is and are very happy about this.
    Empire_TW wrote: »
    DICE has been aware and have been working with JackFrags for a very long time now, since BF3 at least.

    Exactly. They work with him because of his influence in the community. That same influence can work for this game too.

    No, I don't know anyone else who base buying a game on what a youtuber thinks. Myself and anyone I know base whether we get a game on it's beta/demos, trailers, or recommendations from real life people, most people make up their own minds on this sort of thing.

    If them changing the progression system a year ago didn't bring in people who didn't buy specifically because of the progression system why would a video now bring them in?

    Jackfrags is known for his Battlefield content, not game recommendations. Most of the people who watched this specific video probably already have their minds made up about this game and him just making a video of him playing it most likely won't change their minds.
    I think all the toxicity on the forums is ultimately why the developers spend more time on Reddit than on here

    and the game will continue to suffer.

    This is exactly what I'm talking about. You guys make stuff up when you don't have anything legit to rag on. And here you've totally sidetracked this thread with it.
    1. Yes Jackfrags absolutely influences the people viewing his videos, as does Shroud and others streaming games on Twitch. This is a fact of today's gaming and internet culture. That's why these guys get invited everywhere and get sponsored to play these games. There are a lot of people who do tune in to see what the gameplay is like before buying.
    2. After a year and a half, this game is back to player numbers on the level of the launch month. That's not suffering.

    What evidence suggests that this game is back to launch numbers? A comment from known liars who refuse to actually prove this statistic is hardly evidence

    Man, it’s funny how many people just auto believe the devs. First with EOR matchmaking, then Launch numbers, then Yoda Dash strike being a bug. Just ridiculous.

    I really don't understand it either, for what reason should anyone believe the "launch day numbers" comment?
    JediJam wrote: »
    Haha it amazing seeing how determinedly negative some people are. Some guy played the game, liked it and broadcast it to loads of new people. Some game devs will actually sponsor youtubers and streamers to play their games because they know how effective that is at bringing in new players. Its how fortnite ended up so popular.

    And I love how people claim anyone who is actually positive about the game or actually enjoys playing it is simply either lying or stupid haha.

    What do you mean "loads of new people"? Considering that Jackfrags is a battlefield channel it is most likely that the grand majority of the viewers have already made up their mind about the game. Who knows how many of the viewers were people who already play this game and just watched to see what jack thought about the game.
    Janina Gavankar/Iden Versio Fan
    First Max Prestige Iden Versio
    hojevrxvarht.png
    PSN: Empire_TW. Twitter: Empire_TW. Youtube: Empire_TW.
  • Versatti
    2198 posts Member
    “Got to go and help the chosen one, he’s in trouble.” :lol: :lol:
  • Relmets
    2468 posts Member
    I mean I'm not going to say it's a bad thing by any means, but JF audience is the battleFIELD crowd. They already were not playing this game most likely because to them the SW appeal alone isn't enough to counteract the fact that it's discount battlefield at best, and even that might be generous. If they do end up checking the game out they'll see how it doesn't really hold a candle to the kind of gameplay they prefer, and probably won't be too interested.
    [+3748 posts]
  • Relmets wrote: »
    I mean I'm not going to say it's a bad thing by any means, but JF audience is the battleFIELD crowd. They already were not playing this game most likely because to them the SW appeal alone isn't enough to counteract the fact that it's discount battlefield at best, and even that might be generous. If they do end up checking the game out they'll see how it doesn't really hold a candle to the kind of gameplay they prefer, and probably won't be too interested.

    He's known for Battlefield, but a lot of people know Battlefront as having Conquest mode. There's appeal there for Battlefield fans. Remember the original Battlefront games lifted Conquest from Battlefield. Long time fans know this and want Conquest gameplay back in Battlefront. CS at least gives some of that in Phase 1.

    BFV is not doing so hot, and as good as BF4 is, it's over 5 years old. I was a Socom 2 and Socom 3 player way back when the original games came out. I would shift to Battlefront when I got tired of the competitive nature of Socom. So yeah, I could see the same happening for Battlefield fans and this game. Battlefront has always been more casual than Battlefield. It could be a change of pace.

    CS doesn't hold a candle to Conquest on Battlefield.

    Factual evidence shows BFV is more popular than BF17.
    My name is Bob

  • Relmets wrote: »
    I mean I'm not going to say it's a bad thing by any means, but JF audience is the battleFIELD crowd. They already were not playing this game most likely because to them the SW appeal alone isn't enough to counteract the fact that it's discount battlefield at best, and even that might be generous. If they do end up checking the game out they'll see how it doesn't really hold a candle to the kind of gameplay they prefer, and probably won't be too interested.

    He's known for Battlefield, but a lot of people know Battlefront as having Conquest mode. There's appeal there for Battlefield fans. Remember the original Battlefront games lifted Conquest from Battlefield. Long time fans know this and want Conquest gameplay back in Battlefront. CS at least gives some of that in Phase 1.

