Search results for query: *

zstrastwa said:

I agree with you, I was hoping to buy and download directly from TaleWorlds as I did Warband for the same reasons. Unfortunately, it's not possible right now. Only a Steam key.

Click to expand...

But do you know/have you read if it will be possible? If it is recommended - due to mods?
Again, sorry for this stupid questions, I have stayed well away from forums because I wanted everything to be kind of a surprise, but as a consequences I'm not well informed anymore XD

zstrastwa said:

Yeah that's the only way to redeem, steam code. If you want a steam code, proceed.

Click to expand...

So, it is impossibile to just buy the game like I did with Warband, outside any platform like Steam, GoG?
I'm asking because of possible future mods - sometimes they are not patched fast enough to keep up with the game auto-patching in steam.
Maybe I'm just stuck in 2010 XD

Stupid question. When I try to buy it here, it says that my platform is steam? Is that correct, should I proceed?

I've read that this new version features a whole new subplot about a german hilferin falling into a dangerous and forbidden liaison, then "La Resistance"...meh.
Coolest part about the original was the claustrophobia of being costantly on the goddamn boot - no land subplot and especially no romantic subplot.
I'll probably watch it, anyway.

So, the famous game that "where muh white suldiers" "femenazies!" "muh historical accuracy" "muh authenticity" "muh commandos of the heavy water raid I've never heard before but I'm going to complain forever about" "respect the veteruns!" "uh? Narvik? Arras? Never heard of those! Who cares! I want muh WWII feel with Nurmandyyy!!!"...

Well, of all games in the world, this same famous games features...

ZE WEHRABOO'S WET DREAM!

A german campaign in which you are a Tiger tank commander. It's not a guilt trip - yet is pretty bland on the subject of nazism, obviously. It is state for thousands of times that the Tiger is superior to each and every allied tank and can survive anything and the gameplay seems to prove so - it's not really historically accurate, but your average wehraboo likes to believe it.

Also, for once, the enemies are not commies or brits but...AMERICANS WITH OUTRAGEOUS AMERICAN ACCENTS!!!

Now, really, I wouldn't suggest buying the game just for 50-80 minutes - at best - campaign, but I think DICE has done a good job with "The Last Tiger". The story itself, while obviously not particularly complicated, is actually pretty tragic and, while you can't relate to the characters too much, well told.

Yes, uniforms could have been better.

I hope I will be able to look as some Gurkha, sometimes in the future. Maybe with a necklace made of germans' ears. I know it's probably a legend and not historical fact, but come on, it's Battlefield.

A suggestion for anyone: differently from BF1, where if you earned something, you earned something, and could just shut off the game, this time around apparently you have to finish the round.

Lumos said:

I'm not educated enough to buy this game, so I'll wait until it's sold with a massive discount... unless I forget, of course, in which case I won't buy it at all. The alpha also didn't run too well on my laptop, so I'm probably also missing some frustration and performance issues, which is a good thing.

Click to expand...

The technical problem, I understand. That's why I'm playing on the PS4. Not the most performing thing, but I don't want to burn my poor laptop. 

The SJW controversy...really, it was made bigger than it actually is. If the general non-realism of the BF franchise, or STGs in Arras 1940, the dutch Stalingrad of Rotterdam (that never was) haven't killed the immersion for you yet, then you shouldn't worry. Since the soldiers are fully customizable and since the playerbase - at least, in Europe - is largely composed, I suppose, by white males, I've seen just a minority of women screeching around (terrible voice acting) and absolutely zero black or asian soldiers. The german army can't have minorities in it - while paradoxically it had more in WWII than in WWI. Given that you REALLY have to care a LOT to notice.

By the way, it's a pity not to have something more nepalese or indian-like as a minority in the British army, both as characters and cosmetics. Like indian turbans, kukhris and all the likes. AND SOME GODDAMN PROPER SIKH BEARDS.
I hope they'll add such cosmetics for the Monte Cassino maps...and oh how I hope for some Burmese/Indian maps as well. Like "Tennis field", a cluster**** map set during the battle of Imphal.

Cioss Julius U.X. said:

Removing Premium was the right choice I believe. DICE can bring more content I trust them. They showed us they can and will with previous titles. Hell, even BF4 had massive failure rushed launch but they didnt leave it alone instead they put effort for 2,5 years. Even if I count first solid stade of Battlefield 4 as Battlefield 4, after 2-3 years I should call it Battlefield 4.5. Game improved and changed drastically.

