Battlefield doesn't have many alternatives or direct competitors but why and for how much longer? Let's play the excellent Battlefield 5 and discuss. Leave a LIKE and a comment, thanks for watching.
Wasted potential due to it's lack of identity. First they charged money for purchasing the beta, then after a year they made it free and yet again they are reworking it because they don't have idea what direction the game should be going, for the 3rd time or more... lost all hopes, too much crap - bugs, dead matchmaking, poor performance. Not even worth mentioning anymore when you got game like Battlebit around
I played it and the game itself is good. Gunplay, vehicles, maps, everything. What killed it is poor management, marketing and that idiotic third party launcher.
That was the last great BF game. Although as it is now, much like with COD. Both games have just fallen so far behind everything else lately that its probably time to retire them.
@@silent_fungus have a hard time finding a game on pc on the weekday. Weekends I have better luck. Make sure to jump back in when a tubow hypes it up again.
Im an old guy, I remember BF2 special forces, night vsion, grappling hooks! Remember Bad company 2? The destruction! BF3 tank battles! Thanks for sharing.
BF2 was a lifetime ago. It was no BS battlefield. Then BC2 destruction was just wow. Yeah we lost some features, but BF3 and BF4 brought some of it back. But by BF3 DICE started releasing broken messy games, that get fixed 2 years post launch just in time for DICE to abandon the game. Like BF2042 is just getting good now, and they are abandoning it. Go back and play BF5 now. Game is great. On release it was a mess. Same with BF1. People praise BF5 now, but on release it was a mess.
@@Olterior BF1 was most certainly not a mess on release, it worked right out of box on both console and pc. They rest of what you said though, 100% agree.
I think he's doing a voiceover and just pretending he is commentating live. The gameplay often cuts while he continues exactly what he was saying. Sorry to ruin the illusion.
@@jamessutton2126that’s the thing that separates good and bad players us good players can have a conversation with ease and still do better than you while focusing on
Battlefield V has some really beautiful, colorful, inspiring graphics. So many different interesting maps, you can find many great detailes, it's almost a pity for it to be no longer existent, because it's just an Artwork. The gameplay is important and very well done, but also the historic feeling, the music, the sounds of explosions, planes, soldiers and even flies are so well done. You have not only soldiers but also vehicles, tanks, plaines, stationary weapons, so many to chose from. Gorgeous maps such as the Pacific, Provence, Arres, Rotterdam... It is also a great beginner game. At first, players are just in awe. For example, I have never played in my life a game with a controller or a what would you call a "serious" game till I was 23 yo, then I started playing Battlefield V. My bf introduced me to the "gaming" world. It was my first game, I practiced, I enjoyed it so much as a newcomer, I then played other games like COD, and now I am back still playing BFV 6 years later. It is calming, it is fun, I can go full playing sweaty or just chilling on the maps, I meet the same players on my servers in Europe, it comforts me, it is not too toxic, it amuses me so much, I love it.
@@Khofax I have and I love it! Thank you none the less! I can’t and won’t choose which is better, I enjoy wholeheartedly both games, depwnding on the mood. Battlefield 1 is really awesome
yeah bfv is very vibrant and pretty where as bf1 I feel captures war better as the lighting and colors are more grim and dark, both look very good though
I remember immediately returning my copy to buy BF3 and play that with my friends because no one wanted to play Homefront. I did enjoy the multiplayer beta
I hated Battlefield 1942 for such a longtime when it came out. It was ruining our Friday nights post-work MP sesh. Wolfenstien was still fresh at that point, with a healthy player base, delivering that Q3-paced shooter gameplay (but with the MP40 instead of the Railgun). But. Everyone wanted to play this Battlefield-thing, which looked sluggish in comparison. And why did it need vehicles? “That’s not what a shooter is all about…”. Then one evening I bit the bullet and stepped up to try it: instant fan for life. When you switch off a game on your machine but you can’t switch it off in your head; that’s the mark of a very special title. How many of us have gone to bed (as it’s getting light outside) still replaying moments from that evenings BF session. When BF works it’s lightning in a bottle.
