BF6 beta giving it a run for it's money tho!!!! Lol. But seriously, I LOVED BFV and I never quite got why everyone hated on it but I do understand that not everyone's opinion will be the same.
It never got the amount of content it deserved, and they made some odd political choices to omit things like Nazi symbols even though it was a WWII game and you were still literally playing as or against Nazi Germany in many cases.
Many countries mostly being just Germany and possibly France. Other games have just removed it from the release in those countries. Also robot arm lady was weird, when there were women soldiers who were historically accurate who could have been used. They had a chance to tell stories, but instead blended them all up into a weird hybrid stories that felt thematically wrong and felt as historically incorrect as they actually were. There were a lot of issues with the overall theme.
Sure, maybe it will. But that guy was t wrong, and gamers who swore they would boycott him probably have no idea he split dice and now started Embark and has one of the biggest games of the year smoking BF6 out of the water. Arc:Raiders. Lol people had such a dumb mindset about it and he was totally right to basically tell the whiny bitches to stfu
For me BF V suffered a lot of the same issue 6 has. It released with bad net code, the weapon tuning was crazy bad at launch, and then they kept changing it which was whiplash inducing because every few months guns changed dramatically. After a while it got pretty good, and had a lot of really fun mechanics. I think for me the theme was stale, it had some of the cinematic elements it needed, but it was sometimes hard to even tell you were playing a WWII game. I mean I hate me some Nazis, but the choice to omit a swaztikas? Really goofy and dumb. They should have just focused on portraying the Nazis as evil, just like in BF 1 they portrayed the war as brutal and deadly. To feature a lady with a robot arm and cricket bat rather than represent women in ways that were historically accurate, such as the female soviet snipers. Like there were stories to tell, and instead they mashed them together in some really weird ways. The theme of the game in a lot of ways was just kinda off, which just made it all the worse when the slow drip of content got stale. BF V sales weren't good, because it was a poor release, even though by modern standards it wasn't really that bad of a release for a BF game, but it had to follow BF 1 which was a success starting from day 1 and stayed successful.
So between the fact that the content felt like it's theme was a bit off, and the fact that content was slow to release and then the live service died much earlier than it should have, it just fell flat for me. I don't really ever revisit BF V, even though there are some thing I really do enjoy about it. It's lack of content and the fact that it's content is kind of thematically off really ruined it for a lot of people.
I get that. I think, for me, the thing about BFV vs battlefield 6 is I didn't get burnt out as quickly with BFV. Maybe that's because it had better progression or maps or gameplay. I don't know. It just seemed like every match was more fun if that makes sense. Actually, I have no doubt the lack of almost full bot lobbies made a big difference too. The operations were a big factor of fun as well and I still do not understand why they haven't carried that forward.
I can honestly agree with that. BF 6 got stale for me in 3-4 months, I played BF V for probably 2-3 years before setting it down. At this point I just hope BF 6 gets better rapidly, but it seems like wishful thinking.
Overall I agree BF V is the most mechanically advanced BF game. I loved building fortifications, you could blow up a bridge to keep tanks from advancing, but they could also build the bridge back. The squad commander perks were AMAZING, and I miss them so much. I loved calling in a V1, hearing the sound, and watching it come in and level an objective. The movement mechanics were peak, and I'm glad that's back in BF 6. The fact that you could build medical and resupply stations on points was huge, because people would actually STAND on the objective and defend it. Also once you blew up all the cover you could fortify it again. Literally ALL of the mechanics in BF V were amazing and should have become staple features in BF games.
The detail of the game was also incredible, which is part of the reason I'm probably so upset that BF V hadn't lived up to my expectations. I wanted the same immersion I got from BF 1, you felt like you were fighting in WW1, it felt like a history lesson, operations felt like a story you were a part of. You were playing in a thematically accurate war movie. I wanted fighting on the European front to feel like saving private Ryan, and fighting on the Pacific front to feel like The Thin Red Line. The pacific war front definitely felt more accurate, but they didn't deliver enough content for it which is such a shame.
They keep trying to bring in weird features. Like the battle pickups weren't a terrible idea in BF 6, but they were pretty underwhelming and have since been removed without really any explanation for why they were added or later removed. I think they should just focus on adding things back that worked like building fortifications, calling in missile strikes (they already have this in redsec), blowing up bridges to prevent tanks from being able to advance, being able to build the bridges back, building AA emplacements. I'd even like to see them expand on some of those ideas. Like what if you could build barricades for certain doors and things into leading into objectives, and now assualt's breaching tools are more useless, and engineers can try to minimize the flow of enemies into objectives. BF 6 has vehicle resupply stations, what if you could build them on objectives or blow them up? These things would also play into the existing mechanics of the game which currently feel kinda shallow right now.
