Global Conflict

I am relatively new compared to all you old timers, and I haven't played with GC on BF3; so maybe this will give you another viewpoint.

I honestly do not care what BF3 was like. From what I have read it was fun, but so is BF4. You say it is so bug ridden and unplayable, yet no one I have played with has had a major bug affect them, their gameplay or their GC Experience. To me, BF4 is uncomparably fun, I gave BF3 a go, of course, and it just doesn't have the same sort of, well anything to it. It seems like it's trying to be too serious, where as BF4 is accused of trying to be too realistic, it just doesn't feel as serious.

Moving back to BF3 would be a terrible inconvenience to two groups of people. The first being people like me, I am terrabad at BF3; I played quite a few hours, but I never really got into it, and I know many of the people who joined during BF4 times, will feel the same. That's if they even have the game, why would they buy backwards into the franchise, I know it is cheap(ish) but there is no point, people who had BF3 would have brought BF4 to see what the game is like, not just to play with GC. The other group of people would be the guys like Wi1D_K4rD, the guys who now detest BF3. For the majority of us, BF4 works. It is about 5 or 6 people who hate BF4, but also the same amount of people who hate BF3, we shouldn't make any accommodation for the minority, especially when the majority of us actually *gasp* like BF4.

In addition to this, from what I have read GC has always just gone onto the next game (with the exception of 2142, I believe), and it has seemed to work pretty well. I understand the BF4 launch was botched, but the Executives made the decision to wait and see how it goes (exactly like they are doing now), and we are having fun as a community has always. There will have always been people who didn't like the next game, and undoubtedly people who will have left because of it, and they probably didn't try to cause an almost revolution in the community. I trust the people above us, I don't know about the rest of you, but I really do. They clearly have been chosen because they are a key and amazing part of the community, and the people who chose them were the people who have made all the decisions in the past to make this community what it is today. And therefore I believe in them to make the decisions of the future.

As Razy said, it is down to preference, and it appears, that although the community loved BF3 for many campaigns, it seems to love BF4 to, despite is small, and largely unnoticeable hiccups. But also, as Razy mentioned, fun is THE key aspect of this community and it should be treated as such, if things stop being fun, then people won't play. But hey, people are playing, maybe, just maybe, people find both games fun. Maybe a poll wouldn't be a bad idea?

But in general this thread is annoying, it is all demands and statements. Not really any suggestions that help further this discussion or help the Execs out in whatever decisions they may or may not be making regarding this issue. And I know for a fact, that although you, Necro, feel that you have no power, that the Executives will be, and have been looking at this thread. Having be part of leadership in other communities I know that even the smallest talk of the smallest matter at the bottom of the food chain can set some of the people in power nattering and making plans for this and that, contingencies for crazy events and agendas for imaginary meetings. But my point is, the Execs will have seen this, and they will be doing something:-

What they are doing or plan to do, is beyond me and probably beyond most people, but whether they decide to say 'NO!' and not give us a chance to voice our opinion, or whether they said 'Meh, answer this survey' and we poll for weeks on what to do, or whether they say 'HELL YEA!' and we go straight for our 'BF3: C7', we will still be the same community with the same people. If people decide to leave because of this, then shame on them, this community isn't about which game we play, its about how we play the game.

Well, that was longer than expected.

I think we should play operation metro in bf4 as compromise

I don't know guys.Comments like ''Armour is OP in BF3'' and ''M16A3 headshot machine'' ,for me, are just ridiculous excuses and are completely wrong.I used to be a competitive player,where everyone was using M16A3,and I have never ever experienced any problems with outplaying them (I still play with AEK because Russian tech is OP).

I don't like Bf4 because of the engine,because of its ugly graphics, no recoil, stupid movement and weak vehicles. It's just too easy and boring.

I have a question for the Senate.Are we going to switch games when Battlefield:Hardline comes out? A game,which has nothing to do with Battlefield,world military conflicts in general.Thank you in advance for your answer.

Róka wrote:Not really, we're just saying that with a new patch and DLC coming out it's still worth trying

I heard that before...

Some people make it sound so terrible, as if that happens we are going to play BF3 'til the end of time.
I guarantee we won't be playing BF3 for more then one campaign. Why? cus people tend to go forward with the new technology, me included. However, now is the exact time to try out BF3 for the last time. After a BF3 campaign we'll have BF4 campaign with the upcoming patch and hopefully the next CTE initiative as well.
And just in case you haven't noticed, that "awww CTE is great, its going to change everything! its almost out!" has been in production for more then 3 months! more then this campaign lasted.


BF3 reddit rush lasted for 5 campaigns including changing game. The BF4 reddit rush barely lasted for 2.
One sided campaigns? Drama? as if we haven't had it in all other campaigns. Whatever the reason, the drop rate was never that fast before.

lakefisher, good post.

Battlefield 4 is more of a mod to BF3 and vice versa than it is a new game. We used to play vanilla + mods when mods weren't payable DLCs and one suggestion is to play both in the same way we now play vanilla + DLCs.
There are indeed some really good maps in BF3, mostly the ones taken from BF2.
But if BF3 still has the no gun glitch, which imo is the most annoying bug in the history of Battlefield, then BF3 should be a no no.