Long story short I'm sure they will do whatever they can for Battlefield V. But I'm curious, Premium stuff were good for making money. Without it their main focus for making money will be microtransactions and right now that seems to be only cosmetics. With this, I don't think they can make same amount of money. Tides of War is cool actually and really good for consumer, Premium simply wasn't. But Premium provide more resources than initial sales.

Since EA is moneyhunger, we might see that this Tides of War free service thing abandoned in -maximum- 2 years. Or they figure another way to profit from the game, increasing microtransaction variety etc.

Click to expand...

Well BF1 had stopped having DLC in two years...
Glad I'm not the only one thinking they're moving in the right direction - for now. I wouldn't have bought the game if it was paid DLC based as BF 1 was. I'm pretty puzzled on how they'll make money, too.

Cioss Julius U.X. said:

and that brings us to another vital discussion, this game is unfinished, unpolished, rushed as if Early Access.

Click to expand...

This is sadly true. But - I wasn't there - it's not like BF1 launched with much more content. And the launch, map weren't the most atmospheric or WWIish, too. Can't speak for the earlier BF, those were obviously a whole different thing from what I'm reading.

Cioss Julius U.X. said:

So, 30 weapons in total is enough? Why no one playing BFV talking about how much less weapon in this game compared to other Battlefield titles?

Back in Battlefield 4, just support class had access to 45 different weapons -including sidearms- at launch but BFV only has 30 weapons for a whole game -at launch-. Sure they will be more content added, like American DLC, Russian DLC etc but how much more weapon can they add?

Can it be 30? Like, it'd make 100% increase in weaponry but 60 different weapons are still not a catch for BF4s inventory. Questions, questions...

Click to expand...

Potentially (POTENTIALLY) they can add tons of weapons, if they are going to use the Tides of War things properly. It's the first time I'm following a "service" game, so I don't know, I'm probably a tad naive. Personally, I always read that BF1 has not enough weapons - meh, they look more than enough for me. Also, I tend to use the same ones, Hellriegel if I'm assaulting, scoped 1917 if supporting, maybe some more variety depending on the map if I'm using scout and...whatever, who uses medic anyway? 

Anyway, the game plays really different from BF1 - and no, you wouldn't notice just from watching youtube videos.

You die much faster and you can't go ramboing alone like in BF1 - if you do, you are sure to die much faster. The weapons are now much accurate, maybe too much. Hip fire seems pretty nerfed; people tend to stay hidden (since it's not that easy to spot) and group together both in offensive and defensive situations. Team work is apparently really encouraged and you're better off sticking with your pals - even if sometimes my team's medics or my squad mates don't care much to, say, risk their lives to revive me. I always do, instead and it always feels like I'm Desmond Doss or something.

The revive mechanic, which triggers most of the time - because, most of the time, one doesn't die instantly - far from being fast and superficial as it is in BF1, while still gamey (it's a game, FFS) is instead very dramatic and depressing in comparison. Imagine the scene, you are bleeding out on the ground and you try to call for help when suddenly you realize all your team-mates are dead or dying too and the enemy had overrun your position and you understand you are really going to die after all. Or a medic start to tend your wounds - it takes 3-4 seconds, which are an eternity in a game like this - but is instead cut down by enemy fire and starts bleeding to death at your side. I always thought something like that could have been cool in the semi-simulators like Red Orchestra/Rising Storm for even greater atmosphere, but still...


Talking about team work, is nice to spawn, from match  to match, in the same squad you started to play in. You start to care a bit for that guy that saved your skin in another match.

BenKenobi said:

F.F.C._fritz said:

There must be a precise reason why the character designers had the germans wear their pouches horizontal on their chest instead of vertical on their belts. Or why the brits have M1942 US paratroopers uniforms instead of their own paratroopers uniforms - way cooler uniforms, BTW. I mean, it's not like they haven't done any research for the game, or they couldn't have some cool looking uniform and loadout with some historical root - like in BF1, with all those cloaks flying around and stuff -, it would be intellectually dishonest to believe so.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Yeah...except for the austro-hungarian. 
Pretty lazy work there. The italians, though, despite "Republique Francaise RF" logo on their Adrian Helmets are nicely done. I like seeing their short cloaks flying around, they actually had them - maybe not while charging the No-man's-land.

