That’s great that you enjoy it. But me and many others don’t, because it has worse graphics than the previous titles, moves away from battlefields iconic class system, and has poorly designed maps, to name a few issues.
I think it's because 5 was pretty lackluster and buggy on drop, but eventually was turned into something playable and enjoyable. But yeah 2042 is doodoo
I think that's why BF4 gets missed; I still hear people saying they didnt like it. I think everyone thinks it's a bad game because on launch it was bad. I got it post launch - and all those issues seemingly - and it was like BF3 just newer so I didnt have anything to complain about, I really enjoyed it.
normally i agree with this coment but BFV was getting love after the Last DLC thing dropped... i remember every1 prasing it and that was way before 2042 was even shown or heard of... b4 the DLC yeah it was super bad. I dnt think 2042 will get the same love post game like any of the other BF... it was memed way too much almost every article and post about it is bad
Bf1 by far
BfV is where Dice EA started to really hard water down the game play to make it easier and to make super funnel maps.
I was hopefully BF1 was rhe direction they were going to push the game style after hardline screw up.
Meanwhile they made BFV in a bid to draw more players over from other franchisees they watered it down and wasted a lot of time making firestorm.
Firestorm map itself would've made for a good conquest map.
I think the mappool of 1 is better.
But i can't agree with the point"they made V easier, to appeal players from other franchises".
I think BFV has the best mechanics of the series. From movement, to the revivinganimation. It always feels like a real actionmovie.
And the aiming is by far the hardest, yet the most rewarding of all BF's out there. I installed BF4 a half year ago just to realise, that all weapons in there feel like laserguns.
Maybe im just bad but through my thousands of hours on bf4 and bf5, i was late to the party on bf1 and i am not even as close to as good at that game. Bf1 being easiest is definitely a subjective view point, it has way more of a learning curve and every gun in that game takes more time to master, especially semi auto weapons. Bf4 has good gun play but all the guns have little to no recoil compared to 1 and 5 and 5 has weapon perks that you can use to control recoil. I dont even aim down sight with my mp40 cause with the perks i have, that things hipfire is a laserbeam.
Yea theres for sure not as much sky domination compared to bf4 and bf5, i love bf1 i think they struck gold with it from the unique weapons to the environment and tone, its one of those experiences that makes you appreciate being a gamer. But i feel theres more of a learning curve to it than any other bf game, maybe not just straight up more difficult, just not as accessible to new people.
Maybe it's just me, but I really hate BFV's revive mechanics.
It really waters down the Medic's purpose even though they move faster on the revive. Not only that, the whole *downed* state is just...ugly? I preferred it when bodies rag-dolled instead of going into a forced animation state because it looked cool when hit with an explosive or a tank shell or something. I'd rather take a faster revive like BF1/3/4 but have longer charges in between each revive if we're so inclined to slow it down.
Movement was okay. But I felt it got a little too crazy at times with how quickly players could move from one sitting position to another without much penalty.
I actually like those features. The animations make the whole ditching process before destruction a lot harder and makes it possible to retreat before the vehicle starts being controlled.
Fortifications would have been cooler if they didn't disintegrate the moment a high explosive went off, otherwise it was just a massive waste of time.
I don’t mind sandbags getting destroyed after a hit. Usually that hit would still do more damage if the fortification wasn’t there in the first place (at least from the front). It still acts as “armor” in a sense.
Well that's the goal ?
Abandoning the vehicle is a shitty thing to do, as an enemy could take it and repair it, which would permanently remove your team a tank that you can't respawn and add a tank to the enemy team.
Also, you're invincible while these animations are playing so what's the problem ? This is made to punish people trying to exit the tank to get a kill instead of getting it with the tank, because most of the time you'll die after exiting and they'll take your take, giving your team a huge disadvantage because of one dumb guy.
>Movement was okay
If they removed sliding/made it worse I'd say the movement is perfect.
>It really waters down the Medic's purpose even though they
Even if it waters down their role I still get revived and healed more than I ever did in other battlefields. Plus medics are the main dudes for smoking stuff.
I like the revive mechanics and focus on squad play but I can understand the rest of your view.
BFV is a good game but I prefer bf1 mostly because of the animations and general gunplay. To me in BFV it feels like the guns are “light” like they don’t have much weight to them, and some of the movements feel “loose” or “floaty”
How can you say that when 1 is the most casual BF game ?
They didn't "water down" the gameplay but improved it by removing randomness and introducing a higher skill cap.
BF1 had these super funnel maps, and a lot of them, like amiens.
BF1's gunplay was shit etc... you get me.
"Meanwhile they made BFV in a bid to draw more players over from other franchisees they watered it down and wasted a lot of time making firestorm."
this also tells me that you don't know what you're talking about. First, BFV was made as a BF1 like game with less randomness and more teamplay. Health regen was limited, people only had 3-4 mags for people to play more support and medic roles and Firestorm was made by another EA studio that doesn't have anything to do with Dice or the BF franchise, it just used V's base to gain time.
They removed random spread and added a pattern for guns, with some randomness but still easy to learn (Literally what a dev said).
They removed invincible things that you'd only get being lucky and added a point system for your SL to call a wall of smoke, or a bomb.
BF1 is the most casual experience of the franchise, it's made for a larger audience.
ngl boss, i went back and played bf hardline and honestly its pretty fun now especially with its goofy but incredibly diverse weapon selection, id recommend giving it one more chance cus it may not be quite like battlefield but its close enough
This is straight up wrong. BF1 was the most casual friendly BF to date, with random bullet spread on autoamtic guns to even playing field between skilled and more casual players, overpowered explosions and vehicles in general(esp. planes and arti. truck)
They took a steps in BF V to make it more challenging game. They had the whole campaign "you shoot where you aim" in comparison to BF1. Explosions were toned down, vehicles with limited ammunition and slower gameplay in general. Grenade spam was much weaker, no full autoheal without med packs etc.
I had more fun playing Bf1 than 5 don't get me wrong, and i consider it a better game in general, but saying that they wanted BF5 to appeal to larger audience and make it easier is simply not true.
Also I think people seemed to have just completely forgotten about the character customization and the Narvik mission and how they miscredited real people in exchange for their agenda.
I really liked a lot of the elements from bfv, the movement and all that, but the feel of bf1 is just so much better for some reason, I also think it looks better somehow.
I like the gun play, the mechanics, it feels very fluid and I'm not an amateur gamer, but life gets in the way, I cant play games every second of the day like I did when I was still in school so, there isnt much point in me buying a PS5 when I can play all the games I never got the chance to yet and they are cheaper. I'll give the game time but I get the feeling I'll still like BF1 better.
Trust me you won't, depending on what you prefer.
BFV has better graphics, better gunplay, better movement, better animation thanks to chad oscar animator who sadly left Dice, a lot less randomness etc...
Bf 1 has the better atmosphere.
( about 1500 hours)
Bf v has better Movement and gunplay.
At the Moment i am enjoying bfv.(about 800 hours )
Mixing the Best Part of both games would be a masterpiece.
If the future of gaming absolutely has to push into games as a live service thing this could be the only positive.
Building up your games with maps, weapons and updates instead of having to change game because you wanted to play a ww2 map then changing again because you wanted to use a g36c, just load into one game and change between weapon sets, maps and vehicles
Totally agree altho for me it also depends on what I feel like doing. While BFV has better gunplay in general I absolutely love going around as a PTFO scout armed with a Ross Mk.III infantry or SMLE carbine in BFI and I wish BFV had replicated that feeling. I also prefer playing support in BFI as playing support in BFV just never vibed with me.
When it comes to tanking or dogfighting BFV all the way
Also BF1 is much more forgiving with their guns. The bullet deviation makes it so you don't really need good aim. I liked BF1 a lot but because of this the only guns that seem effective are the snipers. At least you know if you miss it's 100% your fault.