    BFV is not doing so hot, and as good as BF4 is, it's over 5 years old. I was a Socom 2 and Socom 3 player way back when the original games came out. I would shift to Battlefront when I got tired of the competitive nature of Socom. So yeah, I could see the same happening for Battlefield fans and this game. Battlefront has always been more casual than Battlefield. It could be a change of pace.

    CS doesn't hold a candle to Conquest on Battlefield.

    Factual evidence shows BFV is more popular than BF17.

    So what? Now we are pretending BFV has some thriving community? Everyone knows the game has struggled since launch. It's been perpetually on sale for $29.99 since two weeks after launch. LOL!!

    But again, read the post. Battlefront 2 doesn't have to replace BFV. It can just be a change of pace. Right now BFV players are getting tired of the lack of maps and content, and are basically waiting on a huge Pacific theater update that is said to be coming in the fall. Meanwhile, Battlefront 2 has been in the press a lot lately for what is generally perceived to be good updates. CS is not Conquest, but it's close enough. Jackfrags enjoyed himself with it.
  • Relmets
    2468 posts Member
    CS is not Conquest, but it's close enough. Jackfrags enjoyed himself with it.

    it'll be close enough if they axe the capital ship phase. Even fragman himself couldn't compliment the mode without mentioning how CQ would be better
    [+3748 posts]
  • Relmets wrote: »
    I mean I'm not going to say it's a bad thing by any means, but JF audience is the battleFIELD crowd. They already were not playing this game most likely because to them the SW appeal alone isn't enough to counteract the fact that it's discount battlefield at best, and even that might be generous. If they do end up checking the game out they'll see how it doesn't really hold a candle to the kind of gameplay they prefer, and probably won't be too interested.

    He's known for Battlefield, but a lot of people know Battlefront as having Conquest mode. There's appeal there for Battlefield fans. Remember the original Battlefront games lifted Conquest from Battlefield. Long time fans know this and want Conquest gameplay back in Battlefront. CS at least gives some of that in Phase 1.

    BFV is not doing so hot, and as good as BF4 is, it's over 5 years old. I was a Socom 2 and Socom 3 player way back when the original games came out. I would shift to Battlefront when I got tired of the competitive nature of Socom. So yeah, I could see the same happening for Battlefield fans and this game. Battlefront has always been more casual than Battlefield. It could be a change of pace.

    CS doesn't hold a candle to Conquest on Battlefield.

    Factual evidence shows BFV is more popular than BF17.

    So what? Now we are pretending BFV has some thriving community? Everyone knows the game has struggled since launch. It's been perpetually on sale for $29.99 since two weeks after launch. LOL!!

    But again, read the post. Battlefront 2 doesn't have to replace BFV. It can just be a change of pace. Right now BFV players are getting tired of the lack of maps and content, and are basically waiting on a huge Pacific theater update that is said to be coming in the fall. Meanwhile, Battlefront 2 has been in the press a lot lately for what is generally perceived to be good updates. CS is not Conquest, but it's close enough. Jackfrags enjoyed himself with it.

    You can't have it both ways. It BFV "isn't doing so hot," then BF15 isn't having the awesome revival you suggest. Your bias is showing.
    My name is Bob

  • rollind24
    5951 posts Member
    So he’s played more than the playtesters before a patch. Excellent
    #infantrylivesmatter
  • Seems to me like this may not matter for most games, but this game is in a unique position to benefit because of its botched launch.

    There are still people out there who think that the game has loot crates even though they were removed before launch. The game was made to be something that wasn’t cool to play when it was released.

    Most of the people who are on here have been playing for a year and half now and forget how great this game is at looking, sounding, and feeling like Star Wars. And honestly that’s what most people play the game for.

    It was funny to watch him in that video have no idea what Obi Wan’s abilities were or how to use him, but just be so stoked about getting to be Obi Wan.

    So yes, this video might not be a massive boost to the game in and of itself. But it is definitely part of a trend of good publicity that this game has been getting. People seem to be interested in giving it another shot. Probably because they got a Star Wars itch after celebration and that EpIX trailer. And this game is designed to scratch that itch.
  • Relmets wrote: »
    CS is not Conquest, but it's close enough. Jackfrags enjoyed himself with it.

    it'll be close enough if they axe the capital ship phase. Even fragman himself couldn't compliment the mode without mentioning how CQ would be better

    He complimented the mode just fine, but he did suggest we need Conquest. I posted that on page one before this train of an argument started. But again, that's also a good thing. Jackfrags adds to the list of YouTubers DICE deals with that want Conquest in Battlefront. DICE does care what these guys say, regardless of what people in here want to think.
  • Seems to me like this may not matter for most games, but this game is in a unique position to benefit because of its botched launch.