This was me with BF2. I made really good friends with a group of guys on BF2 back in 2009. We still talk regularly to this day and some of us have met each other in person. We would all stay up super late during the summer off school playing BF2 and various BF2 mods like Sandbox. Those were the days! Good times.
@@Shortay1325 Same, man. My gaming friends, the close ones who became great friends, all found each other via BF3. And your point, for me, speaks to another weird misstep that DICE / EA made over the last few decades; the demise of rented servers and Battlelog. It highlights (to me at least) that someone making the big financial decisions around that game did not understand the GOLD that is Community. There are brands - inside and outside of gaming - that would kill for the loyal, active and engaged community BF had around that time; all these pockets of friends coming together to host community-owned nights and events. It was such a clear indicator towards loyalty I find it utterly mind-bottlin' it was abandoned (probably because of a figure on a spreadsheet somewhere). So shortsighted of them… and I guarantee they're still feeling the ripple effect [pun] of that poor decision; end of the day it's going to be a community that sticks with you through your wins and your not-so-wins.
From South Africa, loving BFV. Unfortunately it's always 120ms for me to play on Singapore servers 😢. Loving it more than 2042 right now! Love the content Jack!
I play on SG servers and I'm in Malaysia (right next to SG) and it's dead. I waited in an empty lobby for 15 minutes and only one guy joined, who then Immediately left. Man i wish this game was so much more popular in Asia
BattleBit and World War 3 were the closest, shame their potential was killed by their own devs (then again, pretty much same happened with Battlefield itself)
@@5at5una Whilst the destruction is super cool, I think at the moment the tech just can't provide us large scale destruction without compromising on gameplay. If they were to do a 24/32 player BF game like they did BC2 I think the quality of gameplay would be better and destruction could be turned up. With 64+ players it's better to have no destruction and use those resources in making sure the netcode is solid.
Give us the CTE back with map editor. If dice can't be bothered to make maps, the community will, I'd like to see a procedurally generated city map too.
There’s nothing better. It’s hands down my favorite game franchise for all the reasons you listed. The immersion, the variety maps, vehicles, aircrafts, ships, boats, watercraft, class load-outs, the music, the game play, the gun play, the necessary team play, and last but not least the destruction. Seeing the next best version of such a game on a modern engine could take the top spot in FPS gaming for the next decade if done right.
I think there is no "competition" because the market is already filled with BF itself, people don't feel the need to play something that is almost BF but is not BF. Jack mentioned many examples of games that have incorporated the BF style of gameplay with their own "thing": oh this is Star Wars BF; oh this is Roblox BF; oh this is milsim BF, etc. Even the spot for "World War I/II BF" is filled (very well btw) by BF itself. To this day (even with BF2042) EA still does the BF formula well enough to make it relevant. Maybe if in the next iterations of BF EA and Dice keep making mistakes, someone else will make a decent game that looks basically exactly like the BF that we know today and then we'll have real competition for BF's spot in the market.
Also with how often they release new games, graphically the 2/3 most recent games almost always look almost as good as the most recent game. Case and point BF1, BF5 and BF2042 look very similar graphically. So If I want my BF fix in a WW2 setting or WW1 setting, I already have Battlefield games with decent populations to play with. Problem is that most BF players are arcade shooter players first, so stuff like Squad are too different from core gameplay of BF. Same reason why COD and Counter-strike are both FPS shooters, but have wildly different playerbases. I hate what EA has done with DICE and Battlefield, but it works for them. Each BF gets bad reviews on launch, then they work on fixing the game, then EA tells them to go make new game yesterday.
