robokill's forum posts

Avatar image for robokill
#1 Posted by robokill (1392 posts) -

Entitled whiners...

I expect a trailer, I want a trailer... it's not fair...

Would you whiners shut up, it's pathetic.

Avatar image for robokill
#2 Posted by robokill (1392 posts) -

I'm permanently avoiding Dice and EA is where I am.

Avatar image for robokill
#3 Posted by robokill (1392 posts) -

@ghosts4ever: blah blah blah, do you read what you type, it's drivel

Avatar image for robokill
#4 Posted by robokill (1392 posts) -

They are pretty low res textures, stop mucking about

Avatar image for robokill
#5 Posted by robokill (1392 posts) -

I'm a developer. I'm applying, **** yeah bitches!!!

Avatar image for robokill
#6 Posted by robokill (1392 posts) -

I'm studying development, visual studio, C++ etc.

It's apparent the games are designed from the top down. Meaning the engine, optimization, core gameplay mechanics are secondary to superficial aspects such as shading, rendering, high resolution textures etc.

Spending so much effort on the visual aspect attracts people who watch a 30 second trailer and that's it. Underneath the hood it's barebones basic functionality at best.

To echo the sentiments here the conquest was the core of battlefield. Dice moves away from it with every game because it takes complex netcoding while demanding reduced visual fidelity. The developers are literally choosing profit over loyalty to their fanbase. Battlefront is an insult, I'm pissed I paid twenty bucks for it

Avatar image for robokill
#7 Posted by robokill (1392 posts) -

@quadknight: hey look a smart person. What are you doing here? I thought I was the only one.

Avatar image for robokill
#8 Edited by robokill (1392 posts) -

@Wasdie: well you're personal opinion is incorrect. The tactics were team based and many people played using them. Offensive front, flanking, stealth are all legitimate strategies. Can you comprehend that?

How can I be 30-0 in a game using strategy when I can barely get a kill in other fps games?

Good use of rhetoric though, classic leftist nonsense. Speak without saying anything logical and conclude with absolute certainty based on zero objective analysis. It's like a playbook stupid people use.

Avatar image for robokill
#9 Edited by robokill (1392 posts) -

@dynamitecop: yup times 1000. The mechanics of bf1942 are what made it better than BF2, Vietnam, 3, 4, battlefront, and now bf1.

What those all have in common are crammed in linear chokepoint maps, cash grab dlc, seasons passes, terrible server browsers. BF1942 had wide open maps that players could actually apply strategy to. The newer games are twitch click meat grinders.

I've never been a fps guru but in BF1942 I could go 30-0 in a round by constantly outsmarting the competition. I studied battle tactics, maneuvers, flanking etc. and applied them to bf1942. In the meat grinders that's all irrelevant. Dice makes zergfest meat grinders with dlc and seasons passes. Don't hold out on BF1 being anything but a battlefront reskin.

The days of 64 multiplayer battles with strategy and open maps is long gone. We might get an open map, hell we might even get 64 players but I'll be god damn amazed if it's anything but a series of chokepoints that create meat grinders.

In BF1942 the players would spread out, like in an actual war. Players would create an offensive front, like in an actual war. The tide of battle shifted with realistic scenarios, haven't had an experience like that in more than a decade.

Avatar image for robokill
#10 Edited by robokill (1392 posts) -

@Lucianu: I have nothing against deep mechanics. I have something against deep mechanics with a lot of downtime and waiting. Eve Online is incredibly deep with hours and hours between the exciting gameplay. I have nothing against difficulty as long as the downtime and waiting doesn't outweigh the gameplay.