Read that a new (major?) patch for BF4 is emerging. It would make sense to wait for that and see how it influences the game.
But relying and waiting for further patches and seeing how it plays out indefinitely is futile in Battlefield as 12 years of its history tells us.

Fisherman; personally I don't support BF: Hardline as it deviates too much from the original game that made GC but thats really up to the community. If the majority wants to play it then why not. GC is a template, you shape its future.

For what it's worth, this is our third campaign now which upon conclusion has left us saying "let's see if this patch that's just around the corner makes the game fun."

To me, the game is still often frustrating to play, both in GC and in pubs. I would prefer to play something else in GC's next campaign. I would be very disappointed if we don't get an official poll to ascertain the opinion of the community as a whole.

The memory of past experiences usually tends focus on the positive things. As a result, we usually glorify the past too much.

There were enough complains about BF3 back in the days. Remember the last BF3 campaign were everyone was so fraking tired of all maps? While doing a short excursion into BF3 in pubs will give u a good feeling, I expect people getting really tired of BF3 again after 2-3 BD/scrims.

Some of the BF4 design decisions are opposing what BF3 made fun for people. Be it in the range of lock-on weapons, air force or gun play. But as mentioned that is all personal preference.

As a last point, I dont think making a BF3 campaign will lead to any influx of new GC players.

As much as I want my AN94 back, no. As infuriating as BF4 is, the gun glitch vastly outweighs any benefits that BF3 has over BF4. there is nothing to say this little venice unleashed thing did anything to fix an inherent engine problem with server-client synchronization (which is in my mind the only logical explanation for the gun glitch), and since there's been no work done on BF3 since the last DLC released on it we know it's still there.

Realize what you are saying. Basically you are hanging all of your hopes on this venice unleashed thing, which is nothing more than a visual tint change mixed with a hacked together server setting, that it not only cured gun glitch but will also get us to have decent people showing up. How is that any different than the BF4 people wanting the next patch to do the same thing to BF4? And yet you're here telling us "oh how many times have we heard that about BF4 now." You're doing the same thing.

It's been a year since we last experienced the plague of the gun glitch. And in my mind unless there was literally poo being flung into my face from my monitor because of BF4, there is very very little it could do to make me want to play BF3 again for a whole campaign. A fun weekend, maybe, although I doubt I'd even install it. But definitely not a whole campaign. BF4 has tons of issues, but there is no part of BF4 that is as game breaking as being forced to leave the server (possibly half your team at a time) and reboot and pray it doesn't happen again.

I preffer gunglitch to bf4.

You can tell by the fact that I actually played in bf3 campaigns.

I just dont enjoy playing bf4 at all, I would even prefer other shooters like arma. Or sims

Can you guarantee that you'll actually stick around for a BF3 camp? I don't mean to offend but from the middle onwards of the BF3 days you were barely here.

Gwynzer wrote:Can you guarantee that you'll actually stick around for a BF3 camp? I don't mean to offend but from the middle onwards of the BF3 days you were barely here.

I had almost 100% attendance for all of my bf3 campaigns, including the later ones. Only reason I missed some of the battledays in the very last campaign was the fact that I started basic training

I like BF3 better than BF4 but I think you guys are forgetting how freaking awful the gun glitch was. Towards the end we were basically dropping a third or more of the rounds in a battleday. There's no evidence they've made this better at all.

If this venice thing were ready to go right now, I might give it a shot, but it's not and won't be for the foreseeable future. I think we're stuck with BF4 until another popular shooter comes along, Battlefield related or otherwise.

I had preferred BF3 at the point where we entered BF4C2. Since then BF4 has improved enough for me to be fun as much as BF3 is, even so I miss quite a few things like full Rush servers. And in GC the most fun I have comes from teamwork, regardless of the game. At this point I'd not vote for another BF3 campaign.

BF3 is fun for some rounds, and maybe some battledays. It feels more fluid and hit registration/feedback is better. But I don't want to play more than 2 or 3 battledays BF3. There are things that annoy me immediately when I play BF3 now, first and foremost suppression. And I can remember the constant stream of complains about BF3 back in the days. They seem to have changed to the same good old days story. Beside the worse „netcode“ there are also improvements compared to the BF3, e.g. Carbines for the Recon or the end to revive trains. And we will get improvements over the current state with the next patch, e.g. the nerf to nade spam.

Secondly I'd like to support what lakefisher wrote. Quite some people in the community don't own BF3, or maybe just the base game EA gave away for free. I'd not expect them to buy into the past, as much as I'd not expect to get enough new members that compensate for the normal loss of players over time.

Anyway, we'll have a BF3 funday and I get my AN-94 for some games, so I'm happy.

I remember a bunch of people so happy about making a little ritual of uninstalling BF3 after the last BF3 campaign. That was the level of frustration towards BF3 as it were back then for some people.
Current state of BF4 have no issues anywhere near the gamebreaking gun glitch bug that BF3 had and probably still have. Of course, if you were in a vehicle then the gun glitch did not affect you, but I don't think BF3 "only vehicle" battledays is an option.
I like BF3, without the gun glitch, and still enjoy a round or two every now and then, but I prefer BF4 when playing with GC.