I agree. And I am saying for a long time now, the BF crowd seems to die out. I guess younger players are no longer that much attracted to BF mechanics. That hurts sales and revenue compared to other AAA games. And it is a shame. BF evolved 25 years ago and back then there was at least a few similar games. E.g. Enemy Territory (RTCW ET). I played this about till 2005 and switched then to BF BC2.
This is a really good point well made. However, to play devils advocate for a minute - Healthy competition is how this specific genre will flourish. If one company/dev has the monopoly, you will see lack of effort because no one is even in the same league. It is like playing Poker with yourself lol. My view is that a big dev needs to go into direct competition with them to stop EA getting complacent. I also think that they have over complicated the mechanics for the past 2, trying to concentrate on visuals over everything else. This is just my view though, for what it is worth. I am yearning for a battlefield with gunplay & vehicles from BF4, map design from BF3 and visuals from BF1. No specialists, no 2 clips before going to an ammo dump (That's what engineers are for), no bugs at launch & just a fun sandbox game.
I think the simple reason Battlefield doesn't get any competition is because it doesn't make enough money as hero shooters or simpler shooter games. Most FPS games seem to have a heavy emphasis on lootboxes and cosmetics and make a stupid amount of money of them, while being more simple to make gameplay wise (Overwatch, Valorant, COD, etc.) Theres a lot going on in a BF game so I figure its hard to design servers that handle it all, especially given the graphical fidelity. I imagine that's why Battlebit can do it with 200+ players. And tbh, I feel like if another big publisher tried it, it would be too much of a risk since they would try to keep costs low and still manage to be worse than older BFs. Maybe, idk
Enlisted is another alternative as long as you count the bots for it's large scale warfare. It's only 10v10, but each player can have 9 controllable soldiers each.
I gave Enlisted a chance and it was quite fun. However, I was getting sick of the huge grind feeling. As soon as you thought you were going somewhere, you had to start grinding from scratch yet again with another side. I do have to say it is a fun take where you can control a squad online. Just so dang grindy.
@@edyslavico3761 Have you played after the merge? Now you can focus on what you want to unlock, and the overall grind has been reduced on top of that. Getting silver is a bit of a pain tho.
I think it does not have a ton of competition is because it has a grip on a lot of the fans of the genre with the whole combined arms thing. They also do it relatively well. This is complete speculation, but I think that they don't want to try because they think they will fail? I do think that Battle.bit did the gameplay justice though!
@@truthseeker9454genuinely doubt it, although I’d like to see it, but given the vitriol in this community most would probably find an excuse to get mad about it.
@@connorbranscombe6819 I hear you. It's sad, really. I played games like MOHAA, SH and BT many years ago. Those were some of the best times I've ever had online. Those games had bugs and were vulnerable to cheats, but the player community banded together to laugh about the bugs and ban the cheaters. These more modern games have stunning graphics and some amazing features, but it seems players complain about *everything.* It's either too much this or not enough that. I'd honestly hate to have the job of trying to please them. I just know I'm done with chasing specs and always having to buy more expensive hardware to play the latest games. I think there are a lot of others who feel that way, too -- hence the large number of players still playing BF 1 and BF V. I'm among them. I'd pay for new content for those games as long as my computer can run them; I think others might as well. Peace, brother!
nice video. as a nowadays very casual gamer, i don't have the insights into the more detailed gameplay mechanics or history of a game. quite interesting to hear an "experienced" view on modern gaming and thoughts on why the industry is how it is atm.
I love battlefield, even with its flaws, since BC2 and watching your vids, Level cap, etc. I love the immersion, even when not playing well. Side note..I will never NOT be amazed how you play so well and do commentary at the same time.
I love bf5. It was the best squad game with your mates, without the sweat of sbmm. Sniping and tank busting was so much fun. I’m a console player and it looks like Helldivers has that same squad/mates feel?
We need a full scale Battlebits...or atleast a console port. A series like Hell Let Loose can thrive in different timelines because they have a solid foundation as is. But that's committing to a more sim-shooter type game.