    There are still people out there who think that the game has loot crates even though they were removed before launch. The game was made to be something that wasn’t cool to play when it was released.

    Most of the people who are on here have been playing for a year and half now and forget how great this game is at looking, sounding, and feeling like Star Wars. And honestly that’s what most people play the game for.

    It was funny to watch him in that video have no idea what Obi Wan’s abilities were or how to use him, but just be so stoked about getting to be Obi Wan.

    So yes, this video might not be a massive boost to the game in and of itself. But it is definitely part of a trend of good publicity that this game has been getting. People seem to be interested in giving it another shot. Probably because they got a Star Wars itch after celebration and that EpIX trailer. And this game is designed to scratch that itch.

    ^This guy gets it.

    Star Wars YouTubers talk about how there's a lot of people who think loot boxes are still a problem in Battlefront 2. Battlefront 2 fell completely off the radar for them. So like Jackfrags in this video, they are going to have a totally different perspective when seeing this game again. Jackfrags was laughing and having a good time. He's not even looking at the things people complain about on these forums.
  • Seems to me like this may not matter for most games, but this game is in a unique position to benefit because of its botched launch.

    There are still people out there who think that the game has loot crates even though they were removed before launch. The game was made to be something that wasn’t cool to play when it was released.

    Most of the people who are on here have been playing for a year and half now and forget how great this game is at looking, sounding, and feeling like Star Wars. And honestly that’s what most people play the game for.

    It was funny to watch him in that video have no idea what Obi Wan’s abilities were or how to use him, but just be so stoked about getting to be Obi Wan.

    So yes, this video might not be a massive boost to the game in and of itself. But it is definitely part of a trend of good publicity that this game has been getting. People seem to be interested in giving it another shot. Probably because they got a Star Wars itch after celebration and that EpIX trailer. And this game is designed to scratch that itch.

    ^This guy gets it.

    He's not even looking at the things people complain about on these forums.

    He's also not been around playing while the developers have ignored meaningful concerns and broken promises, such as adding new weapons. It's been a year and a half since release. Why did this game launch without basic features and content BF15 included?

    My name is Bob

  • Relmets
    2468 posts Member
    Relmets wrote: »
    CS is not Conquest, but it's close enough. Jackfrags enjoyed himself with it.

    it'll be close enough if they axe the capital ship phase. Even fragman himself couldn't compliment the mode without mentioning how CQ would be better

    He complimented the mode just fine, but he did suggest we need Conquest. I posted that on page one before this train of an argument started. But again, that's also a good thing. Jackfrags adds to the list of YouTubers DICE deals with that want Conquest in Battlefront. DICE does care what these guys say, regardless of what people in here want to think.

    So are we back to the perpetual "hoping for CQ" phase again? Everybody's been asking for a non linear large mode, in the form of CQ, since launch haven't they? And we got CS instead for absolutely no reason. What's the point of the non linear mode when half of it, including the victory condition, is GA 2.0?

    [+3748 posts]
  • Relmets wrote: »
    I mean I'm not going to say it's a bad thing by any means, but JF audience is the battleFIELD crowd. They already were not playing this game most likely because to them the SW appeal alone isn't enough to counteract the fact that it's discount battlefield at best, and even that might be generous. If they do end up checking the game out they'll see how it doesn't really hold a candle to the kind of gameplay they prefer, and probably won't be too interested.

    He's known for Battlefield, but a lot of people know Battlefront as having Conquest mode. There's appeal there for Battlefield fans. Remember the original Battlefront games lifted Conquest from Battlefield. Long time fans know this and want Conquest gameplay back in Battlefront. CS at least gives some of that in Phase 1.

    BFV is not doing so hot, and as good as BF4 is, it's over 5 years old. I was a Socom 2 and Socom 3 player way back when the original games came out. I would shift to Battlefront when I got tired of the competitive nature of Socom. So yeah, I could see the same happening for Battlefield fans and this game. Battlefront has always been more casual than Battlefield. It could be a change of pace.

    CS doesn't hold a candle to Conquest on Battlefield.

    Factual evidence shows BFV is more popular than BF17.

    So what? Now we are pretending BFV has some thriving community? Everyone knows the game has struggled since launch. It's been perpetually on sale for $29.99 since two weeks after launch. LOL!!

    But again, read the post. Battlefront 2 doesn't have to replace BFV. It can just be a change of pace. Right now BFV players are getting tired of the lack of maps and content, and are basically waiting on a huge Pacific theater update that is said to be coming in the fall. Meanwhile, Battlefront 2 has been in the press a lot lately for what is generally perceived to be good updates. CS is not Conquest, but it's close enough. Jackfrags enjoyed himself with it.