@Captured Joe

Yes, in the single player there are indeed examples of german wearing the italian samurai vest, but in multiplayer I think  it looks different. They also have a skin with the rifle strips pouches put in the same odd way. Again, nothing crazy, but they could have added some "normal" german uniform 

Also, rare guns, ok, I understand, I'm used to it, but having the Volkssturmgewehr as the first weapon ever for the assault class seems a bit...odd. I mean, it's WWII, there's a lot more choice, you don't HAVE to include late war weird stuff so fast

There must be a precise reason why the character designers had the germans wear their pouches horizontal on their chest instead of vertical on their belts. Or why the brits have M1942 US paratroopers uniforms instead of their own paratroopers uniforms - way cooler uniforms, BTW. I mean, it's not like they haven't done any research for the game, or they couldn't have some cool looking uniform and loadout with some historical root
- like in BF1, with all those cloaks flying around and stuff -, it would be intellectually dishonest to believe so. Not that is gamebreaking or MUH IMMERSION, but I'd be curious to know. There's a lot of little cosmetic things like this that could have been better without offending or excluding anyone. Call of Duty WWII had far more believable models, for example.

Probably not.

By the way, I've seen the battle scene - which is my main point of interest - and I don't how much historically accurate - not an expert of this exact part of the Middle Ages but damn it looks good. Even if it is pretty dark and muddy, there are vibrant colours all around in the clothing - like it should be. The armors are by no means perfect, but they aren't that bad either - with the exception of Edward, which has horrible fantasy gear. They may be some of the best I've seen in western movies in a while. Then there's the one shot one kill trope, but really I've seen armor doing their job in movies maybe twice - Excalibur and Polanski's Macbeth. Some apparently important characters even keeps their helmets on, too.

Barry_bon_Loyale said:

Saw it and it was... alright?

The Medieval clichés were on full display.  Fire arrows, bare stonework (which they avoided once, yay!), all those candles burning in broad daylight, always remove your helmet when you need it most! 

Click to expand...

Lindybeige fan, aren't you? 
Not really interested in investing this two hours either. I've grown unable to appreciate most medieval movies due to the tropes and the stuff they got wrong. Maybe when go with the intimistic approach, instead of the epic historical, that's better already.

I don't know, I'll wait to see some reviews but I know I'm sold. Customization looks damn nice, maps great fun. To my surprise I'm much more hyped for this than for Assassin's Creed Odyssey and Red Dead II.
No paid DLC (so they say), but slowly adding up maps 'till '45. Even if Arras, Devastation or Twisted Steel are already '45, from a gameplay point of view.
Damn.

See, nobody forces anybody to play as an asian female sniper in the british army or as a black woman of the Waffen SS.



Doesn't look bad, at all.

Silverstein said:

BIGGER Kentucky James XXL said:

Silverstein said:

Were those black men speaking French? Silly Dice, that came During WW2. At least they almost got something accurate.

Click to expand...

Fixed

Click to expand...

Focusing a campaign around a marginal division solely because of their race - let's call a spade a spade - is still inappropriate.

Click to expand...

And what make the french colonial divisions (or any division or regiment) "marginal"?

Easy Company, 506 regiment, 101 Airborne as a whole was pretty marginal too, in the big context of WWII, yet there's a tv show and **** tons of videogames and stuff about those couple of american regiments that saw action for less than a year near the very end of the war.
The Battle of the Bulge is a joke compared to Citadel or Saturn, yet it always sounds to be the biggest thing ever according to those same tv shows, movies and games.
The whole Normandy-Rhine, an year long, slow march against relatively few german divisions always sounds like the biggest thing ever and the only place where the war was ever fought - and is nothing compared to Bagration-Berlin.

Yet, I'm sure you've never complained Band of Brothers, Saving Private Ryan and the ****loads of western movies focusing on such a marginal parts of the war, the Normandy-Rhine campaign, were trying to shovel down your throat some narrative; that the american and the brits won the war by themselves for example, or something of the like.

Yet, suddenly, the idea of playing some black dudes in a french division is instead oh so terrible and inappropriate.

Woah, Mikkelsen would have been fantastic. That's too bad I guess. Hope they can do something with dat wig - or add some beard.

Meh, I wonder why didn't EA just waited for March for a decent release. I'm kinda interested in the game, but at launch it will have extremely little content, I'm hardly seeing myself buying it. Since they have delayed the game already, couldn't they just delay it a little more? I doubt such a content poor game will be able to rival with RDR2, Assassin's Creed and even BLOPS 4, even in a month from now. That's just too bad...