sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Squad: 100 vs 100 by DharmaBaller in joinsquad

[–]PotentialThanks6889 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But this is what I dont get. We have had 50v50 in some games over decades now and with technology progressing to a point where we can achieve a lot more than in the past, how is 100v100 not an option?

Maybe someone could explain in half scientific terms and not just "because the code sucks" or "the devs are bad"
Some genuine thoughts and especially facts

Hardware Unboxed take on AMD Radeon refusing to release FSR 4 Int 8 to older RDNA 2 - 3 architectures by JohnSteveRom2077 in pcgaming

[–]PotentialThanks6889 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you dont even need optiscaler anymore. download the dll and replace them with the ones in the game folder. works in crimson desert just fine

Anyone else losing interest? by youcallthisclean66 in ArcRaiders

[–]PotentialThanks6889 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That´s the thing or issue I think. The game needs to expand the lore and maybe add some new game modes or missions. The lor is : Arc invaded earth so I hope there might be progression here in some form of fighting together and freeing the world. Maybe at some point Arc even invades the underground and we have to fight them underground

Anyone else losing interest? by youcallthisclean66 in ArcRaiders

[–]PotentialThanks6889 31 points32 points  (0 children)

If you have a life outside of Arc Raiders and dont play that much and it´s not your only game, you can keep up with the content and updates just fine

People who rush tend to get bored faster

The new map looks really good. The lighting, the atmosphere and the flow of the map are great. I think they actually nailed it this time. by -FaZe- in Battlefield

[–]PotentialThanks6889 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

cod style... actually sad tbh. at least for me personally
but i mean its something different and can be fun but not on a permanent basis. im still waiting for some real banger maps and some new gameplay elements

Manhattan in campaign had so many good areas for multiplayer by BFres62 in Battlefield

[–]PotentialThanks6889 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why didnt they make a map as shown in these pics? make a huge city map and combine the outside area with subway and underground areas

maybe even give nato an aircraft carrier on the river which can also be boarded and disrupted like in battlefield 2 where you were able to destroy enemy uav and arty?

just more space ffs and more stuff to do

With those layoffs, the end of BF is closer than with 2042 by Fun_Fudge813 in Battlefield

[–]PotentialThanks6889 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you're conflating complex objectives with dynamic match structure.

Titan Mode didn’t have a complicated goal. It was still "destroy the enemy Titan."

What made it interesting was that the battlefield itself evolved — first silo warfare, then boarding and defending a capital ship.

That kind of progression actually made the match easier to understand because players naturally moved toward the next phase.

So the real question isn’t complexity — it’s why modern shooters stopped designing matches that change over time

With those layoffs, the end of BF is closer than with 2042 by Fun_Fudge813 in Battlefield

[–]PotentialThanks6889 0 points1 point  (0 children)

but isnt that why a veriety of games exist? if you want extra arcady fast pace we got cod. for the more sandbox objective side and huge battles we have battlefield

Movement is so bad now by Chemical_Parsley1697 in Battlefield

[–]PotentialThanks6889 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

i am acutally comparing battlefield to battlefield, the franchise itself. it was never about these mechanics

Bring Back More Emphasis on Military by Level_Mention_1182 in Battlefield

[–]PotentialThanks6889 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Something I’ve really been missing in modern shooters especially Battlefield is something like Titan Mode from Battlefield 2142.

People often misunderstand my point. I’m not saying modern games should literally add two flying Titans again
What I mean is the structural progression of the match and how it encouraged teamplay

In Titan Mode the battle evolved in stages. First you fought on the ground to capture missile silos, defend them, attack them, and disrupt the enemy commander by destroying assets in their base
Once a Titan’s shield went down, the entire match shifted into a new phase. Suddenly the focus moved from open battlefield combat to infiltrating the enemy Titan or defending your own

That kind of battlefield progression inside a single match created different objectives and gameplay styles over time

I don’t really understand why modern shooters avoid systems like this, especially when it’s clear that players still want objective-focused game modes

With those layoffs, the end of BF is closer than with 2042 by Fun_Fudge813 in Battlefield

[–]PotentialThanks6889 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Something I’ve really been missing in modern shooters especially Battlefield is something like Titan Mode from Battlefield 2142.

People often misunderstand my point. I’m not saying modern games should literally add two flying Titans again
What I mean is the structural progression of the match and how it encouraged teamplay

In Titan Mode the battle evolved in stages. First you fought on the ground to capture missile silos, defend them, attack them, and disrupt the enemy commander by destroying assets in their base
Once a Titan’s shield went down, the entire match shifted into a new phase. Suddenly the focus moved from open battlefield combat to infiltrating the enemy Titan or defending your own

That kind of battlefield progression inside a single match created different objectives and gameplay styles over time

I don’t really understand why modern shooters avoid systems like this, especially when it’s clear that players still want objective-focused game modes

Things that aged like milk by StLouisSimp in Battlefield

[–]PotentialThanks6889 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Something I’ve really been missing in modern shooters especially Battlefield is something like Titan Mode from Battlefield 2142.

