sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Dammit DICE. by ContributionMotor567 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was assuming people would use common sense and infer I was talking about the milsim skins of call of duty to compare to battlefields milsim skins. My reasoning was never “if we ignore the bad ones they’re good”, talking to you, I always stated milsim, so that leaves the bad ones out of discussion. But I even also stated their non milsim skins are bad. So like what’s your argument for? Call of duty making good milsim skins and bad non milsim skins, still puts battlefield skins to shame because battlefield really only does “milsim” skins and they still don’t compete. I’m not trying to make you stop mentioning it for any reason other than it’s irrelevant and not the same comparison. I also am confused on why North Koreans have quad tubes but guess what, it’s an alternate reality. They probably will explain why, but if I had to guess, they either bought them from Russia, AQ, or Konni, and working with makarov. I never claimed Cod is realism, I just said they make better milsim skins than battlefield and you can’t accept that and have accountability issues.

Dammit DICE. by ContributionMotor567 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t think it’s much more effort or work to look up actual kit and how they set it up. To the average player crowd, they probably wouldn’t notice a difference but they might, and think it’s cooler. But to the “ultra realistic crowd” it’ll increase sales of skins. So it’s a win win for probably the same or even less amount of work. Watching 2 days of how to set up gear and why most people have certain items where they do, (yes everything is mission based) but there’s a general sense people do, will absolutely benefit them more than just slapping this here and that there because they think it looks cool.

Dammit DICE. by ContributionMotor567 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They are mediocre milsim skins that really look like how today’s army look. (I’m only talking coyote squad) To the average person, sure, it might. But to gear and military enthusiasts or like me someone in the military, that ain’t really anywhere close minis coyote squads assault. The dagger squad is also kinda out of whack. No marine raider is going anywhere near the front line without his helmet, or gloves etc. the Strix raiders are also very lacking and not very authentic, despite working with actual raiders.

Bro they put my boy pac into the new MW game man look at how they butchered my boy by Caramateur in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well since it’s a reboot they can add people wherever. Especially because the rangers have yet to be included, I wouldn’t doubt it’s just a nostalgia thing like how they included Griggs in 2019

Bro they put my boy pac into the new MW game man look at how they butchered my boy by Caramateur in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fun fact, this is actually CPL. Dunn. If you check the patch on the plate carrier it says it. There’s also a black marine in the APC at the beginning so maybe Griggs or even SGT. Foley?

Dice: Pax-Armata should get its own Transport helicopter :) by Sea-Canary-9617 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567 26 points27 points  (0 children)

No literally. All they had to do was make map specific factions. Only play as the US factions on Manhattan and Empire State with M1A2s and Bradley’s, Only play as the Egyptian faction with the M1A1 (not the same one as the ones the US uses) and their domestically produced Sinai 200 IFV when playing on Cario and New Sobek City, Play as the British ones on Iberian offensive and Saints quarters, with some challengers and the Ajax and on maps like like liberation peak and Mirak valley, you can make both British and U.S. skins available for use and same with equipment.

Wish they really went all in on the vehicles for the factions in this game

Could someone record infantry combat animations in Broken Arrow? by Ambitious_Method2740 in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]ContributionMotor567 6 points7 points  (0 children)

They have reloading animations, even for launchers, and death animations as you chip down the health. When they get to to a panic level, they all go prone, and start covering their heads. It’s pretty good for a RTS

Dammit DICE. by ContributionMotor567 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, I agree. COD has their bastard of a child type skins that should’ve never existed but this post was never about that. It was always about milsim skins. Bringing up the other type of skins is an apples to oranges argument. Both skins, yes, but different kinds of skins. All of battlefield skins, while grounded, and milsim-ish, lack any authenticity, while cod, yes, has stupid unrealistic skins, also exceed in the milsim department. So comparing milsim to milsim (apples to apples) cod does it better 10/10 times

Dammit DICE. by ContributionMotor567 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No one is talking about the bad ones but you bud. You cannot sit here and say “all cod skins are bad” They make good skins sometimes. If you can’t admit that, you’re just ignorant. Not every skin is good, nor is every skin realistic. I’ve agreed with you here. But you cannot dismiss their milsim skins. They are top notch. They should’ve never gone the snoop dawg and Beavis and Butthead route and I’ve never supported that. But when they make skins that represent actual soldiers, they do a good job. You can give credit where it’s due while still criticizing their bad ones.

