Battlefield 5 - going back to WW2

[Wirdschowerdn]

WAB steaming off on "box-ticking diversity."

 

[Beastro]

It's customary for Battlefield's campaigns to magnify the myriad flaws of CoD campaigns.
Now that CoD doesn't even have a campaign I shudder to think how bad it'll be.

Amusing considering that Battlefield was only good back when it was the only one without a campaign.

Are you implying in any way or form that they aren't? Haven't you seen the world cup? France is one of the most ancient black african countries in Europa!

If we're gonna go by that, then America and Canada are all Scandanavians and Russians given how many are brought over for the NHL.

nvestigations include:

• What type of disruptive behavior do we see in Battlefield today?
• What drives or triggers people to disrupt other players games?
• How can we prevent disruptive behavior in our titles and community?
• What are some experiments we could conduct to measure benefits of punishing bad or rewarding good behavior?

What's the fun in online FPS gameplay if you can't do anything of these things?

I mean, most of my time on BF1942 was using bugs to camp the airfields and US aircraft carrier by managing to clip through and sit inside structures, as well as using another bug to make amphibious vehicles drive underneath the water specifically to piss people off.

The latter was hilarious in capture the flag, as your flag had to be at your base in order to successfully capture the enemies, so me stealing one and then spending the rest of the game hiding underwater avoiding planes trying to kamikaze into me while ships sails around desperately trying to shoot me brought the entire match to a grinding halt every time.

 

[Dexter]

 

[†††]

 

[unfairlight]

BFV is shit and all but taking Metacritic seriously is kind of a joke to begin with.

 

[fantadomat]

BFV is shit and all but taking Metacritic seriously is kind of a joke to begin with.

I watch only the user score,don't care about the shill one.

 

[Jimmious]

User scores are also very "emotional" and not reliable. People vote either 0 or 10 and a lot vote without even having played the game.
Not talking about BFV specifically of course

 

[fantadomat]

User scores are also very "emotional" and not reliable. People vote either 0 or 10 and a lot vote without even having played the game.
Not talking about BFV specifically of course

Come on,show me game where the user score is not accurate. People get emotional over good and bad games,not over some mediocre nohype games.

 

[Jimmious]

User scores are also very "emotional" and not reliable. People vote either 0 or 10 and a lot vote without even having played the game.
Not talking about BFV specifically of course

Come on,show me game where the user score is not accurate. People get emotional over good and bad games,not over some mediocre nohype games.

How can I know where is the user score more "accurate"? Is there some other knowledge base to compare with? I'm only saying that metacritic user score is simply the depiction of the emotional reaction of people on games, not necessarily representing the actual quality of the game it self

 

[Wunderbar]

User scores are also very "emotional" and not reliable. People vote either 0 or 10 and a lot vote without even having played the game.
Not talking about BFV specifically of course

Come on,show me game where the user score is not accurate. People get emotional over good and bad games,not over some mediocre nohype games.

https://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/hitman-absolution
https://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-4/dragon-age-inquisition

 

[Kitchen Utensil]

User scores are also very "emotional" and not reliable. People vote either 0 or 10 and a lot vote without even having played the game.
Not talking about BFV specifically of course

That's true, most individual reviews are utterly worthless. However, meta user scores/steam ratings often reflect the quality of a game quite accurately.

 

[unfairlight]

I watch only the user score,don't care about the shill one.

Yeah no shit, but any game that has a negative popular opinion will be bombed with 0s by people who have never played the game to begin with meaning the entire thing is pointless.

 

[Jimmious]

Plus lets not forget the amazing art of "review bombing" for whatever reason that happens in each separate case

 

[agentorange]

User scores are also very "emotional" and not reliable. People vote either 0 or 10 and a lot vote without even having played the game.
Not talking about BFV specifically of course

Come on,show me game where the user score is not accurate. People get emotional over good and bad games,not over some mediocre nohype games.

https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/the-elder-scrolls-iv-oblivion

 

[fantadomat]

User scores are also very "emotional" and not reliable. People vote either 0 or 10 and a lot vote without even having played the game.
Not talking about BFV specifically of course

Come on,show me game where the user score is not accurate. People get emotional over good and bad games,not over some mediocre nohype games.

https://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/hitman-absolution
https://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-4/dragon-age-inquisition

Both are mediocre AAA games.

I watch only the user score,don't care about the shill one.

Yeah no shit, but any game that has a negative popular opinion will be bombed with 0s by people who have never played the game to begin with meaning the entire thing is pointless.

So you have played all the games you have criticized?

Plus lets not forget the amazing art of "review bombing" for whatever reason that happens in each separate case

Nothing wrong with review bombing,if the customers are pissed they bomb it,don't be a corporate shill. In the end i am old enough to be able to read past the bullshit whine and decipher the real problems by reading a few user reviews.

User scores are also very "emotional" and not reliable. People vote either 0 or 10 and a lot vote without even having played the game.
Not talking about BFV specifically of course

Come on,show me game where the user score is not accurate. People get emotional over good and bad games,not over some mediocre nohype games.

https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/the-elder-scrolls-iv-oblivion

Can you put even less effort in your next post?

 

[agentorange]

Can you put even less effort in your next post?

yeah, fuck off

 

[unfairlight]

So you have played all the games you have criticized?

I can call Overwatch poorly designed and balanced hero shooter shit, but I won't go on Metacritic to rate it as something I have played, because I have not. If BFV was on Steam and there was a baseline to entry because you have to buy and play games to review them on Steam, I believe it would have mixed or mostly positive reviews.

 

[fantadomat]

Can you put even less effort in your next post?

yeah, fuck off

I disagree with you darling,it is higher effort than the last one .

 

[Big Wrangle]

Technically, googling Metacritic, looking up Oblivion, then copypasting the link requires more steps than typing words.

 

[fantadomat]

Technically, googling Metacritic, looking up Oblivion, then copypasting the link requires more steps than typing words.

Physically i agree,mentally...not really. I was literally thinking while writing the post that some retard will bring up some dead horse like oblivion or fallout3.

 

[BlackAdderBG]

Plus lets not forget the amazing art of "review bombing" for whatever reason that happens in each separate case

Yeah, like review shilling is not a thing.

 

[Jimmious]

Both review shilling and bombing are retarded. Bombing sometimes happens for reasons that make sense, other times they are utterly retarded - see for example Battle Brothers being bombed because they didn't implement modding - even though they never promised to do so

*My point being that I would like to see actual reviews and opinions for the games but what we get are emotional reactions and "wars" with developers and so on

 

[†††]

User scores are also very "emotional" and not reliable. People vote either 0 or 10 and a lot vote without even having played the game.
Not talking about BFV specifically of course

Come on,show me game where the user score is not accurate. People get emotional over good and bad games,not over some mediocre nohype games.

https://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/hitman-absolution
https://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-4/dragon-age-inquisition

your problem is using the console examples when we know the popamolers gonna popamole. DA:I in its PC version has a 59 user score (Hitman only goes down by 0.4 compared to PS3)

 

[fantadomat]

At this rate Anthem must be a success,it could really break the horse's back. It just lost a 3 years of stock gains in a few months. The times we live in are truly amazing.

Edit:LoL even Activision lost a third of their stock value.....amazing times.

EditEdit: Wath the fuck even ubishit is crumbling......

 

[AwesomeButton]

All "tech" is going down in stock price. I believe it has to do with Apple's stock crashing and the rest is bad rep that gets reflected on anything that counts as "Tech". Of course getting progressively greedy and lazy and rehashing the same franchises with next to no innovation for the past 10 years is starting to catch up with EA, Ubisoft and Activision, and it's not helping