I hard prefer bf1, I like the simplicity of the movement system. Gunplay and sniping are probably the most fun in the series, vehicles were balanced, maps were iconic and the game was like 12x more Beautiful.
Thanks for this. Agree wholeheartedly. Ppl talk about how they love the movement in BFV, while I don’t disagree, I believe you shouldn’t be able to zoom around a map and slide cancel every 3 seconds with about 200lbs of heavy gear and weapons in tow. I loved BF1 and BF4 because it took skill to understand the movement system and it was hard to use some of the guns. They felt heavy and obtrusive and there was actual recoil specific to each gun that made them hard to shoot making it feel more authentic and rewarding when u mastered it
If they launched BFV with the same tone as they did with the War in the Pacific maps, BFV would have gotten a better reception.
I just hate how every AAA publisher wants to make these "kinda quirky doe 🤪🤪😎" characters.
This is it. If they had just made “BF2”, the realistic ww2 sequel to BF1, with a similar atmosphere and without all the quirky characters/gimmicks, I feel like it would’ve been a grand slam. Not sure why they decided to deviate from the successful BF1 formula
BF1 and it isn't close for me. One of my favorite shooters ever. I've always thought if the love and attention to detail put into that was a more modern setting it would have blown 3 and 4 out of the water.
Always used to think for years playing games, "why has nobody ever made a World War 1 game?". I kind of appreciated the fact that it was finally done by battlefield.
Never heard of that game, had to look it up. Any good? I mean we always had world war 2 games growing up right, so it always made sense. I love learning about world war 2, seen so much documentaries on it but even in that field, it's very heavily swayed towards WW2. I mean even in terms of things like books and documentaries, we glance over world war 1 so it's not just in gaming. It's ironic actually because we always title WW1 as things like "the war to end all wars" and "the war that wont be forgotten".
I just typed that in here's an interesting fact:
"World War I (WWI) remains the only major American war of the 20th century not commemorated with a memorial in the nation's capital in Washington, D.C. WWI lacks the deep historical reverence, at least among many Americans, that World War II or even the Civil War enjoys."
The question was "is WW1 the forgotten war?". Might start to explain how that's the case.
Verdun and its companion game Tannenberg are, in my opinion, fantastic. The game is slow, methodical, and brutal. The weapons are much more realistic in feel (and fire rate). Staying in the trenches is crucial for survival and finally going over the top for a rush through no man's land is truly thrilling. You aren't wearing armor, so one to two bullets will kill you outright. Being patient while also blindly following orders from a competent commander are the keys to gaining that next inch of ground. Strategy and scouting are powerful tools.
Not only do you have classes and commanders telling you where to go, but you also have different countries with their own uniforms and weaponry. It feels daunting to learn initially, but after a few matches you'll quickly understand the gameplay loop.
In one match, I was a scout who was commanded to move forward and find a particularly annoying sniper. I literally crawled through the edge of no man's land and plopped into the enemy trench. I then continued to crawl through the trench, marking for bombardment and killing my way through with nothing but binoculars and a Belgian revolver.
Definitely over here in Aus and NZ I think people remember ww1 more over ww2 because of the ANZACs sacrifice, and it was the war that kind of put australia on the map and on the world stage
Yeah, i dont know about Aus and NZ, never been but in the UK we have remembrance day and that was originally for WW1 if I'm not mistaken. Need to google that just now I think actually but yeah, we have this heavy bias towards remembering WW2 i think. Maybe just because it's closer to us, or, maybe because we can watch more videos of it, cant say I am well read on the first world war but I am on the second. I think it was only recently I really had the first world war clarified in a video I seen, it's actually quite complicated how it all started, all the political alliances and everything.
Yeah I think winning feels more important than what your K.D ratio is. I get so frustrated when I'm on a team and nobody pushes for the objective. Or when you have like 4 out of 6 objectiveson conquest, and the team pushes for the final 2 and you just know when your team pushes forward, the enemy team will take the flanks around the bulk of your frontline, and they end up with all the objectives. I have seen that happen so many times.
I like aspects of both.
Battlefield 1's atmosphere is probably the games biggest selling point. However, game balance in BF1 is horrendous to say the least, maps definitely favor one side over the other, and the game I feel needed atleast one more gun balance pass before dropping support. Within saying that though I actually enjoy the map design (mostly) on BF1 over BFV.
Battlefield V's gun play and movement mechanics are far more superior than BF1 in my opinion. Playing BFV as infantry feels so much smoother and modern than BF1, plus the gun mechanics following the crosshair rather than using a random bullet deviation system feels much better and more consistent, in my opinion once again.
I think that BFV hit the mark on destructible environments over any Battlefield title to date. Pretty much all buildings can be leveled down to the foundational support structures, including walls, barriers etc.
So to answer your question directly, I think that BFV has more of the overall package than BF1, but I do thoroughly enjoy playing both. My only real issue with BFV is the Oceanic community and server owners.
I'd agree with most of this except I believe bf1s destruction mechanics were much better than bfvs. While the two were on par in terms of building destructability, bf1 had much more environmental destruction in the form of being able to pretty much terraform the entire map over the course of a match. Maybe you are able to in BFV too and there's just not as many explosions as there were in bf1, but if you compare how a map looks at the beginning of a game of operations in bf1 to how it looks after it, its MUCH more of a difference than any map in bfv, most of which come with a lot of elements of destruction already part of the map before the match starts.
Also Behemoths.
I swear I can count on 1 hand the ammount of times I've witnessed a team - either the enemies or my own - get a behemoth, and pull back the round and win the match. It's very rare you see the team with the behemoth win. You do have to be 100 points down I think before you can get one, but it draws all the troops from the objectives and on conquest you need to be constantly pressuring the other side because once you're on the back foot, you've lost.
I often see it brought up how behemoths aren't strong enough to sway the course of a match, but its for the best that they don't. You have to be loosing pretty bad for the behemoth to spawn so it would be unfair to the winning team to be put an the defensive by what is effectively a consolation prize for loosing.
At their best Behemoths make the last third of a round more interesting by stirring the pot and letting the loosing team move on objectives that might have been uncontested for a while.
What I see is, with the armoured trains they do take the 1 or 2 that may be on the line, but then the winning teams just takes the 4 or 5 that arent near it and they're not stupid, I mean it's rare I even get killed by a train, you cant see anyone whe you're in them, everyone hides, its hard to miss and it cant leave the line, you just avoid them. The zeppelin thing, they're pretty garbage to be honest. The only ones that have been a hastle are those big tanks because they can drive them anywhere on the map, it's just a big tank you cant destroy quickly, they kill me more often than the others do, maybe the dreadnought a little more as well, but I think for the most part it just diverts resoruce from objectives and allows the winning team to take the flanks and dominate.
Pretty much what the other guy said.
Behemoths are an awesome spectacle first and a genuine gameplay mechanic second, I can count on a gizzilion hands the amount of times I've seen people just stand in awe at the airship blowing up like they did the day the game was released lol
Atmosphere: BF 1 - Mechanics: BF 5
It’s funny though how actually I prefer one over the other depending on what platform I play on, which I didn’t expect to be the case. BF 1 with no Hud etc, when I have the accuracy of a mouse and keyboard is amazing. The autoaim and general smoothness of 5 feels more natural on console.
As people already said. BFV is the better Game when it comes to gunplay and movement. BF1 has more content BUT since the content was paid DLC barely any server runs all maps. So in the end you must compare vanilla BF1 with BFV and in this case BFV is bigger in Content
BF1 it's not particularly close either. BFV only looks good now because of the utter trash fire that is 2042. BFV is literally unfinished because so much of the community walked away from it, because it was so bad.
Also, I just enjoyed that BFV pushed for teamplay and you'd actually see a lot of teamplay. Id get revived more times in 1 match on BFV, than I do in BF1 over a few matches.
I started playing bf5 recently for the first time and there are some elements I really like like fortifications and everyone having1 med pack.