    You can't have it both ways. It BFV "isn't doing so hot," then BF15 isn't having the awesome revival you suggest. Your bias is showing.
    Empire_TW wrote: »
    Relmets wrote: »
    I mean I'm not going to say it's a bad thing by any means, but JF audience is the battleFIELD crowd. They already were not playing this game most likely because to them the SW appeal alone isn't enough to counteract the fact that it's discount battlefield at best, and even that might be generous. If they do end up checking the game out they'll see how it doesn't really hold a candle to the kind of gameplay they prefer, and probably won't be too interested.

    He's known for Battlefield, but a lot of people know Battlefront as having Conquest mode. There's appeal there for Battlefield fans. Remember the original Battlefront games lifted Conquest from Battlefield. Long time fans know this and want Conquest gameplay back in Battlefront. CS at least gives some of that in Phase 1.

    BFV is not doing so hot, and as good as BF4 is, it's over 5 years old. I was a Socom 2 and Socom 3 player way back when the original games came out. I would shift to Battlefront when I got tired of the competitive nature of Socom. So yeah, I could see the same happening for Battlefield fans and this game. Battlefront has always been more casual than Battlefield. It could be a change of pace.

    CS doesn't hold a candle to Conquest on Battlefield.

    Factual evidence shows BFV is more popular than BF17.

    So what? Now we are pretending BFV has some thriving community? Everyone knows the game has struggled since launch. It's been perpetually on sale for $29.99 since two weeks after launch. LOL!!

    But again, read the post. Battlefront 2 doesn't have to replace BFV. It can just be a change of pace. Right now BFV players are getting tired of the lack of maps and content, and are basically waiting on a huge Pacific theater update that is said to be coming in the fall. Meanwhile, Battlefront 2 has been in the press a lot lately for what is generally perceived to be good updates. CS is not Conquest, but it's close enough. Jackfrags enjoyed himself with it.

    So BFV is struggling and them selling it for $30.00 is evidence of that but BF2 selling for significantly less isn't evidence of it doing poorly? Where is BF2 getting good press lately? This one video that was most likely watched by people who are well aware of bf2's state is hardy press.

    CS is and never will be "close enough" to real conquest. A nonlinear big mode was requested, we got domination (which lasts like 10 minutes) fused with a GA phase.

    Guys BFV has been on sale since two weeks after launch. It had a bad launch, not unlike Battlefront 2. But the fact is, Battlefield is, and has always been, a more popular series. Yes they have more players. But relatively speaking, BFV is struggling. They had low content at launch. They were missing game modes like Rush mode. They launched with just 8 maps and have only added a couple since launch. Firestorm isn't something most Battlefield fans are interested in. It's not been good.

    What you guys don't want to realize is there is so much missing from this game that creates the overall Conquest experience we know from Battlefield and even the original Battlefront games.

    Another Battlefield YouTuber named Westie uploaded a video of BF4 the other day. The phrase he used to describe it was "the theater of it". He was talking about how BFV was largely missing the elements that make the Battlefield chaos of the series. He was on Paracel Storm. There were boats, planes, helicopters, vehicles, troops, explosions, etc. everywhere. He just stopped and laughed while taking it all in. People used to do that with Battlefront way back with the original games too.
  • bfloo
    15957 posts Member
    Relmets wrote: »
    I mean I'm not going to say it's a bad thing by any means, but JF audience is the battleFIELD crowd. They already were not playing this game most likely because to them the SW appeal alone isn't enough to counteract the fact that it's discount battlefield at best, and even that might be generous. If they do end up checking the game out they'll see how it doesn't really hold a candle to the kind of gameplay they prefer, and probably won't be too interested.

    He's known for Battlefield, but a lot of people know Battlefront as having Conquest mode. There's appeal there for Battlefield fans. Remember the original Battlefront games lifted Conquest from Battlefield. Long time fans know this and want Conquest gameplay back in Battlefront. CS at least gives some of that in Phase 1.

    BFV is not doing so hot, and as good as BF4 is, it's over 5 years old. I was a Socom 2 and Socom 3 player way back when the original games came out. I would shift to Battlefront when I got tired of the competitive nature of Socom. So yeah, I could see the same happening for Battlefield fans and this game. Battlefront has always been more casual than Battlefield. It could be a change of pace.

    CS doesn't hold a candle to Conquest on Battlefield.

    Factual evidence shows BFV is more popular than BF17.

    BFV was its own debacle.

    I tried the beta and 10 hour access and thought it was terrible game play wise.

    I ignored the customization debate judging the game, though the constant women screaming in a WW2 atmosphere felt out of place.
    If you are going to try and sell me a historical game, at least make it accurate. Women played a large role in WW2, but not on the front lines the game depicts. I am fine with, and enjoy using, the female Russian sniper in Battlefield 1 as they are historically accurate.
    The Knights of Gareth are Eternal

    Pirate of the Knights of Gareth

    h846398gb27k.png


  • bfloo wrote: »
    Relmets wrote: »
    I mean I'm not going to say it's a bad thing by any means, but JF audience is the battleFIELD crowd. They already were not playing this game most likely because to them the SW appeal alone isn't enough to counteract the fact that it's discount battlefield at best, and even that might be generous. If they do end up checking the game out they'll see how it doesn't really hold a candle to the kind of gameplay they prefer, and probably won't be too interested.

