Battlefield VI Fans Are Worried That the Game Won’t Feature a Campaign

Tsing

The FPS Review
Staff member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Messages
12,595
Points
113
battlefield-1-key-art-1024x576.jpg
Image: DICE



Many of the leaks surrounding DICE’s sixth installment of its hit military FPS franchise, Battlefield, have primarily comprised multiplayer information such as player sizes and maps. There could be a very disappointing reason for that. Popular Battlefield leaker Tom Henderson has pointed out that he hasn’t heard anything specific about a campaign, nor has EA mentioned anything about a campaign mode for Battlefield VI during its latest earnings call, which is suspicious based on the publisher’s past history with the franchise. The implication is that Battlefield VI might not feature a campaign mode at all and focus strictly on multiplayer. Henderson did previously suggest that Battlefield VI would feature a “revolutionary campaign,” but he later clarified that the information had more to do with the general backstory of the game.



Sources – The information given to...
Click to expand...

Continue reading...


 
I've never played any of the Battlefield games.

I'd seen some multiplayer gameplay and the teenage numbskulls who played looked pretty annoying and it seemed like it wasn't worth it.

Didn't realize they had single player campaigns. Are they any good?
 
Zarathustra said:
Didn't realize they had single player campaigns. Are they any good?
Click to expand...
I really enjoyed BF3's single player. BF4's single player was meh, but not bad. I didn't bother to finish the single player in BF1. And those are the only BF games I have ever played. I don't really play multiplayer games, so if I game doesn't have a solid single player campaign, then it's pretty useless to me. I also hate multiplayer games that don't have bots. I'm looking at you, Halo series.
 
I made it through BF3 and BF4, can't be bothered to finish BF1 or BFV. Granted they might be decent stories, it's mostly just 'shooter on rails' is 'shooter on rails'.

The multiplayer is where it's at, and it has its own feel and pace that's distinct from say the CoD games.
Zarathustra said:
I'd seen some multiplayer gameplay and the teenage numbskulls who played looked pretty annoying
Click to expand...
Young and stupid is easy to frustrate with a little cunning; I've been playing BF for about a decade now, having migrated from Counter-Strike, and I've seen effective players well into their sixties. And at least with the BF games you get fewer prepubescents!
 
I have never heard of any fan of the Battlefield franchise to be worried about there being no single-player campaign. It is conceivable I suppose... getting used to the weapons without being annihilated over and over again by a bunch of sweats already familiar with the maps and meta-weapons. For this, the battlfield 2 campaign was unmatched. There was no storyline. It was like multiplayer but everyone else is a bot.
 
Axle Grease said:
I have never heard of any fan of the Battlefield franchise to be worried about there being no single-player campaign. It is conceivable I suppose... getting used to the weapons without being annihilated over and over again by a bunch of sweats already familiar with the maps and meta-weapons. For this, the battlfield 2 campaign was unmatched. There was no storyline. It was like multiplayer but everyone else is a bot.
Click to expand...
If anything, from BF Bad Company 2 on, the weapons are so incredibly well balanced that you only have to pick one up and try it to get used to it. Out of the hundreds of weapons in BF3 and BF4, there were only a few that I found frustrating to use, and that was largely due to my playstyle more than anything.

But I'm one to run around with a pump shotgun, slugs, and a short optic, and be able to do everything from clearing close quarters to knocking folks out across the map.

I also play exclusively hardcore on BF4 (and predecessors) because 'normal' is like 'Battlefield, but detuned for consoles'. That was literally the most frustrating part about BF:V- that you could shoot someone in the face with a long rifle at close distance and have them still take you out. Hardcore just means that players actually die when shot!
 
LazyGamer said:
And at least with the BF games you get fewer prepubescents!
Click to expand...

Really? Last time I peeked at streams of Call of Modern Battlefield type games, that was seemingly all there was. A mix of prebubescents and 14 year olds.

Either way, the unrealistic run-and-gun style of these games was really not my style, so they never really appealed to me, but I could get into a single player campaign if they were any good...
 
Zarathustra said:
Really? Last time I peeked at streams of Call of Modern Battlefield type games, that was seemingly all there was. A mix of prebubescents and 14 year olds.
Click to expand...
Oh, then you managed to catch an older audience. BF games have a 'slowness' in them that usually puts off the younger crowd. They like the 'arcade' feeling of COD.

Zarathustra said:
Either way, the unrealistic run-and-gun style of these games was really not my style, so they never really appealed to me, but I could get into a single player campaign if they were any good...
Click to expand...
The later BF games are pretty good; in general, they've neutered the more effective weapons, and you have to play in 'hardcore' mode online to even get close. Where available it's a riot. BF4, the current 'modern' release to which BF6 will be the most direct successor, still has player managed servers and active communities running them.

And in matches where both sides are of similar individual skill, team tactics win, and part of that is the 'RPG-ish' borrow of 'playing one's class'. Can't have a raid of all warriors etc., and can't excel at BF4 without at least a few people actually playing their classes!
 
LazyGamer said:
Oh, then you managed to catch an older audience. BF games have a 'slowness' in them that usually puts off the younger crowd. They like the 'arcade' feeling of COD.


The later BF games are pretty good; in general, they've neutered the more effective weapons, and you have to play in 'hardcore' mode online to even get close. Where available it's a riot. BF4, the current 'modern' release to which BF6 will be the most direct successor, still has player managed servers and active communities running them.

And in matches where both sides are of similar individual skill, team tactics win, and part of that is the 'RPG-ish' borrow of 'playing one's class'. Can't have a raid of all warriors etc., and can't excel at BF4 without at least a few people actually playing their classes!
Click to expand...

Interesting. I have always thought of BF and CoD as pretty much the same game.

The last time I had a satisfying online gaming experience was back when Red Orchestra 2 could fill up a "Classic" mode server. That is th eproper speed. By comparison BF is unrealistically blazing fast.
 
What ever happened to Medal of Honor? I still remember trying to get through the bombed-out town with snipers trying to take you out.
 
Zarathustra said:
Interesting. I have always thought of BF and CoD as pretty much the same game.

The last time I had a satisfying online gaming experience was back when Red Orchestra 2 could fill up a "Classic" mode server. That is th eproper speed. By comparison BF is unrealistically blazing fast.
Click to expand...
COD feels more like Quake these days... you can run faster in BF than say Counter-Strike, of which RO is similar to I guess, but every action incurs a delay either before or after. And with bullet travel and drop, things like sniping with 12g slugs take practice and outright luck. Transitions, even just throwing grenades, make you vulnerable.

But if you want real slow, just pick up BF1 ;)

hubaduba said:
What ever happened to Medal of Honor? I still remember trying to get through the bombed-out town with snipers trying to take you out.
Click to expand...
They did the whole 'play as Taliban and kill Americans in Afghanistan' thing and that controversy stuck enough to shelve the brand for a good length of time.
 
Burticus said:
I keep forgetting about the Bad Company games. The best of the BF games
Click to expand...
They still had the best destruction, bar none!

BF4 has a bit of it, and in degrees, but a real upgrade would be to have literally everything destructable down to the physics model level.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Become a Patron!
Back
Top