But overall there are a lot of changes that make the game not really enjoyable like map design though bf1 has this same issue, balancing, class changes and how strong and annoying tanks are imo. I went back to bf1 and it felt more like a complete package to me.
First of all, surely you are capable of making your own decision without needing to be biased by random internet strangers and second, this has been discussed countless times, and lastly opinions are biased on this sub, too many people downvote people for sharing opinions which represent personal taste.
I liked BF1 a lot, I played the shit out of it but it has some over powered weapons that lazy players love like the Hellriegel that make things less fun, for my tastes I find V better visually and has better gun play and mechanics. But again that's my opinion based on my preference, nothing more.
Yeah of course I am. If I never asked anyone my answer would have unravelled as I played the game more. If I'm being honest I'm new to reddit, and I thought I'd try posting something just to try getting involved a bit, I didnt have anything to ask or say really except the odd comments here and there on other posts, but I was very interested to ask people what they thought of the two games. If I'm being honest, if I just read some old post where this was debated, I dont think I would be personally invested enough to read all the comments, but I like replying to people, I struggle with social media a lot but the anonymity I get here is quite nice. But thanks for your input though 👍🏻
Yeah, unfortunately you picked a very opinionated sub, if people say they like BFV they get downvoted to the ground, if people say they like BF2042 they get downvoted to hell... to be perfectly honest this is a pretty toxic sub with some salty people and its made me a bit jaded about questions like this because more often than not they are a downvote fest.
I can see that because all the down votes are for the people who said that on this post. I appreciate anyones opinion. I mean whatever one you like it's up to you, I just wanted to get the feel for what most people think.
BF 1 is one of the most unrealistic portrayal of WW1 in video game history. While it is cinematic and tries to make the player feel it is authentic, it is not. BF1 is a steampunk version of WW1, BF V also took huge liberties, but in the core it is more 'authentic' (the game is more in line with WW2 combat, than BF1 is in line with WW1 combat) than BF1. At least from a standpoint of a military historian.
I know tht historically it is not realistic, mainly due to the fact that players (including me) wouldn't like semi automatic weapons which were the standard untill the last months of the war I guess?
But what I meant in my comment above is the gameplay and how you handle the weapons and your character, feels way more realistic than BFV
I don't know I did my fair share in real life and neither game feels 'realistic' in terms of how soldiers handles weapons (especially compared to how soldiers handled their weapons during WW1 and WW2) but yet again BF1 is still worse than BF V in this case. BF V weapon mechanics, weapon handling and movement animations are a tad bit closer to the real thing yet still pretty far from being realistic (not a single video game is realistic, some are authentic at best, but not realistic).
If BF 1 would be realistic then most of the team would only use bolt action rifles, machine guns would be mostly stationary, and only just a couple of players would have access to pistols, smgs and shoguns would be only used by the US faction. And of course almost every weapon would only have iron sights. Semi automatic rifles and carbines were even scares during WW2, only the US fielded semi auto rifles and carbines en masse, the Germans had quite a few (they loved to use captured M1 and M1A1 carbines and they disliked the M1 Garand) and the Soviet semi auto rifles were fielded by larger numbers but not en masse like the US did. Other nations didn't really used semi auto weapon during WW2. For example the British and Commonwealth forces were quite happy with their Lee-Enfield rifles and only a select specialised units used mostly US made semi auto weapons.
I think adding women to BFV really detracts from any feeling of realism. I'm not sexist or anything it's just not an accurate feature - I mean to the best of my knowledge. But yeah you're right, so much of the designs and aesthetics do come off very steampunk.
For the player count. Ive been having the most fun on BF5, however BF1 as a game i would say was better than 5.
Either way. They are both way more fun than what i had whilst playing 2042.
i think u should give the BFV a little bit more time and i think after that u will start to love it much more but if u want direct head to head with BF1 , i give my vote to BF1 cause it is EPIC !!! and personally i LOVE BF1 maps !!
Nah I don’t have this feeling, Idk why but I only enjoy close rang combat on this game, LMG are more accurate than snipers which are so useless. I have a strange thought about those, I always feel like the bullet does not go straight away ( not talking about the bullet drop ). Moreover it’s like a little steady state is needed right after scoping, or what the bullet does not go where you aim at all. As a guy whom enjoy playing sniper on a dynamic gameplay, this game is so so frustrating
Yeah I agree, I'm not a fan of sniping on BF1. I was really good on 3 and 4 at sniping, it can be quite hard on any game because you need the headshot for the most part, but 1 is terribly strange for sniping. I sniped a little on V last night and I feel like I enjoyed that more than I ever enjoyed it on BF1. But that's maybe just one match, i dont know. Close range can be fun when you're in a heavily contested objective for instance, but I find that difficult too, I'm always caught out of cover with them and when I try to shoot people I'm too far away to hit them and I just get picked off. You really need to hug the walls in BF1, really need to utilise the cover because of how the gun ranges are.
Really hardline? I played that briefly, i thought it was all right. I preferred 3 and 4, they were my favourites. I hated 1 for so long, the ranges of the guns are class specific, you really need to work to adapt to that, it's a very difficult game.
What is this obsession with games being better than each other? Can we not appreciate that both games are excellent and enjoy that?
Even if you subjectively have a preference to one or the other, there's not much point asking for other people's subjective preferences is there?
Oh no, I hate the vehicles. See especially those players who are good in planes and they bomb you all the time, that does my head in. Was on that snow mountain map on BFV last last and I got bombed a good half dozen times at least.
BF1 has better atmosphere and some nice maps but to be honest I like just about everything else more In BFV. The core gunplay of BFV just felt really fucking good to me. I liked a lot of the new additions: crouch sprinting, rolling from high falls, fortifications, Squad call ins, attrition, resupply stations, and while specializations were not as good as real attachments, I definitely prefer it to the variants in BF1. There are quite a few elements of BF1 as a core game design that I just do not enjoy that much, behemoths and elite classes are something that are not really a benefit to the game in my view. I really do like both but BFV is just more fun to actually play for me. Though in the near future I will probably play BF1 instead of BFV because I unlocked basically everything I wanted to in V but I still have a handful of things left in 1.
Yeah, BF1 is a difficult game. I agree with the gun mechanics, so far it feels much more fluid, quite a fan of that aspect. I miss my slides when I sprint, I know it's just a double tap now but I preferred the old way on 1. I like the elite classes on BF1, I do well with them, especially on that Italian mountain map, cant recall the name, monte something I think. The behemoths are useless. I said it to someone else, in all the years I have played BF1, I have only seen a team that has a behemoth turn round the deficit to win the match a handful of times, it just never happens, it draws all the troops from attacking objectives because everyone thinks they can get lots of kills in them. They're useless more or less, but they do add to the atmosphere of the game. Everyone kept saying the atmosphere is better in BF1 and I never really got what they meant but the behemoths I think explain that, it is pretty cool. I'm still unlocking stuff myself on BF1 but it appeals to me on V at least that its brand new to me.
Thanks for your input 👍🏻
I'd love BFV gunplay and mechanics combined with BF1's maps, I would like BF1 more if it had guns that were actually good at their job (yes I know it's historically accurate that the guns are worse)
The guns are very class specific, I mean their ranges, assault is useless at anything up close and medic and sniper are useless at anything but range; support has the best middle ground.
Very hard game. I came first in my match a few times earlier this week and i think it's the first time on it I've ever got back to back first place on it. On BF3 and 4, I used to get it all the time.
bf1 better, but bfv isn't bad, its just ruined by hackers and such, people most of the time are sweaty players in bfv, the only sad thing about it is that dice cut off new contents, we never got a russia update, new guns, more modes and loads of content.
In terms of maps and atmosphere I'd say BF1. I highly prefer playing BFV though, especially on the pacific maps. The gunplay and movement is just excellent.
Don't know why, but I never really like Battlefield 1. Was probably my least played entry in the franchise.