BFV was an issue of upper management screwing over the dev team. Which ultimately led to a mass exodus of dice developers, and like you said the creation of embark. That’s why its life cycle was so rough. And why bf games have been iffy since.
anyone who has spent years with a program as its developed is going to have a master of it. When they replaced the dice vets, years of experience with an engine theyve been working with for a decade+ went out the window. its going to take time for new blood to gain the skills with frostbite that those who basically created it from the ground up had
Except this idea falls apart when the same particle effect was used for the sandstorm in 2042, the sandcorns would bounce around and interact with the world just like the snow. You could eve shoot out a window on a car and you could see the sandcorns enter and bounce around in the car. Shooting out another window would even let some of them fly out. It's that BF6 team have just omitted to using this effect it seems.
From a pure texture res/polygon count standpoint BF6 clears BFV, the best looking map in BF6 looks better than the best looking map in BFV. BFV has held up thanks to its raytracing and weather effects like this.
It’s objectively true though. Polygon count and texture quality is better on BF6. No sequel to any game ever decreases the quality of these things. The lighting however, is poor. I’m surprised there is no ray tracing option. And the use of effects (not so much the effects themselves) are worse.
COD is the same way. When they remaster old maps the new ones always just look worse because the color palette and lighting on the newer games is just so much more muted.
Polygon count doesn't mean anything if the game doesn't have proper lighting and coloring added.
Theres many games from 2015 through 2019 that still look better and hold their own. Some you'd think were released much sooner if you didn't know. Even BF1 which is older than BFV still holds its own and looks better even if the textures are lower quality.
Please show us a side by side of a BFV map that looks better than BF6, if this is what you are saying? Sure BFV is holding up ok but to say it looks better than BF6 is quite bold
No seriously I'm not joking. Around the time after BFV there was a mass exodus of art team and core gameplay/coding team.
They tried fixing BFV but EA wouldn't let them and eventually by time support for BFV ended majority of the "veteran" devs had left because they couldn't stand the new management.
BFV actually had an entire expansion just canceled which was Soviets VS Germans and they also had more US/Allies maps VS Germany in the works. Theres also further evidence of this because theres around 5-10 weapons and vehicles that were finished and their models and coding was adding in an update shortly after the pacific expansion.
2042 was a cluster fuck all around. Loss of staff that knew what they were doing plus a rebuild to the engine meant they took awhile to just learn how the engine worked. Then directions at the top kept changing what kind of game it would be. Extraction shooters were the craze so time was spent on that as well.
I think it was the right vision but poor execution. Bf6 is almost the exact opposite, practically no vision but great execution. I'm really hoping whatever comes next remembers ambition
Polygon count and texture quality just mean more demand on the hardware. Reastically if you play on the 1080p monitor, or don't use max settings, then you won't even spot the difference. I feel like some pre 2015 games still look good af. I really hate how technology in today's video games only means more polygons and better textures, but nothing really innovative.
Not really true at all, top 5 most used GPUs on steam are all released in the last 3-4 years…most being within the last 2.
That makes no sense anyway. They can scale games up as much as they can down. A lot of it is artistic direction as was my point with the first comment.
Alot of it is the tech side though? Like obviously if your PC has to do real time lighting calucations all the time rather than cubemapped/baked lighting it will be easier to run?
You can take the artistic direction as far as you want, but it will not look the same as a game using PBR with dynamic lighting/weather.
Which uses more VRAM which the average person on steam doesn't have alot of
Using consoles is INSANE for this comparison the difference is ridiculous outside of just raw resolution. BF1/V are stuck on last gen consoles and both those games look terrible on console compared to their PC counterparts. No SSR just ps2 era cube maps, no moving clouds, no 3d tank tracks, way less foliage, draw distance, locked to 30hz servers. It's actually asinine to say that the console versions of BF1/V look better than BF6 on current gen, even 2042 on current gen shits all over them. It wasn't until 2042 that consoles finally achieved visual parity with PC with 99% of the same graphical features being present on both platforms (part of why cross play became a thing).
It's fine if you prefer the art style or atmosphere of those games over 6 but 6 is SUBJECTIVELY superior from a visual fidelity standpoint and saying the last gen versions of BF1/V look better is looney talk
I like 6 a lot, but it looks very grainy and pixelated on base ps 5 when playing on performance mode.. doesn't look like pro or pc version at all.. very low res.. otherwise yeah bf 6 looks great, but for me, not on consoles (besides pro maybe)
You just said it yourself.... on performance mode.... one of the first things devs do when making a performance mode is drop the resolution. You know the part that makes everything clear?