BFV was way underrated. I never understood the hate, i loved it the whole time,it has the best movement of all battlefield games, and its better than any COD in the last couple handfuls of years
It came after bf1 people were sick from ww and it had many issues they wanted to put woke propaganda in it but then they fixed it and abandoned it to develop battleshit 2042 Angel does it again
It's a pretty good game now, but people were frustrated with how the live service aspects of the game rolled out. There was very little content and the devs kept rebalancing things, creating massive swings in how the game played. Then Dice pulled the plug out very quickly just as the game started to find its footing.
You mentioned Quake and Unreal Tournament towards the end, and I've been wondering recently about what happened to the arena shooter genre, as I never really got to experience it and feel like I would really enjoy those kinds of games. I'd love to hear your thoughts on that topic as well.
I still love Halo for example but one thing jack didn't touch so much on and off subject slightly is sandbox arena shooters. Man they're so fun and I miss the old school unreal tournament / quake / halo madness. Nonetheless BF is still king
He had talked about it in a video. Not sure which one. I would consider Halo a modern version of an arena shooter. But it is very different than quake and unreal with pacing
the 30 year olds want 5v5 cs like, or war like shooters they can't handle the quake shooters. It's just my take, they get bored of the die/respawn/die type game play but can do that if they are drinking water / food in a dayz type game -- weird huh? arena shooters are dead and most of us 'boomers' are sad about it, but what can you do? gotta just join the newer type of gamer and deal with it (hence why i forced myself to learn bf2042 / bb / cod (the horror) type games.
Damn, what an amazing map you were playing on. It has so many different vibes and settings and flows really nice. Wild how good this game still looks 🤯
It was tried at one point with the game Frontlines: Fuel of War and I don't think most people ever even heard of it and this was 2008 right between 2142 and BC2. 🤷♂
I was in the Beta for that game. It had potential but was kind of stillborn. It was released in a very basic state and pretty much abandoned as the studio that made it (Kaos) moved on to Homefront. As a side note, many of the developers at Kaos previously worked on the Desert Combat mode for 1942 that inspired BF2.
The Harry Potter under the stairs reference is great, Jack. That's why I watch your content, you always have a reference to popular culture. In my opinion the commentary you do is underrated. Keep it coming I'm all for it.
Play Easy red 2! In all honesty the vibe is more similar to OG battlefront, and the graphics arent great, but the game is fantastic. And the kid making it has made massive strides in the time ive had the game. Theres been several free dlc with tons of maps.
Special type of guys can stroll around, taking on squads alone, while chatting about whats on their mind in a hectic game like Battlefield. Im so glad I found this video, I did not know about a lot of these other games like Battlefield
WW3 was a good battlefield style game, until they released it on Free-2-Play, changing the movement, sound (which was |EPIC) and gunplay, also the colur palette was enlivened which ruined the bleak atmosphere
Dude I agree. I think if the next Battlefield incorporates the gunplay, proximity chat, and other features from Battlebit, it could be very successful.
Its sad that no one mentions Isonzo. I had so many experiences there that i think many people would describe as "battlefield-moments" and i still play it regularly.
Hell Let Loose is the go to ‘Battlefield’ style game right now. The best battlefield moments are from squad play, and HLL amplifies that on a large scale
People tried to kill this franchise just to let make them get better. Instead, the next battlefield flows more and more .. Battlefield has a huge engine, and Dice must reach to its limits so it can get near the recent COD and other tactical FPS Games that emphasize realism . But I really doubt it because Battlefield has this kinda limited as teamplay game more then rush lone wolf like COD..