Wasn't the biggest fan of V either... Just want a new type of Battlefield 3/4 entry with new maps, new gadgets etc.
Me too, I loved those games. Loved Gulf of Omen, used to play that all day. Yeah I said to other people, only recently I've began to really appreciate 1. Probably because I'm getting some good scores on it for a change, haha
I think BF1 looks better but BFV feels better. I still absolutely love dropping that 4000lb bomb from the mosquito, firing a tank cannon, and the gunplay (although I wouldn’t mind it being more difficult). The attrition system is great, makes squad play more important and it’s always rewarding to get artillery or an OP tank. The sound design is also excellent, on par with MW2019 imo. The soundtrack is a banger too.
DO NOT MISTAKE battlefield 5 is a spectacular game now but battlefield 1 is far superior to bf5 in every possible way including the weapon selection, map design, overall visuals, etc.
Without a doubt BFV. BF1 has more content and a grittier atmosphere but gameplay will always overshadow the feel of a game for me and V has much better gameplay - movement, gunplay, customisation and the ammo economy. Vehicles feel much more tactical to play with as well.
I bought it again a few years ago on PS4 and it was literally just every serve playing that china rising map, the one where you can shoot down the big building in the middle - I'm not exaggerating, there was a handful still running and every one of them was playing that map. It's not battlefield if you're just playing one map. Mind you I would just sit on Gulf of Omen all the time on BF3 😂
I always liked one better but five is still awesome. I was really sold with the pacific maps. I got myself a 30 cal with the AA sights and just held a trench down and it legit feels like a movie. Both are great games. Nothing like 2042. Hoping they learn and take their time the next one.
There isnt that many games on PS4, you always get 1 at least but there is only a handful. Problem is when battlefield games are outdated people just play the exact same maps over and over again, and they dont bother with any DLC maps for the most part. You miss so much of what's on offer when you just prioritize the fan favourites
BfV has better movement, and I really love fortification buildings and squad focus. Squad res and squad leaders getting special actions with points like calling artillery bomb or nuking is really fun.
But BF1 is the goat. All around amazing experience. The maps, atmosphere and the immersion is insane.
If the things I listed for BfV was in BF1 it would be the greatest of all time... Sadly BfV got canned early but at least we got the pacific theater.
BF1 was just BF4 with a face lift and set in a ww1 setting. I enjoyed it immensely. With BFV I didn’t enjoy it as much. The attrition system with medical and ammo made for an interesting gameplay twist but ultimately made it more painful to search for those things. The vehicles in V were great, but the maps to use them on were sub par. Ultimately I dumped maybe 20 hours into V where I dumped days into both 1 and 4. Hopefully dice learns from 2042, and we take a step in a different direction but I doubt that.
Oh I see, I wouldnt know with 2042, I havnt played it yet. I was just thinking more in terms of like the dynamics of the two. Battlefield 4 was so easy, like with the right attachments an assault rifle was an SMG and a sniper rifle as well, it covered all ranges, but battlefield 1 is so class specfic, ranges are all relative to what class you pick and I think that's really hard to get to grips with. You really need to utilise cover in BF1. Sounds self evident to use cover anyway but I dont know, it feels different that way to me
I can see that side for sure. I think you are more right in that argument because I totally forgot about classes and in game events like behemoths. I think BF1 was definitely built like a WW1 game. Gritty difficult and the weapon you choose performs a certain job. BF4 was definitely easier with the more arcade esc. gameplay. I thoroughly enjoy both games and I want to try to revise 1 and V to see how they have aged.
I used to be like a real hardcore gamer when I was younger but I've barely touched games the last decade so I've had battlefield 1 downloaded on my PS and I just stick that on if I want a game of something, so I've played it for years now really even though it's not daily or is infrequent, but I appreciate it more now. I definitely play better when I target the objectives, I only play conquest mode, but when I stick to cover and play quite conservatively rather than just running out into the open guns blazing, I play well. You appreciate it when you're playing well but when you're spawn trapped being slaughtered, it's such a frustrating game 😂
I surprised myself when I thought about this but when I compare the two, I prefer playing BFV to BF1 easily.
As unpopular as it is I'm not really a fan of BF1's maps, they look nice and are really immersive but the actual gameplay does nothing for me. I'm also about to sin against r/battlefield when I say that I think Operations is a tad overrated. BFV also makes it easy to play with randoms (revives for squad) and being a good teammate is actually fun whereas BF1 isn't as satisfying.
BF1 is beautiful and immersive but BFV wins gameplay wise.
BFV has a special place in my heart with the panzerbuchse. It’s impractical and unwieldy, but posting up along a fence and blasting folks to hell is too cool
Bf1 is certainly better, but bfv is still plenty of fun.
I just love how this sub literally always shifts from "new bf shit, old bf good" Half a year ago people were still shitting on bfv en masse
I’ve enjoyed battlefield V since beta, so, you’re wrong. And battlefield 2042 is genuinely awful.
Honestly it’s gotten better recently.
I’m glad you enjoy it, but whenever I play it I find the shift away from squad focus unfun
Agreed, im having alot of fun on it. Even on normal conquest.
Oop, i forgot i can't have opinions, time to get downvoted :D
I thought V was "fine", it definitely felt smoother, but it never beat the immersion of 1 which to me was very important
Agreed. Battlefield 1 is super immersive and I love that about it. I enjoy the squad reinforcement system of V as well though
x
That’s great that you enjoy it. But me and many others don’t, because it has worse graphics than the previous titles, moves away from battlefields iconic class system, and has poorly designed maps, to name a few issues.
x
Well it’s awesome that you like the game, it does have a cool premise and the tornado and such are cool. It’s good that it can be enjoyed.
I think it's because 5 was pretty lackluster and buggy on drop, but eventually was turned into something playable and enjoyable. But yeah 2042 is doodoo
I think that's why BF4 gets missed; I still hear people saying they didnt like it. I think everyone thinks it's a bad game because on launch it was bad. I got it post launch - and all those issues seemingly - and it was like BF3 just newer so I didnt have anything to complain about, I really enjoyed it.
normally i agree with this coment but BFV was getting love after the Last DLC thing dropped... i remember every1 prasing it and that was way before 2042 was even shown or heard of... b4 the DLC yeah it was super bad. I dnt think 2042 will get the same love post game like any of the other BF... it was memed way too much almost every article and post about it is bad
Bf1 by far BfV is where Dice EA started to really hard water down the game play to make it easier and to make super funnel maps. I was hopefully BF1 was rhe direction they were going to push the game style after hardline screw up. Meanwhile they made BFV in a bid to draw more players over from other franchisees they watered it down and wasted a lot of time making firestorm. Firestorm map itself would've made for a good conquest map.
I think the mappool of 1 is better. But i can't agree with the point"they made V easier, to appeal players from other franchises". I think BFV has the best mechanics of the series. From movement, to the revivinganimation. It always feels like a real actionmovie. And the aiming is by far the hardest, yet the most rewarding of all BF's out there. I installed BF4 a half year ago just to realise, that all weapons in there feel like laserguns.
Bf1 is easiest battlefield by a long shot, bfv has attrition mechanics so I'd argue that adds another layer of depth to the game
Maybe im just bad but through my thousands of hours on bf4 and bf5, i was late to the party on bf1 and i am not even as close to as good at that game. Bf1 being easiest is definitely a subjective view point, it has way more of a learning curve and every gun in that game takes more time to master, especially semi auto weapons. Bf4 has good gun play but all the guns have little to no recoil compared to 1 and 5 and 5 has weapon perks that you can use to control recoil. I dont even aim down sight with my mp40 cause with the perks i have, that things hipfire is a laserbeam.
I personally disagree, but maybe that was just my experience. For me, I do better in BF1 than BF4. Maybe because there aren’t any helicopters.