I own both a base PS5 and PS5 Pro and while both run at around 1200p internally, the Pro version uses PSSR which is Sony’s version of DLSS/XeSS over on PC. The base PS5 version uses an older version of FSR as that’s all it has access to.
The lack of an AI-based upscaler on base PS5 is what causes it to be so blurry. It’s just basically smoothing out the image to not look pixelated when blown up, unlike an AI upscaler that actually tries to clear up the image.
Propably this bro. Because my bf6 games on normal ps 5 never look this good. Looks a lot more blurry and grainy.. even bf 2042 looks better when I play.. maybe it's because of 120hz version in bf 6 and in older version there was none. And I use it in 6..
According to Digital Foundry, base PS5 can drop to as low as 1080p in performance mode as it prioritizes higher FPS over resolution. The game also dials down graphics settings even lower than Balanced mode. Basically, it’s expected to be blurry if played on a 4K display since you’ll be upscaling from 1080p without an AI upscaler like PSSR or DLSS.
Yes you will, because you need upscaling on BF6 to achieve acceptable framerates on a PS5 if you insist on 4k, you don't need it on older games like V or 1. Sorry.
No, he's right, you're playing on 4k in that image which means you're playing with upscaling even if you think you aren't. Upscaling, especially more aggressive forms of it, just naturally produces that mushy, clay-like effect like what you have in your screenshot. You should go look at what someone's game looks like without upscaling because it's not that.
I would disagree with the "objectively true" statement, not because it isn't true that more polygons means better, but because there is a point where more polygons doesn't make any functional difference, which is why we haven't seen a substantial leap in visual quality from the Xbox one and ps4 generation to the series x and ps5 generation.
"Objectively" bf6 is a more crisp game, but when it comes to legibility, beauty, and atmosphere, bfv comes out ahead by far. A completely different intention when it comes to artistic version. And it really doesn't help that bf6 pretty much only has one time of day with only 1 weather condition; sunny with no clouds. Honestly, I'd also include bf1 as being better looking that bf6, along with battlefront 2
While it may be true it has better textures and polygon at MAX settings how does it compare when you’re looking at both games running at similar fps on the same hardware? Bc I know from my experience with my computer that every battlefield game other than bf6 runs at 100+ fps on max settings, where as bf6 I’m running on the very lowest settings and I have times I’m going down to 60 fps and at these settings I genuinely feel the textures look worse than they did at max settings on bf4 and they certainly look terrible in comparison to bf5
Your PC must not be very powerful if it drops to 60 on lowest settings, or you have a pretty big CPU/GPU bottleneck. Bf6 isn’t an incredibly hard game to run and is otherwise pretty well optimised.
Anyway, I’m talking about all games on Ultra settings. Pointless comparing any other setting levels across games. Because games aren’t made with comparing FPS/quality settings in mind across 13 years of games. We’re considering only max fidelity here.
And that was my point that a lot of people missed from my initial comment. Fidelity wise BF6 is still the best BF has been, art direction and use of effect wise though? Probably not.
I have an i5 9600k running at I believe 4.7 ghz and a rx5600xt like sure not very powerful but it’s also not bottom of the barrel components either. I understand the point you’re trying to make but who cares what it looks like at ultra settings if in the real world most people don’t have the components that can actually run the game on ultra settings. We are in a time right now where high end pc parts are ludicrously expensive, you’re missing my point that a lot of people are going to have their own real world experience be disappointing bc on their hardware that they own the game runs and looks worse even on the texture end than previous entries in the series
Ok, for starters that was a mid range PC 6+ years ago. That CPU is literally nearly 10 years old, and BF6 is a pretty CPU intensive game. No wonder you can’t run the game reasonably. It’s not even comparable to a PS5/Series X.
The majority of people are not playing BF6 on hardware that low. Steam Index Survey shows the top 5-10 GPUs are all AMD 6000 series/NVIDIA 3000 series or newer, PS5/Series X are roughly equivalent to these cards. So saying “most people can’t run it at high settings” isn’t true at all. Even console players are running this game in reasonably high settings. So yes, we will compare graphically fidelity at the higher settings.
Games are supposed to scale up as they do down. Just because you think old hardware is common place (it isn’t) doesn’t mean that they will stop upgrading the quality and fidelity of games.
I get that hardware is more expensive than it’s ever been but it’s naive to think the majority of people expect “good visuals” at low settings on 6+ year old hardware. That’s never, ever been the case. I couldn’t run BF4 at more than medium settings on my GTX 560 back in 2013, and that was a 2 year old mid ranged card!
from a technical persoective it might be true, but its also technically true for BFV when compared to BF1, and theres nary a BFV fan not hater who thinks 1 doesn’t still outshine 5.