I believe that in today's society, many individuals have developed a lack of patience and a desire for quick solutions. This, when combined with economic pressures and investor expectations, can create a negative situation. Rather than rushing to complete tasks, it is important to take the time to do things properly and thoroughly, instead of settling for a half-hearted attempt. Sometimes, the simplest solutions are the best. I mean, they don't need to reinvent the wheel, just take some proper time with it. That's my thoughts on it :). Thanks for the great content :)
Great question, I think it comes down to development difficulty and time investment getting all the features working together in a combined arms focused game. Like the flying just does not feel quite right in 2042 vs bf4 and everyone noticed. When all the features don't mesh well it really breaks the immersion. It is rare for a single game dev studio to have the engine experience to iterate all those different features with destruction and an engine capable of handling all the vehicle mechanics/physics. It is like 3 games in one but each game is harder to make because it has to work with all the others. I imagine being the project manager for such a team would be very difficult to say the least, whatever the case I hope more great combined arms games with destruction come out and I would love to see new dev teams try to create games like this.
I love that project reality got a shout out. Still play it till this day and still one of the most cinematic and co-operative experience I have ever had.
I remember one game when I was a kid : Wolfenstein enemy territory. It was pure joy to play it. Very similar to the rush mode, more objectives turned game, but with classes and so on
I agree. Gaming for me always has had battlefield at the forefront. And although I used to switch to call of duty from time to time over the years, I have always been a battlefield fan. There is just something so unique in the classic battlefield bc2, bf3 and bf4 formula that kept me playing. The immersion of modern combat rifles, tanks, jets, choppers, being a trained soldier part of big armies, feeling like you REALLY were flying and parachuting out of choppers and buildings (something that bf2042 really lacks), the gritty feeling of war and cursing going on while fighting the other team, the squad play and conversations with random people playing together to push the objective. MAAAN I miss those fucking days...
One game that is slept on is Polygon its free and its Battlefield/Call of duty mix and you can customize weapons and such. And there is maps from BF and other games. give it a try its fun
Hi Jack, In response to your question/video. In my opinion I feel Dice have such a great game engine and have been using and upgrading it for a very long time. I don't feel any other game engine could produce anything near the same experience. Ultimately I believe its the engine they use. Love your content thankyou for taking time to create. 👍
I stopped playing BF and switched to World War 3 on Steam. Nice balance between arcade and hardcore. It got real weapons and gear, that is 1:1 to the real world, like magpull grips, ELCAN sights and Aimpoint and so on. Great game, and life like maps in Japan, Germany (Berlin) and Ruzzia. Give it a go!
I agree, I’ve noticed 2042 doesn’t always have 128 players, which is sad because there isn’t another fps like it imo. I’ve just returned and I’ve been having a blast! Looks like I need to play BF1 & BF5 again too!
I believe the hardest thing to do in games like this is making a large scaled map and making it balanced for the players. Also, having a lot of players together, with explosions and all, is hard to optimize on certain hardwares.
battlefield 1 and 5 were two of a bazillion other shooter games i've ever played that were so good, currently about to get both on pc and relive some of this awesomeness, never gonna touch bf42 though
Great video , especially covering other games like BF . Proximity chat would be ❤ly in BF games . Hate the devs backed away so soon with BFV & SWBF2.. It comes back to the Why ?
If you've been with the franchise since bad company 2 or earlier, you know exactly what makes a battlefield game. At first when I saw the title of this video, I thought, "battlefield has plenty of comp". But after watching I see what you're talking about. NOTHING has compared to battlefields style, which makes me one of its loyal fans. The feeling of being in a war is amazing and not too hard-core like Arma (which I also love playing from time to time)
Hawk Ops confirmed will have an MP mode with no heroes, hopefully it will have dedicated servers where hosts have some control as well. Cautiously optimistic about it.
I think the BF games are just a genre in the gray zone of gaming. They're good on their own but everyone wants an extraction shooter; or at least it seems that way. I think BF is still fun and filled with so many unique moments that make it incomparable.
You should try 2042 Rapid Strike. It removes the specialist gadgets and the guns feels a lot more balanced. It’s only against bots (though up to 68 players can join) but it’s so much fun!