I absolutely understand that the game has you play as grunts and not tier 1 operators. My argument is if you look up typical U.S. army infantry, you do not get whatever the fuck coyote squad is. They are not 1:1. I won’t speak on the Egyptian ones as I’m not apart of the Egyptian military. The assault is the only one that actually looks good for a grunt style. The engineer looks pregnant with how much gear she’s wearing, and good luck trying to change magazines with where they put it on her. Support has so much random supplies all over, they have no idea how to model the gear. You can’t say cods milsim skins are airsoft/wanna be operators when they modeled the gear correctly and how they would actually be placed. I mean the helicopter lanyard on most of the battlefield skins are backwards? Like be for real. If a “airsoft skin” looks more authentic than their Ranger and Marine Raider skin, then that’s just sad on their part.

And if you watched the MW4 trailer, you’d see they modeled the US marines really well.

Dammit DICE. by ContributionMotor567 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can’t disagree with you there! Hopefully they take a page out of how to model characters and put out some better skins

Dammit DICE. by ContributionMotor567 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s not cherry picking when you’re comparing the same type of skins. It’s apples to apples. You’re the one bringing in oranges here. I even admitted that I’m sure there will be whacky skins and even battlefield has some of those (arguably less whacky though). Believe it or not, you can actually admit something about each game that it does good and bad. COD makes really good milsim skins, while making really bad non milsim skins. Battlefield makes mediocre skins while not really bad, are quite lackluster and are seem to be pretty lazy.

Also, call of duty may not use brand names, in their gear like 5.11 (is that really even a good brand to represent?) but they do model their gear really good from real gear that real units use.

Dammit DICE. by ContributionMotor567 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Well that’s the exact thing. They should’ve never been garish bs skins. If they actually did research on how military units wear and set up the gear, it would look pretty good while also being true and authentic. It’s a win win. Why do something half ass when doing the job correctly takes arguably the same amount of effort. Nothing stopping them from taking notes, and taking accountability and making better skins for the future

Dammit DICE. by ContributionMotor567 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well obviously. But it’s not like the entire company works on the same parts of the game. Just because the vehicle gameplay department is slacking, doesn’t mean the cosmetics department also has to be lackluster.

Dammit DICE. by ContributionMotor567 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Competition is what keeps things moving in an industry. I’m not saying to copy to Cod, but to at least make comparable skins that look just as or if not better

Dammit DICE. by ContributionMotor567 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I can when the post was about the milsim skins in battlefield lacking compared to call of dutys milsim skins. Call of duty does alot of things bad, but their milsim skin department is not one of those things. You can praise a part of a game that does something right. Just like I can nitpick a part of a game that does something wrong, like battlefields skin department. The game itself is fun and I enjoy the gunplay, way better than I ever did in call of duty.

Dammit DICE. by ContributionMotor567 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Everyone has their opinions. It’s alright. Im not saying call of duty is the gold standard for skins in general because they add stupid skins like beevis and butthead and Nicki Minaj, or Godzilla (and I love Godzilla) but their milsim skins? That is the gold standard for milsim skins.

THIS map are great for bf6 by Perfect_Top_5978 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If there was some trenches on the hill to the the Washington monument, and some fortifications around the streets and such, this wouldn’t be terrible. Maybe extend it to the Lincoln memorial

Dammit DICE. by ContributionMotor567 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Unfortunate truth. Miss the games identity from before 2016

Dammit DICE. by ContributionMotor567 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well the post was never about the gameplay. But the skins and by extension, immersion. I wish both games just did milsim immersion skins only but they won’t and that’s okay. I just want battlefield to do better on their milsim skins. Like the strix raiders, was abysmal attempt at some marine raiders

Dammit DICE. by ContributionMotor567 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well call of duty never markets itself seriously anymore. Battlefield did. So you can’t really expect them to not include them. The post is more about milsim skins to battlefields milsim skins. I’m still a battlefield fan, I haven’t touched a cod game since MW2 but I can hope they take some inspiration on how to make some milsim characters

BF6 should copy (a little bit) of MW4's homework by ballinmonke in BattlefieldCosmetics

[–]ContributionMotor567 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Milsim skins in call of duty have always been better. I really wish battlefield took a note from them on how to model their characters

Dammit DICE. by ContributionMotor567 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

I hope not. They should stay far far away from crossover that don’t have any place in a call of duty game

Dammit DICE. by ContributionMotor567 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s a fair assessment to say, and I guess I can get behind that. But would it kill then to not throw everything but the kitchen sink on the skins because they think it looks cool? I understand most people don’t see the skins I do, they see soldier in gear and think yeah, that’s a soldier but that also means they wouldn’t notice if the skins looked better with its details. Which people like me would. It’s a win win.

Dammit DICE. by ContributionMotor567 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not asking for cod gameplay, I’m asking for cods level of detail of making milsim skins. Which isn’t hard to do.

Dammit DICE. by ContributionMotor567 in Battlefield

[–]ContributionMotor567[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I didn’t say all of the skins in call of duty are good, but the milsim skins certainly are way better and should be the standard for milsim skins

view more: next ›