    He's known for Battlefield, but a lot of people know Battlefront as having Conquest mode. There's appeal there for Battlefield fans. Remember the original Battlefront games lifted Conquest from Battlefield. Long time fans know this and want Conquest gameplay back in Battlefront. CS at least gives some of that in Phase 1.

    BFV is not doing so hot, and as good as BF4 is, it's over 5 years old. I was a Socom 2 and Socom 3 player way back when the original games came out. I would shift to Battlefront when I got tired of the competitive nature of Socom. So yeah, I could see the same happening for Battlefield fans and this game. Battlefront has always been more casual than Battlefield. It could be a change of pace.

    CS doesn't hold a candle to Conquest on Battlefield.

    Factual evidence shows BFV is more popular than BF17.

    BFV was its own debacle.

    I tried the beta and 10 hour access and thought it was terrible game play wise.

    I ignored the customization debate judging the game, though the constant women screaming in a WW2 atmosphere felt out of place.
    If you are going to try and sell me a historical game, at least make it accurate. Women played a large role in WW2, but not on the front lines the game depicts. I am fine with, and enjoy using, the female Russian sniper in Battlefield 1 as they are historically accurate.

    Me too. The beta was really bad. The maps were small to medium sized. There was maybe a couple of vehicles on each map. The CS phase 1 maps we have are better to be honest, with more vehicles and chaos going on you'd expect from Conquest.

    I play BF4 if I want a Battlefield fix...last night actually LOL. Supposedly BFV is getting a major update in the fall with Pacific Theater content.
  • bfloo
    15957 posts Member
    bfloo wrote: »
    Relmets wrote: »
    I mean I'm not going to say it's a bad thing by any means, but JF audience is the battleFIELD crowd. They already were not playing this game most likely because to them the SW appeal alone isn't enough to counteract the fact that it's discount battlefield at best, and even that might be generous. If they do end up checking the game out they'll see how it doesn't really hold a candle to the kind of gameplay they prefer, and probably won't be too interested.

    He's known for Battlefield, but a lot of people know Battlefront as having Conquest mode. There's appeal there for Battlefield fans. Remember the original Battlefront games lifted Conquest from Battlefield. Long time fans know this and want Conquest gameplay back in Battlefront. CS at least gives some of that in Phase 1.

    BFV is not doing so hot, and as good as BF4 is, it's over 5 years old. I was a Socom 2 and Socom 3 player way back when the original games came out. I would shift to Battlefront when I got tired of the competitive nature of Socom. So yeah, I could see the same happening for Battlefield fans and this game. Battlefront has always been more casual than Battlefield. It could be a change of pace.

    CS doesn't hold a candle to Conquest on Battlefield.

    Factual evidence shows BFV is more popular than BF17.

    BFV was its own debacle.

    I tried the beta and 10 hour access and thought it was terrible game play wise.

    I ignored the customization debate judging the game, though the constant women screaming in a WW2 atmosphere felt out of place.
    If you are going to try and sell me a historical game, at least make it accurate. Women played a large role in WW2, but not on the front lines the game depicts. I am fine with, and enjoy using, the female Russian sniper in Battlefield 1 as they are historically accurate.

    Me too. The beta was really bad. The maps were small to medium sized. There was maybe a couple of vehicles on each map. The CS phase 1 maps we have are better to be honest, with more vehicles and chaos going on you'd expect from Conquest.

    I play BF4 if I want a Battlefield fix...last night actually LOL. Supposedly BFV is getting a major update in the fall with Pacific Theater content.

    I enjoy Battlefield 1, but never played the others. WW1 sounded different from everything else the last few years so I gave it a go.
    The Knights of Gareth are Eternal

    Pirate of the Knights of Gareth

    h846398gb27k.png


  • bfloo wrote: »
    Relmets wrote: »
    I mean I'm not going to say it's a bad thing by any means, but JF audience is the battleFIELD crowd. They already were not playing this game most likely because to them the SW appeal alone isn't enough to counteract the fact that it's discount battlefield at best, and even that might be generous. If they do end up checking the game out they'll see how it doesn't really hold a candle to the kind of gameplay they prefer, and probably won't be too interested.

    He's known for Battlefield, but a lot of people know Battlefront as having Conquest mode. There's appeal there for Battlefield fans. Remember the original Battlefront games lifted Conquest from Battlefield. Long time fans know this and want Conquest gameplay back in Battlefront. CS at least gives some of that in Phase 1.

