what do you guys think about the new BF?

[Mando772004]

i tried the game runs at about 70-80 fps 1440p max settings rtx 3080 though there is stuttering im not sure why, does anyone else get this? also just tell me what you think about the game

[Rameares]

You may be noticing the 1% or 0.1% lows while playing. When pushing a graphics card the difference between highs and lows can be considerable and you'll notice this. Try limiting the frame rate to 60 fps. That way the lows might not be so noticeable and you won't be able to notice the stuttering.

[Gix7Fifty]

So far its ok, some of the sounds are horrocious, first person in vehicles has shaky camera. You definitely can still do "Only in Battlefield" stuff. I have been doing some of my same old tricks like helicopter seat switching, putting c4 on drones... the stuff that really puts a smile on my face!

[Blademaster91]

The beta seems ok so far, definitely feels like a beta though, like some shots don't seem to hit, the UI seems kind of bland, and when taking or losing a sector a large box of text appears at the top of the screen which is too much and distracting IMO. Also some guns don't have enough ammo.

[Mando772004]

Just now, Blademaster91 said:

The beta seems ok so far, definitely feels like a beta though, like some shots don't seem to hit, the UI seems kind of bland, and when taking or losing a sector a large box of text appears at the top of the screen which is too much and distracting IMO. Also some guns don't have enough ammo.

do u happen to experience small stutters/frametime spikes? if not what are your pc specs

[Gohardgrandpa]

6 hours ago, InfernalClaw said:

i tried the game runs at about 70-80 fps 1440p max settings rtx 3080 though there is stuttering im not sure why, does anyone else get this? also just tell me what you think about the game

I forgot to download the damn thing last night before bed. I have 8 minutes left on my download so hopefully I can get in and play at least one round before I have to leave for work.

 

70-80fps at 1440p with a rtx 3080 worries me. Looks like it's way more demanding than BF5 was. Is this with ray tracing on or off?

[Morrie Sells Wigs]

I'm not really impressed. 

 

Visually, it's Battlefield. 

 

It looks very similar to the other games, and I swear I'm seeing Star Wars Battlefront and Mirrors Edge assets.

 

That's not to say it looks bad, because it doesn't.

It looks great, just not especially different. 

I just found the gameplay a bit meh. 

 

Anything other than a spawn right on top of the action ends up with constant running and running...and more running...as you try get back into the action.

Doing all that, only to be sniped by a guy hiding in a bush and having to start all over again gets really old...really fast.

 

There are vehicles, of course, but you don't always get one.

The enemies are hard to spot, and small...weird, but the player models look really small to me.

 

Anyway, I'd take Warzone over this any day.

 

However, if you love Battlefield and have a good rig, I'm sure you'll love it.

[Montana One-Six]

I own and played BF1942, BFV, BF2, Bad Company, Bad Company 2 and BF3 (I skipped BF2142). Haven't bought any Battlefield since because honestly to me Battlefield as a whole has been going downhill since Battlefield 3 and it feels like EA forgot where it came from, which led to me losing interest in the series.

 

BF2042 looks to me like the best Battlefield since BF4 but there are still a lot of things I don't like and overall it is not enough to get me back into the series.

 

 

 

[Delta28]

I feel like I'm in the minority based on the reactions I've read, but I actually quite like it so far. I think the feel of the game is pretty similar to BF4. I like the cross-platform integration, makes it really easy to play with my friends and family that only play on consoles. I'm not sold on the operators quite yet, in the beta there's only four. This means you only have four character models on a 128 player server, so it's a little strange. I prefer the old class system, seems like operators might just be a way to introduce microtransactions, but it's not a deal breaker for me. And of course, I'd prefer being able to rent private dedicated servers.  

[Blademaster91]

On 10/6/2021 at 7:07 AM, InfernalClaw said:

do u happen to experience small stutters/frametime spikes? if not what are your pc specs

Yes I have been getting occasional stuttering, I'm on a Ryzen 3700x and a GTX 1080, my GPU is the limiting factor but I haven't been able to get a hold of a new GPU at all. Although I've seen some complaints of people that even have a RTX 3080 or 3080Ti getting stuttering and a lot of frametime spiking.

 

My thoughts on the game so far is it's ok, the graphics could look better, players not having different camo on the other team can get really confusing, some weapons need re-balancing, like DMR's don't have enough ammo.

And EA/Dice hasn't said anything about custom servers that you can buy and host yourself, which is what keeps BF4 active, so not sure if i'm going to buy BF2042.

 

[JZStudios]

On 10/7/2021 at 7:41 AM, Montana16 said:

I own and played BF1942, BFV, BF2, Bad Company, Bad Company 2 and BF3 (I skipped BF2142). Haven't bought any Battlefield since because honestly to me Battlefield as a whole has been going downhill since Battlefield 3 and it feels like EA forgot where it came from, which led to me losing interest in the series.

 

BF2042 looks to me like the best Battlefield since BF4 but there are still a lot of things I don't like and overall it is not enough to get me back into the series.

BF4 was a good time. At least it didn't have annoying color filters and the same death animation every time like 3. BF4 was more like 3.5, though it tried to generalize the maps and stuff so none of the game modes other than conquest really worked.

 

18 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

And EA/Dice hasn't said anything about custom servers that you can buy and host yourself, which is what keeps BF4 active, so not sure if i'm going to buy BF2042.

Given their claim of how Portal works I don't see how it couldn't. Definitely a deal breaker if it doesn't though.