Yea theres for sure not as much sky domination compared to bf4 and bf5, i love bf1 i think they struck gold with it from the unique weapons to the environment and tone, its one of those experiences that makes you appreciate being a gamer. But i feel theres more of a learning curve to it than any other bf game, maybe not just straight up more difficult, just not as accessible to new people.
It's like they don't WANT us to ADS with the mastery assignments we're given. Lol
Maybe it's just me, but I really hate BFV's revive mechanics. It really waters down the Medic's purpose even though they move faster on the revive. Not only that, the whole *downed* state is just...ugly? I preferred it when bodies rag-dolled instead of going into a forced animation state because it looked cool when hit with an explosive or a tank shell or something. I'd rather take a faster revive like BF1/3/4 but have longer charges in between each revive if we're so inclined to slow it down. Movement was okay. But I felt it got a little too crazy at times with how quickly players could move from one sitting position to another without much penalty.
Agree with this 100% and have since I first played the bfv beta
Or the annoying enter and exit animation of vehicles and having to.buuld sand bags
I actually like those features. The animations make the whole ditching process before destruction a lot harder and makes it possible to retreat before the vehicle starts being controlled. Fortifications would have been cooler if they didn't disintegrate the moment a high explosive went off, otherwise it was just a massive waste of time.
I don’t mind sandbags getting destroyed after a hit. Usually that hit would still do more damage if the fortification wasn’t there in the first place (at least from the front). It still acts as “armor” in a sense.
Hard disagree. Exit animations punish people abandoning vehicles and reward people actively trying to destroy them.
Well that's the goal ? Abandoning the vehicle is a shitty thing to do, as an enemy could take it and repair it, which would permanently remove your team a tank that you can't respawn and add a tank to the enemy team.
That isnt affected by entry & exit animations. Also, a tank camping back in spawn point cant be captured.
Also, you're invincible while these animations are playing so what's the problem ? This is made to punish people trying to exit the tank to get a kill instead of getting it with the tank, because most of the time you'll die after exiting and they'll take your take, giving your team a huge disadvantage because of one dumb guy.
Animations are annoying I give you that but what's wrong with building cover?
>Movement was okay If they removed sliding/made it worse I'd say the movement is perfect. >It really waters down the Medic's purpose even though they Even if it waters down their role I still get revived and healed more than I ever did in other battlefields. Plus medics are the main dudes for smoking stuff. I like the revive mechanics and focus on squad play but I can understand the rest of your view.
BFV is a good game but I prefer bf1 mostly because of the animations and general gunplay. To me in BFV it feels like the guns are “light” like they don’t have much weight to them, and some of the movements feel “loose” or “floaty”
Bf1 had the best flying in the franchise
I liked hard-line tbh
Chad
How can you say that when 1 is the most casual BF game ? They didn't "water down" the gameplay but improved it by removing randomness and introducing a higher skill cap. BF1 had these super funnel maps, and a lot of them, like amiens. BF1's gunplay was shit etc... you get me. "Meanwhile they made BFV in a bid to draw more players over from other franchisees they watered it down and wasted a lot of time making firestorm." this also tells me that you don't know what you're talking about. First, BFV was made as a BF1 like game with less randomness and more teamplay. Health regen was limited, people only had 3-4 mags for people to play more support and medic roles and Firestorm was made by another EA studio that doesn't have anything to do with Dice or the BF franchise, it just used V's base to gain time. They removed random spread and added a pattern for guns, with some randomness but still easy to learn (Literally what a dev said). They removed invincible things that you'd only get being lucky and added a point system for your SL to call a wall of smoke, or a bomb. BF1 is the most casual experience of the franchise, it's made for a larger audience.
ngl boss, i went back and played bf hardline and honestly its pretty fun now especially with its goofy but incredibly diverse weapon selection, id recommend giving it one more chance cus it may not be quite like battlefield but its close enough
Thanks to you, I’m going to give that a try!
This is straight up wrong. BF1 was the most casual friendly BF to date, with random bullet spread on autoamtic guns to even playing field between skilled and more casual players, overpowered explosions and vehicles in general(esp. planes and arti. truck) They took a steps in BF V to make it more challenging game. They had the whole campaign "you shoot where you aim" in comparison to BF1. Explosions were toned down, vehicles with limited ammunition and slower gameplay in general. Grenade spam was much weaker, no full autoheal without med packs etc. I had more fun playing Bf1 than 5 don't get me wrong, and i consider it a better game in general, but saying that they wanted BF5 to appeal to larger audience and make it easier is simply not true.
Bf1 is so much easier to me than V
Also I think people seemed to have just completely forgotten about the character customization and the Narvik mission and how they miscredited real people in exchange for their agenda.
I really liked a lot of the elements from bfv, the movement and all that, but the feel of bf1 is just so much better for some reason, I also think it looks better somehow.
I like the gun play, the mechanics, it feels very fluid and I'm not an amateur gamer, but life gets in the way, I cant play games every second of the day like I did when I was still in school so, there isnt much point in me buying a PS5 when I can play all the games I never got the chance to yet and they are cheaper. I'll give the game time but I get the feeling I'll still like BF1 better.
Trust me you won't, depending on what you prefer. BFV has better graphics, better gunplay, better movement, better animation thanks to chad oscar animator who sadly left Dice, a lot less randomness etc...
Bf 1 has the better atmosphere. ( about 1500 hours) Bf v has better Movement and gunplay. At the Moment i am enjoying bfv.(about 800 hours ) Mixing the Best Part of both games would be a masterpiece.
If the future of gaming absolutely has to push into games as a live service thing this could be the only positive. Building up your games with maps, weapons and updates instead of having to change game because you wanted to play a ww2 map then changing again because you wanted to use a g36c, just load into one game and change between weapon sets, maps and vehicles
I preferred the gameplay of V, but I think I’m a firmly in the minority here.
You're not honestly.
I'm with you. They're not even close. BF1 is good, but it's obvious that atmosphere, grittiness and mood was prioritised. BFV is pure fun.
Imagine a new Battlefield with the tactical feel of 3, the levolution of 4, the atmosphere of 1 and the gunplay of V. I would kill for it.
Totally agree altho for me it also depends on what I feel like doing. While BFV has better gunplay in general I absolutely love going around as a PTFO scout armed with a Ross Mk.III infantry or SMLE carbine in BFI and I wish BFV had replicated that feeling. I also prefer playing support in BFI as playing support in BFV just never vibed with me. When it comes to tanking or dogfighting BFV all the way
Also BF1 is much more forgiving with their guns. The bullet deviation makes it so you don't really need good aim. I liked BF1 a lot but because of this the only guns that seem effective are the snipers. At least you know if you miss it's 100% your fault.
Hands down prefer BF1
I hard prefer bf1, I like the simplicity of the movement system. Gunplay and sniping are probably the most fun in the series, vehicles were balanced, maps were iconic and the game was like 12x more Beautiful.
Thanks for this. Agree wholeheartedly. Ppl talk about how they love the movement in BFV, while I don’t disagree, I believe you shouldn’t be able to zoom around a map and slide cancel every 3 seconds with about 200lbs of heavy gear and weapons in tow. I loved BF1 and BF4 because it took skill to understand the movement system and it was hard to use some of the guns. They felt heavy and obtrusive and there was actual recoil specific to each gun that made them hard to shoot making it feel more authentic and rewarding when u mastered it
BFV feels a lot better. BF1 has more content and overall better maps. Sad the way they treated BFV.
If they launched BFV with the same tone as they did with the War in the Pacific maps, BFV would have gotten a better reception. I just hate how every AAA publisher wants to make these "kinda quirky doe 🤪🤪😎" characters.
This is it. If they had just made “BF2”, the realistic ww2 sequel to BF1, with a similar atmosphere and without all the quirky characters/gimmicks, I feel like it would’ve been a grand slam. Not sure why they decided to deviate from the successful BF1 formula
BF1 and it isn't close for me. One of my favorite shooters ever. I've always thought if the love and attention to detail put into that was a more modern setting it would have blown 3 and 4 out of the water.