    BFV is not doing so hot, and as good as BF4 is, it's over 5 years old. I was a Socom 2 and Socom 3 player way back when the original games came out. I would shift to Battlefront when I got tired of the competitive nature of Socom. So yeah, I could see the same happening for Battlefield fans and this game. Battlefront has always been more casual than Battlefield. It could be a change of pace.

    CS doesn't hold a candle to Conquest on Battlefield.

    Factual evidence shows BFV is more popular than BF17.

    BFV was its own debacle.

    I tried the beta and 10 hour access and thought it was terrible game play wise.

    I ignored the customization debate judging the game, though the constant women screaming in a WW2 atmosphere felt out of place.
    If you are going to try and sell me a historical game, at least make it accurate. Women played a large role in WW2, but not on the front lines the game depicts. I am fine with, and enjoy using, the female Russian sniper in Battlefield 1 as they are historically accurate.

    For sure. I'm just trying to make the point that Battlefront can't be labeled as some miraculous comeback story when it is less popular than the BFV game he describes as "not doing so hot."
    My name is Bob

  • Relmets wrote: »
    Relmets wrote: »
    CS is not Conquest, but it's close enough. Jackfrags enjoyed himself with it.

    it'll be close enough if they axe the capital ship phase. Even fragman himself couldn't compliment the mode without mentioning how CQ would be better

    He complimented the mode just fine, but he did suggest we need Conquest. I posted that on page one before this train of an argument started. But again, that's also a good thing. Jackfrags adds to the list of YouTubers DICE deals with that want Conquest in Battlefront. DICE does care what these guys say, regardless of what people in here want to think.

    So are we back to the perpetual "hoping for CQ" phase again? Everybody's been asking for a non linear large mode, in the form of CQ, since launch haven't they? And we got CS instead for absolutely no reason. What's the point of the non linear mode when half of it, including the victory condition, is GA 2.0?

    I'm not sure it's for "no reason". I think they were looking for a game mode for the Clone Wars content. It ties better in with that era, given the large scale battles.

    But it's also given people a taste for Conquest and almost certainly raised the cry for a legit Conquest mode. For all we know, that's what they are doing. What if that's what they announce with the new roadmap, starting with OT era maps?
  • bfloo
    15957 posts Member
    bfloo wrote: »
    Relmets wrote: »
    I mean I'm not going to say it's a bad thing by any means, but JF audience is the battleFIELD crowd. They already were not playing this game most likely because to them the SW appeal alone isn't enough to counteract the fact that it's discount battlefield at best, and even that might be generous. If they do end up checking the game out they'll see how it doesn't really hold a candle to the kind of gameplay they prefer, and probably won't be too interested.

    He's known for Battlefield, but a lot of people know Battlefront as having Conquest mode. There's appeal there for Battlefield fans. Remember the original Battlefront games lifted Conquest from Battlefield. Long time fans know this and want Conquest gameplay back in Battlefront. CS at least gives some of that in Phase 1.

    BFV is not doing so hot, and as good as BF4 is, it's over 5 years old. I was a Socom 2 and Socom 3 player way back when the original games came out. I would shift to Battlefront when I got tired of the competitive nature of Socom. So yeah, I could see the same happening for Battlefield fans and this game. Battlefront has always been more casual than Battlefield. It could be a change of pace.

    CS doesn't hold a candle to Conquest on Battlefield.

    Factual evidence shows BFV is more popular than BF17.

    BFV was its own debacle.

    I tried the beta and 10 hour access and thought it was terrible game play wise.

    I ignored the customization debate judging the game, though the constant women screaming in a WW2 atmosphere felt out of place.
    If you are going to try and sell me a historical game, at least make it accurate. Women played a large role in WW2, but not on the front lines the game depicts. I am fine with, and enjoy using, the female Russian sniper in Battlefield 1 as they are historically accurate.

    For sure. I'm just trying to make the point that Battlefront can't be labeled as some miraculous comeback story when it is less popular than the BFV game he describes as "not doing so hot."

    Player population is hidden for both, both forums are miserable, both forums say the games are too casual (I can't say if I agree for BFV or not, since I don't play it), plus a bunch of other issues
    The Knights of Gareth are Eternal

    Pirate of the Knights of Gareth

    h846398gb27k.png


  • ZephanUnbound
    3078 posts Member
    edited April 29
    I don’t know about lifetime sales since EA never announced them, but Battlefront 2 outperformed Battlefield V at launch. EA announced 9m sales for Battlefront 2 in 2017, 7.3m sales for Battlefield V in 2018. Maybe Battlefield V caught up and passed Battlefront 2 since then, but EA hasn’t announced it. Battlefield V was a flop for sure, EA’s stock value fell to it’s lowest point in over a decade in financial Q3 2018, and EA blamed it on Battlefield V underperforming.
  • bfloo wrote: »
    bfloo wrote: »
    Relmets wrote: »
    I mean I'm not going to say it's a bad thing by any means, but JF audience is the battleFIELD crowd. They already were not playing this game most likely because to them the SW appeal alone isn't enough to counteract the fact that it's discount battlefield at best, and even that might be generous. If they do end up checking the game out they'll see how it doesn't really hold a candle to the kind of gameplay they prefer, and probably won't be too interested.