 

I played with my buddy on PS5 and it was garbage. It might have a memory leak or something, the longer we played the worse it got and it started dropping to single digits and had seizure inducing flashes. Aside from the sheer quantity of bugs that 100% aren't all going to be fixed by launch, the map is awful. The capture points suck, there's no flow, the 2 primary towers have sightlines over 80% of the map with no cover, the operators are a terrible idea, the weapon customization/unlock is convoluted (might be more obvious with final UI), the UI is garbage, and the vehicle drops is a dumb idea. For that matter so is what people are apparently calling the "plus system" instead of the Crysis menu. There's no need for it.

It's like they went around to a bunch of other games and pulled out their gimmicky ideas. They pulled the Crysis menu from a game where it makes sense, the tornado from JC3? 4? Operators from... a bunch of things... Battlefield didn't need any of this.

[Montana One-Six]

24 minutes ago, JZStudios said:

BF4 was a good time. At least it didn't have annoying color filters and the same death animation every time like 3. BF4 was more like 3.5, though it tried to generalize the maps and stuff so none of the game modes other than conquest really worked.

BF4 is basically a reskinned BF3 with a few meaningless changes which is why I never bought it because I didn't see the point of paying twice for pretty much the same game. Everything after BF4 was pretty bad in my eyes.

I mean you could even say that Battlefield had its peak with BF2 in the mid 2000s after that it was slowly going downhill and after BF3 the slope just got steeper.

[Blademaster91]

2 hours ago, JZStudios said:

BF4 was a good time. At least it didn't have annoying color filters and the same death animation every time like 3. BF4 was more like 3.5, though it tried to generalize the maps and stuff so none of the game modes other than conquest really worked.

 

Given their claim of how Portal works I don't see how it couldn't. Definitely a deal breaker if it doesn't though.

 

I played with my buddy on PS5 and it was garbage. It might have a memory leak or something, the longer we played the worse it got and it started dropping to single digits and had seizure inducing flashes. Aside from the sheer quantity of bugs that 100% aren't all going to be fixed by launch, the map is awful. The capture points suck, there's no flow, the 2 primary towers have sightlines over 80% of the map with no cover, the operators are a terrible idea, the weapon customization/unlock is convoluted (might be more obvious with final UI), the UI is garbage, and the vehicle drops is a dumb idea. For that matter so is what people are apparently calling the "plus system" instead of the Crysis menu. There's no need for it.

It's like they went around to a bunch of other games and pulled out their gimmicky ideas. They pulled the Crysis menu from a game where it makes sense, the tornado from JC3? 4? Operators from... a bunch of things... Battlefield didn't need any of this.

I'm not sure with portal, I guess I'll have to see how it plays, but all Portal seems to be is more customization, but you're still stuck with EA's servers, I remember official servers weren't great with BF4, and the EA servers sucked in BFV. The great thing with BF4 is you could find high or regular tick rate servers, good servers had extra measures against cheaters, and prevented people from camping the main spawn point.

I think the memory leaks are also on PC, because if i play more than a few rounds, it starts to get really laggy and I get some bad frame dips. I expect bugs in the beta but there are just so many I doubt the launch is going to be a significantly more playable game.  The orbital map is either just not good, or DICE needs to work on capture points, there doesn't seem to be much of any team work, and the map seems to be too large, I spent more time running around than holding any capture points. Its way different than BF4 where you can just get few points and defend an area.

The UI feels like it was pulled from an alpha or the closed beta, the kill feed needs to be at the top right corner, and I miss the pop up showing how many points I got from a kill or an assist.

The operators, or specialists as they're called in the game is weird, you're still playing for the US or RU team, and the visibility of the enemy isn't very good because the enemy team is using the same operators. I think the concept of specialists is just a way for EA to sell you more specialist characters later.

IMO weapon customization is ok, not sure why anyone needs to change attachments in the middle of a fight, I was just fine with picking a load out good enough for the class I was using. With the weapon customization, classes are kind pointless though. The tornado is interesting, but the storm events might get tiring after a while, because it really ruins the FPS and interrupts the game forcing everyone to move away from the storm or get sucked into the tornado.

1 hour ago, Montana16 said:

BF4 is basically a reskinned BF3 with a few meaningless changes which is why I never bought it because I didn't see the point of paying twice for pretty much the same game. Everything after BF4 was pretty bad in my eyes.

I mean you could even say that Battlefield had its peak with BF2 in the mid 2000s after that it was slowly going downhill and after BF3 the slope just got steeper.

IMO BF4 is the best modern Battlefield game, but I think everything went downhill after BF4.

[Nalgasp3ludas]

On 10/7/2021 at 7:15 PM, Blademaster91 said:

Yes I have been getting occasional stuttering, I'm on a Ryzen 3700x and a GTX 1080, my GPU is the limiting factor but I haven't been able to get a hold of a new GPU at all. Although I've seen some complaints of people that even have a RTX 3080 or 3080Ti getting stuttering and a lot of frametime spiking.

 

My thoughts on the game so far is it's ok, the graphics could look better, players not having different camo on the other team can get really confusing, some weapons need re-balancing, like DMR's don't have enough ammo.

And EA/Dice hasn't said anything about custom servers that you can buy and host yourself, which is what keeps BF4 active, so not sure if i'm going to buy BF2042.

 

I totally agree with you! They should have faction locked operators. Because I honestly cant imagine them implementing hardcore servers with this system 

[Gohardgrandpa]

I had really high hopes for this game. I've played the beta for 2 days now. I started bf4 got into one of my favorite servers and it was boomin. Everyone talking trash about 2042. The old bf4 guys I play with aren't getting it, had the same complaints that I do. 

They really should of had more than conquest in the beta. It's like Forrest Gump simulator with all the damn running you do