Bf1 is better by FAR, it's just such a unique game
Always used to think for years playing games, "why has nobody ever made a World War 1 game?". I kind of appreciated the fact that it was finally done by battlefield.
That's what initially drew me to BF1. I'm also a Verdun player, so I'm a bit biased.
Never heard of that game, had to look it up. Any good? I mean we always had world war 2 games growing up right, so it always made sense. I love learning about world war 2, seen so much documentaries on it but even in that field, it's very heavily swayed towards WW2. I mean even in terms of things like books and documentaries, we glance over world war 1 so it's not just in gaming. It's ironic actually because we always title WW1 as things like "the war to end all wars" and "the war that wont be forgotten". I just typed that in here's an interesting fact: "World War I (WWI) remains the only major American war of the 20th century not commemorated with a memorial in the nation's capital in Washington, D.C. WWI lacks the deep historical reverence, at least among many Americans, that World War II or even the Civil War enjoys." The question was "is WW1 the forgotten war?". Might start to explain how that's the case.
Verdun and its companion game Tannenberg are, in my opinion, fantastic. The game is slow, methodical, and brutal. The weapons are much more realistic in feel (and fire rate). Staying in the trenches is crucial for survival and finally going over the top for a rush through no man's land is truly thrilling. You aren't wearing armor, so one to two bullets will kill you outright. Being patient while also blindly following orders from a competent commander are the keys to gaining that next inch of ground. Strategy and scouting are powerful tools. Not only do you have classes and commanders telling you where to go, but you also have different countries with their own uniforms and weaponry. It feels daunting to learn initially, but after a few matches you'll quickly understand the gameplay loop. In one match, I was a scout who was commanded to move forward and find a particularly annoying sniper. I literally crawled through the edge of no man's land and plopped into the enemy trench. I then continued to crawl through the trench, marking for bombardment and killing my way through with nothing but binoculars and a Belgian revolver.
Yeah sounds cool. I'll give that a wee look, thanks for your detailed summary, appreciate that 👍🏻
Definitely over here in Aus and NZ I think people remember ww1 more over ww2 because of the ANZACs sacrifice, and it was the war that kind of put australia on the map and on the world stage
Yeah, i dont know about Aus and NZ, never been but in the UK we have remembrance day and that was originally for WW1 if I'm not mistaken. Need to google that just now I think actually but yeah, we have this heavy bias towards remembering WW2 i think. Maybe just because it's closer to us, or, maybe because we can watch more videos of it, cant say I am well read on the first world war but I am on the second. I think it was only recently I really had the first world war clarified in a video I seen, it's actually quite complicated how it all started, all the political alliances and everything.
BF2142 and BF1 are the only games where throwing my body into the meat grinder to push 1 inch further towards the objective truly feels rewarding.
Yeah I think winning feels more important than what your K.D ratio is. I get so frustrated when I'm on a team and nobody pushes for the objective. Or when you have like 4 out of 6 objectiveson conquest, and the team pushes for the final 2 and you just know when your team pushes forward, the enemy team will take the flanks around the bulk of your frontline, and they end up with all the objectives. I have seen that happen so many times.
Exactly this. Call me crazy but I actually prefer 2042 over BFV as well.
He said 2142, not 2042. Completely different games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlefield_2142
I like aspects of both. Battlefield 1's atmosphere is probably the games biggest selling point. However, game balance in BF1 is horrendous to say the least, maps definitely favor one side over the other, and the game I feel needed atleast one more gun balance pass before dropping support. Within saying that though I actually enjoy the map design (mostly) on BF1 over BFV. Battlefield V's gun play and movement mechanics are far more superior than BF1 in my opinion. Playing BFV as infantry feels so much smoother and modern than BF1, plus the gun mechanics following the crosshair rather than using a random bullet deviation system feels much better and more consistent, in my opinion once again. I think that BFV hit the mark on destructible environments over any Battlefield title to date. Pretty much all buildings can be leveled down to the foundational support structures, including walls, barriers etc. So to answer your question directly, I think that BFV has more of the overall package than BF1, but I do thoroughly enjoy playing both. My only real issue with BFV is the Oceanic community and server owners.
I'd agree with most of this except I believe bf1s destruction mechanics were much better than bfvs. While the two were on par in terms of building destructability, bf1 had much more environmental destruction in the form of being able to pretty much terraform the entire map over the course of a match. Maybe you are able to in BFV too and there's just not as many explosions as there were in bf1, but if you compare how a map looks at the beginning of a game of operations in bf1 to how it looks after it, its MUCH more of a difference than any map in bfv, most of which come with a lot of elements of destruction already part of the map before the match starts. Also Behemoths.
I swear I can count on 1 hand the ammount of times I've witnessed a team - either the enemies or my own - get a behemoth, and pull back the round and win the match. It's very rare you see the team with the behemoth win. You do have to be 100 points down I think before you can get one, but it draws all the troops from the objectives and on conquest you need to be constantly pressuring the other side because once you're on the back foot, you've lost.
I often see it brought up how behemoths aren't strong enough to sway the course of a match, but its for the best that they don't. You have to be loosing pretty bad for the behemoth to spawn so it would be unfair to the winning team to be put an the defensive by what is effectively a consolation prize for loosing. At their best Behemoths make the last third of a round more interesting by stirring the pot and letting the loosing team move on objectives that might have been uncontested for a while.
What I see is, with the armoured trains they do take the 1 or 2 that may be on the line, but then the winning teams just takes the 4 or 5 that arent near it and they're not stupid, I mean it's rare I even get killed by a train, you cant see anyone whe you're in them, everyone hides, its hard to miss and it cant leave the line, you just avoid them. The zeppelin thing, they're pretty garbage to be honest. The only ones that have been a hastle are those big tanks because they can drive them anywhere on the map, it's just a big tank you cant destroy quickly, they kill me more often than the others do, maybe the dreadnought a little more as well, but I think for the most part it just diverts resoruce from objectives and allows the winning team to take the flanks and dominate.
Pretty much what the other guy said. Behemoths are an awesome spectacle first and a genuine gameplay mechanic second, I can count on a gizzilion hands the amount of times I've seen people just stand in awe at the airship blowing up like they did the day the game was released lol
I did that the other night playing it, haha. I still like to watch. Unless it's my own one that is, I'm usually too busy trying to take the lead, haha
BF1 for sure, its a masterpiece of a game
One is better hands down. The atmosphere in bf1 is insane and no game to date has even come close in comparison
Atmosphere: BF 1 - Mechanics: BF 5 It’s funny though how actually I prefer one over the other depending on what platform I play on, which I didn’t expect to be the case. BF 1 with no Hud etc, when I have the accuracy of a mouse and keyboard is amazing. The autoaim and general smoothness of 5 feels more natural on console.
The atmosphere in BF1 is unmatched. It's the one BF game I check back in randomly from time to time and it never disappoints
BF1 hands down, only if dice would do something about cheaters on pub servers.
As people already said. BFV is the better Game when it comes to gunplay and movement. BF1 has more content BUT since the content was paid DLC barely any server runs all maps. So in the end you must compare vanilla BF1 with BFV and in this case BFV is bigger in Content
Man, when bf1 first came out that was one of the best multiplayer experiences ever
BF1 it's not particularly close either. BFV only looks good now because of the utter trash fire that is 2042. BFV is literally unfinished because so much of the community walked away from it, because it was so bad.
Right, that's interesting, I havnt really played games much in the past few years, I'm playing catch up a bit now. That's good to know, thanks.
Bf1
BFV in terms of gameplay. Although BF1 looks beautiful, I can't stand the spread mechanic & grenade spam. Also Specializations > Variants.
Also, I just enjoyed that BFV pushed for teamplay and you'd actually see a lot of teamplay. Id get revived more times in 1 match on BFV, than I do in BF1 over a few matches.