    He's known for Battlefield, but a lot of people know Battlefront as having Conquest mode. There's appeal there for Battlefield fans. Remember the original Battlefront games lifted Conquest from Battlefield. Long time fans know this and want Conquest gameplay back in Battlefront. CS at least gives some of that in Phase 1.

    BFV is not doing so hot, and as good as BF4 is, it's over 5 years old. I was a Socom 2 and Socom 3 player way back when the original games came out. I would shift to Battlefront when I got tired of the competitive nature of Socom. So yeah, I could see the same happening for Battlefield fans and this game. Battlefront has always been more casual than Battlefield. It could be a change of pace.

    CS doesn't hold a candle to Conquest on Battlefield.

    Factual evidence shows BFV is more popular than BF17.

    BFV was its own debacle.

    I tried the beta and 10 hour access and thought it was terrible game play wise.

    I ignored the customization debate judging the game, though the constant women screaming in a WW2 atmosphere felt out of place.
    If you are going to try and sell me a historical game, at least make it accurate. Women played a large role in WW2, but not on the front lines the game depicts. I am fine with, and enjoy using, the female Russian sniper in Battlefield 1 as they are historically accurate.

    Me too. The beta was really bad. The maps were small to medium sized. There was maybe a couple of vehicles on each map. The CS phase 1 maps we have are better to be honest, with more vehicles and chaos going on you'd expect from Conquest.

    I play BF4 if I want a Battlefield fix...last night actually LOL. Supposedly BFV is getting a major update in the fall with Pacific Theater content.

    I enjoy Battlefield 1, but never played the others. WW1 sounded different from everything else the last few years so I gave it a go.

    Nice! I think BF1 was mostly well received. I passed on it because I went with Titanfall 2 instead. Both launched at the same time, and I enjoyed the Titanfall 2 beta much more than BF1. I've been playing the Battlefield series since Battlefield 2 way back in 2005. BF1 was the first DICE Battlefield game I had skipped on, and I haven't gotten BFV yet.

    BF4 still has a lot of people playing. I play on PS4 and have no problems finding games, especially with the launch maps. It's maintained a community because it's the last modern warfare Battlefield, and it has much larger vehicles counts than BF1 or BFV. Its cheap too if you want to try it out LOL
  • I don’t know about lifetime sales since EA never announced them, but Battlefront 2 outperformed Battlefield V at launch. EA announced 9m sales for Battlefront 2 in 2017, 7.3m sales for Battlefield V in 2018. Maybe Battlefield V caught up and passed Battlefront 2 since then, but EA hasn’t announced it.

    Yeah they don’t announce much.
    You guys are gonna make me rich......
    Xbox G-tag
    XJO461
    That Specialist rework was disappointing.
    nceaq2h23fqj.png



  • Relmets wrote: »
    Relmets wrote: »
    CS is not Conquest, but it's close enough. Jackfrags enjoyed himself with it.

    it'll be close enough if they axe the capital ship phase. Even fragman himself couldn't compliment the mode without mentioning how CQ would be better

    He complimented the mode just fine, but he did suggest we need Conquest. I posted that on page one before this train of an argument started. But again, that's also a good thing. Jackfrags adds to the list of YouTubers DICE deals with that want Conquest in Battlefront. DICE does care what these guys say, regardless of what people in here want to think.

    So are we back to the perpetual "hoping for CQ" phase again? Everybody's been asking for a non linear large mode, in the form of CQ, since launch haven't they? And we got CS instead for absolutely no reason. What's the point of the non linear mode when half of it, including the victory condition, is GA 2.0?

    I'm not sure it's for "no reason". I think they were looking for a game mode for the Clone Wars content. It ties better in with that era, given the large scale battles.

    But it's also given people a taste for Conquest and almost certainly raised the cry for a legit Conquest mode. For all we know, that's what they are doing. What if that's what they announce with the new roadmap, starting with OT era maps?

    Mmmmmkay :#

    I hope my future customers are like this. It would keep me from implementing a CRM system, saving the company millions. :smirk:
    My name is Bob

  • I don’t know about lifetime sales since EA never announced them, but Battlefront 2 outperformed Battlefield V at launch. EA announced 9m sales for Battlefront 2 in 2017, 7.3m sales for Battlefield V in 2018. Maybe Battlefield V caught up and passed Battlefront 2 since then, but EA hasn’t announced it. Battlefield V was a flop for sure, EA’s stock value fell to it’s lowest point in over a decade in financial Q3 2018, and EA blamed it on Battlefield V underperforming.