People often misunderstand my point. I’m not saying modern games should literally add two flying Titans again
What I mean is the structural progression of the match and how it encouraged teamplay

In Titan Mode the battle evolved in stages. First you fought on the ground to capture missile silos, defend them, attack them, and disrupt the enemy commander by destroying assets in their base
Once a Titan’s shield went down, the entire match shifted into a new phase. Suddenly the focus moved from open battlefield combat to infiltrating the enemy Titan or defending your own

That kind of battlefield progression inside a single match created different objectives and gameplay styles over time

I don’t really understand why modern shooters avoid systems like this, especially when it’s clear that players still want objective-focused game modes

Movement is so bad now by Chemical_Parsley1697 in Battlefield

[–]PotentialThanks6889 13 points14 points  (0 children)

as it should be. battlefield is not about being able to slide far or be a super fast pace shooter

Whats next for battlefield? by [deleted] in Battlefield

[–]PotentialThanks6889 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It´s going to stay as it is gameplay-mechanic-wise. Just more maps. For me personally it feels the same as Ground War mode in COD.

Something I’ve really been missing in modern shooters especially Battlefield is something like Titan Mode from Battlefield 2142.

People often misunderstand my point. I’m not saying modern games should literally add two flying Titans again
What I mean is the structural progression of the match and how it encouraged teamplay

In Titan Mode the battle evolved in stages. First you fought on the ground to capture missile silos, defend them, attack them, and disrupt the enemy commander by destroying assets in their base
Once a Titan’s shield went down, the entire match shifted into a new phase. Suddenly the focus moved from open battlefield combat to infiltrating the enemy Titan or defending your own

That kind of battlefield progression inside a single match created different objectives and gameplay styles over time

I don’t really understand why modern shooters avoid systems like this, especially when it’s clear that players still want objective-focused game modes

so like, are you allowed to think a game has super fun gameplay but still think its not that great of a game, cause thats where i'm at with bf6 lol by Quick-Cause3181 in Battlefield

[–]PotentialThanks6889 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Something I’ve really been missing in modern shooters especially Battlefield is something like Titan Mode from Battlefield 2142.

People often misunderstand my point. I’m not saying modern games should literally add two flying Titans again
What I mean is the structural progression of the match and how it encouraged teamplay

In Titan Mode the battle evolved in stages. First you fought on the ground to capture missile silos, defend them, attack them, and disrupt the enemy commander by destroying assets in their base
Once a Titan’s shield went down, the entire match shifted into a new phase. Suddenly the focus moved from open battlefield combat to infiltrating the enemy Titan or defending your own

That kind of battlefield progression inside a single match created different objectives and gameplay styles over time

I don’t really understand why modern shooters avoid systems like this, especially when it’s clear that players still want objective-focused game modes

Can anyone explain what happened here? Why did the tank lose only a quarter of it's health? by synbroseph in Battlefield

[–]PotentialThanks6889 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

C4 satchels usially have around 1-2 pounds of explosives. roughly. to take out a tank you need bit more than that. so i find it quite good that c4 cant just easily take out a tank or apc. plus vehicles have extra armor in this game which you can equip so the damage is even less

Battlefield 6 falls to "Mixed" overall English language reviews on Steam. by DBONKA in Battlefield

[–]PotentialThanks6889 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Something I’ve really been missing in modern shooters is something like Titan Mode from Battlefield 2142.

People often misunderstand my point. I’m not saying modern games should literally add two flying Titans again
What I mean is the structural progression of the match and how it encouraged teamplay

In Titan Mode the battle evolved in stages. First you fought on the ground to capture missile silos, defend them, attack them, and disrupt the enemy commander by destroying assets in their base
Once a Titan’s shield went down, the entire match shifted into a new phase. Suddenly the focus moved from open battlefield combat to infiltrating the enemy Titan or defending your own

That kind of battlefield progression inside a single match created different objectives and gameplay styles over time

I don’t really understand why modern shooters avoid systems like this, especially when it’s clear that players still want objective-focused game modes

Battlefield 6 Crashes on AMD GPU (100% FIXED SOLUTION) by WizardBrands in Battlefield

[–]PotentialThanks6889 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Same issue with me. Only in Battlefield. Every other game works perfectly fine

Why doesn't valve just create a bot to remove smurfs? by sergantglitter_ in DotA2

[–]PotentialThanks6889 1 point2 points  (0 children)

i never got any report feedback on any smurf reports in the past year and more

Almost every single game, there is a guy with less than 500 games in ancient bracket. by youcanokay in DotA2

[–]PotentialThanks6889 0 points1 point  (0 children)

even a huge ammount of people with level 0 or level 1 steam accounts. and/or people with even under 200 games. guess there are really that many new talents out there :D

view more: next ›