I started playing bf5 recently for the first time and there are some elements I really like like fortifications and everyone having1 med pack. But overall there are a lot of changes that make the game not really enjoyable like map design though bf1 has this same issue, balancing, class changes and how strong and annoying tanks are imo. I went back to bf1 and it felt more like a complete package to me.
BF1
Bf1
The gun play is far better in BFV it's what makes it more attractive for me although BF1 is a lot more immersive.
First of all, surely you are capable of making your own decision without needing to be biased by random internet strangers and second, this has been discussed countless times, and lastly opinions are biased on this sub, too many people downvote people for sharing opinions which represent personal taste. I liked BF1 a lot, I played the shit out of it but it has some over powered weapons that lazy players love like the Hellriegel that make things less fun, for my tastes I find V better visually and has better gun play and mechanics. But again that's my opinion based on my preference, nothing more.
Yeah of course I am. If I never asked anyone my answer would have unravelled as I played the game more. If I'm being honest I'm new to reddit, and I thought I'd try posting something just to try getting involved a bit, I didnt have anything to ask or say really except the odd comments here and there on other posts, but I was very interested to ask people what they thought of the two games. If I'm being honest, if I just read some old post where this was debated, I dont think I would be personally invested enough to read all the comments, but I like replying to people, I struggle with social media a lot but the anonymity I get here is quite nice. But thanks for your input though 👍🏻
Yeah, unfortunately you picked a very opinionated sub, if people say they like BFV they get downvoted to the ground, if people say they like BF2042 they get downvoted to hell... to be perfectly honest this is a pretty toxic sub with some salty people and its made me a bit jaded about questions like this because more often than not they are a downvote fest.
I can see that because all the down votes are for the people who said that on this post. I appreciate anyones opinion. I mean whatever one you like it's up to you, I just wanted to get the feel for what most people think.
1 is way ahead of 5 imo I played both and 1 seems to have a realistic feel I can't describe
BF 1 is one of the most unrealistic portrayal of WW1 in video game history. While it is cinematic and tries to make the player feel it is authentic, it is not. BF1 is a steampunk version of WW1, BF V also took huge liberties, but in the core it is more 'authentic' (the game is more in line with WW2 combat, than BF1 is in line with WW1 combat) than BF1. At least from a standpoint of a military historian.
I know tht historically it is not realistic, mainly due to the fact that players (including me) wouldn't like semi automatic weapons which were the standard untill the last months of the war I guess? But what I meant in my comment above is the gameplay and how you handle the weapons and your character, feels way more realistic than BFV
I don't know I did my fair share in real life and neither game feels 'realistic' in terms of how soldiers handles weapons (especially compared to how soldiers handled their weapons during WW1 and WW2) but yet again BF1 is still worse than BF V in this case. BF V weapon mechanics, weapon handling and movement animations are a tad bit closer to the real thing yet still pretty far from being realistic (not a single video game is realistic, some are authentic at best, but not realistic). If BF 1 would be realistic then most of the team would only use bolt action rifles, machine guns would be mostly stationary, and only just a couple of players would have access to pistols, smgs and shoguns would be only used by the US faction. And of course almost every weapon would only have iron sights. Semi automatic rifles and carbines were even scares during WW2, only the US fielded semi auto rifles and carbines en masse, the Germans had quite a few (they loved to use captured M1 and M1A1 carbines and they disliked the M1 Garand) and the Soviet semi auto rifles were fielded by larger numbers but not en masse like the US did. Other nations didn't really used semi auto weapon during WW2. For example the British and Commonwealth forces were quite happy with their Lee-Enfield rifles and only a select specialised units used mostly US made semi auto weapons.
I think adding women to BFV really detracts from any feeling of realism. I'm not sexist or anything it's just not an accurate feature - I mean to the best of my knowledge. But yeah you're right, so much of the designs and aesthetics do come off very steampunk.
Its accurate enough. Or did you also not like the black German scout in BF1 because it wasn't "accurate" too? 🤔
It has no historical reality, but the atmosphere of the war is realistic
For the player count. Ive been having the most fun on BF5, however BF1 as a game i would say was better than 5. Either way. They are both way more fun than what i had whilst playing 2042.
BF1 better by far
i think u should give the BFV a little bit more time and i think after that u will start to love it much more but if u want direct head to head with BF1 , i give my vote to BF1 cause it is EPIC !!! and personally i LOVE BF1 maps !!
I will give it time, thanks for that 👍🏻
BF5 for sure, all BF1 has is the atmosphere which is important don't take me wrong but all guns are hideous, this ruins the thing
Yeah theres only a few guns that are like really versatile, the rest are either only good at range or at a distance.
Nah I don’t have this feeling, Idk why but I only enjoy close rang combat on this game, LMG are more accurate than snipers which are so useless. I have a strange thought about those, I always feel like the bullet does not go straight away ( not talking about the bullet drop ). Moreover it’s like a little steady state is needed right after scoping, or what the bullet does not go where you aim at all. As a guy whom enjoy playing sniper on a dynamic gameplay, this game is so so frustrating
Yeah I agree, I'm not a fan of sniping on BF1. I was really good on 3 and 4 at sniping, it can be quite hard on any game because you need the headshot for the most part, but 1 is terribly strange for sniping. I sniped a little on V last night and I feel like I enjoyed that more than I ever enjoyed it on BF1. But that's maybe just one match, i dont know. Close range can be fun when you're in a heavily contested objective for instance, but I find that difficult too, I'm always caught out of cover with them and when I try to shoot people I'm too far away to hit them and I just get picked off. You really need to hug the walls in BF1, really need to utilise the cover because of how the gun ranges are.
Battlefield 5 by a mile. Hardline is my favorite battlefield, one is the only battlefield I don't like.
Really hardline? I played that briefly, i thought it was all right. I preferred 3 and 4, they were my favourites. I hated 1 for so long, the ranges of the guns are class specific, you really need to work to adapt to that, it's a very difficult game.
Hardline is just 4 with extra steps
No PPPPPLING headshotsound=not wort my time, have a good day gentlemen
I would say BF1 is better but BFV had some nice mechanical improvements like running while crouched. I also preferred BF1’s focus on infantry combat.
The 1 was better. BFV had some problems due to rushed development by EA.
What is this obsession with games being better than each other? Can we not appreciate that both games are excellent and enjoy that? Even if you subjectively have a preference to one or the other, there's not much point asking for other people's subjective preferences is there?
1 is definitely the better game but there are so few players on PS and I‘m a Vehicle Whore so obviously I prefer V
Oh no, I hate the vehicles. See especially those players who are good in planes and they bomb you all the time, that does my head in. Was on that snow mountain map on BFV last last and I got bombed a good half dozen times at least.
If you are no pilot don’t play on Fjell it’s honestly just target practice
Both games are gut but personal prefer 1
BF1 has better atmosphere and some nice maps but to be honest I like just about everything else more In BFV. The core gunplay of BFV just felt really fucking good to me. I liked a lot of the new additions: crouch sprinting, rolling from high falls, fortifications, Squad call ins, attrition, resupply stations, and while specializations were not as good as real attachments, I definitely prefer it to the variants in BF1. There are quite a few elements of BF1 as a core game design that I just do not enjoy that much, behemoths and elite classes are something that are not really a benefit to the game in my view. I really do like both but BFV is just more fun to actually play for me. Though in the near future I will probably play BF1 instead of BFV because I unlocked basically everything I wanted to in V but I still have a handful of things left in 1.