    Battlefield V has more active players. It's been well ahead of BF17 on Microsoft's official tracker for quite some time.
    My name is Bob

  • I don’t know about lifetime sales since EA never announced them, but Battlefront 2 outperformed Battlefield V at launch. EA announced 9m sales for Battlefront 2 in 2017, 7.3m sales for Battlefield V in 2018. Maybe Battlefield V caught up and passed Battlefront 2 since then, but EA hasn’t announced it. Battlefield V was a flop for sure, EA’s stock value fell to it’s lowest point in over a decade in financial Q3 2018, and EA blamed it on Battlefield V underperforming.

    Yeah it hasn't been pretty. Thanks for the numbers. I never saw exact counts. I just know BFV has been heavily discounted since a couple weeks after launch. It was real quick. A lot of Battlefield players are back on BF4 and BF1 until they get BFV sorted out.

    I'm keeping an eye out for the Pacific theater content this fall. If it's any good, maybe I'll pick it up then. The biggest issue most seem to have is where's the scale of the battles? Like Westie said in his BF4 video "the theater of it". WW2 should be a setting where they could load the maps with all kinds of heavy vehicle and "Battlefield" action the series is known for. The series started with Battlefield 1942 after all, and Wake Island remains one of the most popular maps in the series.
  • I don’t know about lifetime sales since EA never announced them, but Battlefront 2 outperformed Battlefield V at launch. EA announced 9m sales for Battlefront 2 in 2017, 7.3m sales for Battlefield V in 2018. Maybe Battlefield V caught up and passed Battlefront 2 since then, but EA hasn’t announced it. Battlefield V was a flop for sure, EA’s stock value fell to it’s lowest point in over a decade in financial Q3 2018, and EA blamed it on Battlefield V underperforming.

    Yeah it hasn't been pretty. Thanks for the numbers. I never saw exact counts. I just know BFV has been heavily discounted since a couple weeks after launch. It was real quick. A lot of Battlefield players are back on BF4 and BF1 until they get BFV sorted out.

    According to Microsoft, Battlefield V is the 20th most popular game on XB1. Battlefield 4 isn't currently in the top 48. Regardless of playercount, Battlefield 4 is still a much better game.
    My name is Bob

  • I don’t know about lifetime sales since EA never announced them, but Battlefront 2 outperformed Battlefield V at launch. EA announced 9m sales for Battlefront 2 in 2017, 7.3m sales for Battlefield V in 2018. Maybe Battlefield V caught up and passed Battlefront 2 since then, but EA hasn’t announced it. Battlefield V was a flop for sure, EA’s stock value fell to it’s lowest point in over a decade in financial Q3 2018, and EA blamed it on Battlefield V underperforming.

    Yeah it hasn't been pretty. Thanks for the numbers. I never saw exact counts. I just know BFV has been heavily discounted since a couple weeks after launch. It was real quick. A lot of Battlefield players are back on BF4 and BF1 until they get BFV sorted out.

    According to Microsoft, Battlefield V is the 20th most popular game on XB1. Battlefield 4 isn't currently in the top 48. Regardless of playercount, Battlefield 4 is still a much better game.

    Considering Xbox 360 players wouldn't make a difference either. As population trackers show, there aren't many BF4 players on the 360 anymore. http://bf4stats.com/
    My name is Bob

  • I don’t know about lifetime sales since EA never announced them, but Battlefront 2 outperformed Battlefield V at launch. EA announced 9m sales for Battlefront 2 in 2017, 7.3m sales for Battlefield V in 2018. Maybe Battlefield V caught up and passed Battlefront 2 since then, but EA hasn’t announced it. Battlefield V was a flop for sure, EA’s stock value fell to it’s lowest point in over a decade in financial Q3 2018, and EA blamed it on Battlefield V underperforming.

    Yeah it hasn't been pretty. Thanks for the numbers. I never saw exact counts. I just know BFV has been heavily discounted since a couple weeks after launch. It was real quick. A lot of Battlefield players are back on BF4 and BF1 until they get BFV sorted out.

    According to Microsoft, Battlefield V is the 20th most popular game on XB1. Battlefield 4 isn't currently in the top 48. Regardless of playercount, Battlefield 4 is still a much better game.

    I play on PS4 which has about twice the player base of XB1. I never have any problems finding full servers of BF4, including some with DLC maps mixed in. I also don't have problems finding any games of Battlefront 2 modes. I can find HvV, Ewok Hunt, SA...modes people on other platforms have a hard time finding.

    BFV is likely going to have a higher count because it's the new thing. BF4 is over 5 years old, and there's people tired of it. One interesting point though is that DICE last summer had a special event in both BF1 and BF4 to unlock skins for BFV. I'm sure they did that because there's a significant enough player base in BF4.
Sign In or Register to comment.