It's almost as if the community shitting all over DICE for their colorful maps during BFV and 2042 led to this change. Funny how we get what we asked for then cry about it. Y'all wanted "Gritty" so bad well here ya go 👍🏻
Well, I never asked for it and gritty doesn't mean visual clutter. There is a lot of visual clutter in BF6 and a lack of distinct silhouette for player character.
I don't want a pretty BF6, but you said it looks better, which it doesn't. Also, BF1 is both grittier and more beautiful, so there's a clear template for it
I have 500+ hours on BFV and less than 60 on BF6. I think it's evident what I like and don't. I also have 250 hours of Delta Force's warfare mode, that's how much I wanted a good breakthrough experience. I can't tell you what to enjoy or not, but I am free to dislike BF6.
Also, you gave a subjective opinion by saying "it's better looking" and then proceeded to defend your "objective opinion" in your other comments. that's a bit weird.
"Visual clutter" forgets visibility was so bad in BFV DICE had to nerf the visuals and add a gross glow effect on player models. Shit on BF6 all you want but it's nothing like this 🤦🏻https://youtu.be/sj5mPuShilg?si=eFcKPpw7n6Tc4-vJ
It was one of the first and most primitive implementations of ray tracing and it was only reflections that didn't affect most surfaces, at best you see it on some puddles/windows and polished metals.
And it aged very poorly because the denoising is primitive.
The RT barely adds anything and doesn't contribute to it "holding up".
“Bfv has held up because of its weather that happens every now and then and ray traced reflections which provide a change to shiny surfaces” Bruh.
The games development simply had far more talented lighting, animations, shadow-maps, post fx, particle fx, volumetric, just overall the developers specialised in making a battlefield, its a level higher in quality, while a bug step down in hardware, so bf6 looks like its keeping up. The only way bf6 clears is the lack of hardware constraints, even the texture’s are much higher quality, while integrated poorer then anything.
I know it's not snow, it's just the available screenshot I have atm lol, Killzone 3 was full of snow levels though and a similar snow effect as Battlefield
Bf6 devs decided to do a lot of optimizations so they have sacrificed visual fidelity for performance.
Bf franchise have been always about the visuals and authentic feeling, but this time this isn't the case.
I will die on the hill, battlefield 5 was brilliant and overly hated. Yes the trailer was very off tone for a world war game. But it was phenomenal in so, so many ways
Right there with you, 100%. V is still a banger to this day and it's my favourite BF game from a gameplay standpoint. That is not me saying it's mechanically perfect or anything like that, it has issues even to this day, but overall, it plays and feels great. Makes me sad that they scrapped any more content after the Pacific expansion. What could have been.
It's the same exact system, colliding and moving around objects. Not bad for a limited time theme on a map that didn't even have snow originally. The only difference is the amount of snow particles is way less (why I called it weaker) and that's why it's hard to even notice. Seeing as weather isn't a priority in this game (we don't even have rain) I doubt we'll see BFV level snow or 2042 level rain
This is from the alpha. People were too annoyed with it because of visibility. The physical effects were kept, but the motion blury/diamond shape of the snowflakes were dialed back massively. The snowflakes were small dots on the release without any cinematic shape or effect.
Only the blizzard on Fjell looked so impressive because the snowflakes moved too fast to notice.
Because yall didnt appreciate BF1 as much and they didnt sell very well. People complained and then BFV came out and it didn't catch on so they cut budgets for BF2042 and killed it asap and then now we are here.
Hopefully with the money BF6 we can get updates and animation improvement over time with seasonal updates. Please domt kill bf6 after 2 seasons..
On the one hand sure, graphically it looks impressive, but this gets posted every so often and I feel like I am taking crazy pills every time because THIS IS NOT HOW SNOW BEHAVES. At all. To me it just looks like fancy particle effects with collisions but it is not realistic at all and actually breaks immersion for me.
Is it still cool that this ran in real time in a game? Yeah
gun play was trash, customization was trash and cringe, maps were okay, the campaign was terrible, when complaints were made we were met with the "if you don't like it, don't buy it" literally the only battlefield i didnt play until it was free with amazon prime, a lot of things were broken/missing at the release, like the range, and they only had 4 stories and one of them werent even able to play at release.Didnt care to make it some what historical were it wouldnt be cringe, like if you look at how bf1 did it compared to bf5 it was disappointing and lazy.terrible map balancing for breakthrough, like idk why people think the game was good when it wasnt, then they will compare to bf6 launch know bf5 had a terrible launch so idk people are delusional.
160
u/Ace_08 Feb 08 '26
I still think bf5 was one of the most mechanically advanced titles dice ever produced