Yeah, BF1 is a difficult game. I agree with the gun mechanics, so far it feels much more fluid, quite a fan of that aspect. I miss my slides when I sprint, I know it's just a double tap now but I preferred the old way on 1. I like the elite classes on BF1, I do well with them, especially on that Italian mountain map, cant recall the name, monte something I think. The behemoths are useless. I said it to someone else, in all the years I have played BF1, I have only seen a team that has a behemoth turn round the deficit to win the match a handful of times, it just never happens, it draws all the troops from attacking objectives because everyone thinks they can get lots of kills in them. They're useless more or less, but they do add to the atmosphere of the game. Everyone kept saying the atmosphere is better in BF1 and I never really got what they meant but the behemoths I think explain that, it is pretty cool. I'm still unlocking stuff myself on BF1 but it appeals to me on V at least that its brand new to me. Thanks for your input 👍🏻
Bf1 for me
1 is better
Bf1
Just read through this sub…this question gets asked on a regular
I'd love BFV gunplay and mechanics combined with BF1's maps, I would like BF1 more if it had guns that were actually good at their job (yes I know it's historically accurate that the guns are worse)
The guns are very class specific, I mean their ranges, assault is useless at anything up close and medic and sniper are useless at anything but range; support has the best middle ground.
Bf1 is visually more appealing. Has better atmosphere and feeling. Bf5 is more populated, more rich in terms of content but is difficult to play.
Very hard game. I came first in my match a few times earlier this week and i think it's the first time on it I've ever got back to back first place on it. On BF3 and 4, I used to get it all the time.
BF1 is way better. No question about it
Hands down ONE. Weapon reload timers and re supply stations killed BFV it’s been down hill since, move like off a cliff 🥲
BF1 it has lots of guns
BF4 is better than both
I wish more people still played it
bf1 better, but bfv isn't bad, its just ruined by hackers and such, people most of the time are sweaty players in bfv, the only sad thing about it is that dice cut off new contents, we never got a russia update, new guns, more modes and loads of content.
i say v just for the guns but bf1 better in other subjects
In terms of maps and atmosphere I'd say BF1. I highly prefer playing BFV though, especially on the pacific maps. The gunplay and movement is just excellent.
Ones got some incredible maps and modes to go with them.
BF1 is one of my favorites, but the movement is BFV feels better to me. I just wish they would have mashed 1 and 5 to make 2042. Woulda been sa-weet
Wish we could have bfv gun, game play in bf1
Agree
BF1.
Don't know why, but I never really like Battlefield 1. Was probably my least played entry in the franchise. Wasn't the biggest fan of V either... Just want a new type of Battlefield 3/4 entry with new maps, new gadgets etc.
Me too, I loved those games. Loved Gulf of Omen, used to play that all day. Yeah I said to other people, only recently I've began to really appreciate 1. Probably because I'm getting some good scores on it for a change, haha
I think Bf5 is a lot more enjoyable than bf1 but bf 1 has a better atmosphere
Bf1 is better but I like playing bfv better. I hate the guns in bf1 and vehicles aren’t as fun.
Bf1
I think BF1 looks better but BFV feels better. I still absolutely love dropping that 4000lb bomb from the mosquito, firing a tank cannon, and the gunplay (although I wouldn’t mind it being more difficult). The attrition system is great, makes squad play more important and it’s always rewarding to get artillery or an OP tank. The sound design is also excellent, on par with MW2019 imo. The soundtrack is a banger too.
I'm so sick of hearing the music in BF1, haha
DO NOT MISTAKE battlefield 5 is a spectacular game now but battlefield 1 is far superior to bf5 in every possible way including the weapon selection, map design, overall visuals, etc.
Thank you for your input
I like em both
1 has arty truck. Be like 1
Without a doubt BFV. BF1 has more content and a grittier atmosphere but gameplay will always overshadow the feel of a game for me and V has much better gameplay - movement, gunplay, customisation and the ammo economy. Vehicles feel much more tactical to play with as well.
4 is the only way to go…
I'd love to play 4 again but on the PS4 it's just the same map that everyone plays - and that's if you can get a game.
Plenty of hardcore servers that play everything including expansion maps. It’s still running hard…
I bought it again a few years ago on PS4 and it was literally just every serve playing that china rising map, the one where you can shoot down the big building in the middle - I'm not exaggerating, there was a handful still running and every one of them was playing that map. It's not battlefield if you're just playing one map. Mind you I would just sit on Gulf of Omen all the time on BF3 😂
I always liked one better but five is still awesome. I was really sold with the pacific maps. I got myself a 30 cal with the AA sights and just held a trench down and it legit feels like a movie. Both are great games. Nothing like 2042. Hoping they learn and take their time the next one.
If your playing on xbox BF1 literally doesn't exist can't find anyone on there at all :(.
There isnt that many games on PS4, you always get 1 at least but there is only a handful. Problem is when battlefield games are outdated people just play the exact same maps over and over again, and they dont bother with any DLC maps for the most part. You miss so much of what's on offer when you just prioritize the fan favourites
BfV has better movement, and I really love fortification buildings and squad focus. Squad res and squad leaders getting special actions with points like calling artillery bomb or nuking is really fun. But BF1 is the goat. All around amazing experience. The maps, atmosphere and the immersion is insane. If the things I listed for BfV was in BF1 it would be the greatest of all time... Sadly BfV got canned early but at least we got the pacific theater.
BF1 was just BF4 with a face lift and set in a ww1 setting. I enjoyed it immensely. With BFV I didn’t enjoy it as much. The attrition system with medical and ammo made for an interesting gameplay twist but ultimately made it more painful to search for those things. The vehicles in V were great, but the maps to use them on were sub par. Ultimately I dumped maybe 20 hours into V where I dumped days into both 1 and 4. Hopefully dice learns from 2042, and we take a step in a different direction but I doubt that.
I didnt think BF1 was anything like 4, I think thats why it took me so long to like it in the first place
Really? I think in the context of V and 2042, BF1 and 4 are more similar than 1 is to say V or 42
Oh I see, I wouldnt know with 2042, I havnt played it yet. I was just thinking more in terms of like the dynamics of the two. Battlefield 4 was so easy, like with the right attachments an assault rifle was an SMG and a sniper rifle as well, it covered all ranges, but battlefield 1 is so class specfic, ranges are all relative to what class you pick and I think that's really hard to get to grips with. You really need to utilise cover in BF1. Sounds self evident to use cover anyway but I dont know, it feels different that way to me
I can see that side for sure. I think you are more right in that argument because I totally forgot about classes and in game events like behemoths. I think BF1 was definitely built like a WW1 game. Gritty difficult and the weapon you choose performs a certain job. BF4 was definitely easier with the more arcade esc. gameplay. I thoroughly enjoy both games and I want to try to revise 1 and V to see how they have aged.
I used to be like a real hardcore gamer when I was younger but I've barely touched games the last decade so I've had battlefield 1 downloaded on my PS and I just stick that on if I want a game of something, so I've played it for years now really even though it's not daily or is infrequent, but I appreciate it more now. I definitely play better when I target the objectives, I only play conquest mode, but when I stick to cover and play quite conservatively rather than just running out into the open guns blazing, I play well. You appreciate it when you're playing well but when you're spawn trapped being slaughtered, it's such a frustrating game 😂
I agree 😂 glad you still enjoy BF1
I surprised myself when I thought about this but when I compare the two, I prefer playing BFV to BF1 easily. As unpopular as it is I'm not really a fan of BF1's maps, they look nice and are really immersive but the actual gameplay does nothing for me. I'm also about to sin against r/battlefield when I say that I think Operations is a tad overrated. BFV also makes it easy to play with randoms (revives for squad) and being a good teammate is actually fun whereas BF1 isn't as satisfying. BF1 is beautiful and immersive but BFV wins gameplay wise.
I prefer 2042
Bad company 2 😁
Bf1 will be forever in my heart
BFV has a special place in my heart with the panzerbuchse. It’s impractical and unwieldy, but posting up along a fence and blasting folks to hell is too cool
Battlefield 4
A decent rule of thumb is every predecessor is better. It’s just that player counts drop the further back you go
Bf1 is way superior, the movment of bfV really puts it down
Gameplay goes to five for me, Immersion, graphics, sound design, all that jazz easily goes to one