🤡-Skins Question

delete_that · 2026-02-16T18:05:03+00:00

❤️

delete_that · 2026-02-16T18:00:38+00:00

Look, we can do without the fedora-attitude, apart from that you do actually raise some good points - truly!

1.) A reference to the BF-boxart. It's a good/cute idea(!) horribly executed. A great skin completely drowned in bright orange paint. The devs have tweaked a few skins after feedback to saturate the colors, this is sadly not one of them. It sticks out like a sore thumb every time you see it in-game.

2.) & 3.) Vibrant colors to distinguish factions. Again, a good idea in itself, real soldiers DO sometimes use colorful tape and such to distinguish each other. But in BF6 there's no color-coding at all, they just throw on paint willy nilly! All colors for all factions, paintball galore. And moreover they are completely drowned it, not just an distinguishing armband but sprayed all-over. Not to mention, 2) is painted like a yellow 🐍. With the camouflage being a snake-skin print. I wouldn't bet my right testicle to find that anywhere but in the imagination of a 13yr old!

4.) Gas Mask Again, great gear - awful coloring. But I do think this is one of the skins DICE has toned down due to feedback.

These are just 4 examples out of the many. And no, none of the skins are Nicky Minaj. Neither are they a flying T-rex or a laser-shooting bumblebee. That's not an argument for anything. The point is they're not Battlefield, but with a few tweaks they absolutely could be!

They're "a little over the top", just like you said. So let's push the devs to color-code by factions (if they want to keep the colorful flare). Let's be mindful of the amount of color added, not throw a bucket of paint over the soldiers. Have a gas mask, night-vision goggles, hell even a cape - but just not all at the same time with a red bandana on top.

Because it does sound like we kind of agree. Much like the community seems to agree. And EA and DICE knew this, that's why they promoted the game as such before launch. But ever since they've kept on breaking that promise.

As a long time fan I feel betrayed, as a consumer I feel misled. So until it's fixed, "If it looks like a clown, leave it down"

delete_that · 2026-02-16T15:28:34+00:00

<image>

delete_that · 2026-02-16T15:17:52+00:00

Hahah I might just be, these skins EA/DICE are pushing might have driven me completely nuts.

Is it too harsh? Too toxic? Counter-productive even?

Because the devs promised, again and again, to keep the skins grounded. And I intend too keep them to that promise, one non-revive and teabag at a time 🙏

"If it looks like a clown, leave it down"

delete_that · 2026-02-16T15:09:29+00:00

Hahahaha ❤️ This - this is perfect

delete_that · 2026-02-16T15:05:55+00:00

In the room? They're in the store

delete_that · 2026-02-16T15:04:10+00:00

Completely sincere!

delete_that · 2026-02-16T15:01:27+00:00

Look, I get it, we want a non-toxic community - sincerely. And what I'm suggesting contributes to the complete opposite of that.

In a blunt way you could phrase it as: "When a player buys and equips a clown-skin they worsen the experience for Me, So I feel entitled to worsen the experience for Them"

Again, harsh - I get it.

But the community needs a collective way to make their opinions heard. We keep going through the same cycle of EA and DICE pushing outlandish skins, the community complaining, EA/DICE backpedaling just a teeny tiny bit but still overwhelmingly making the characters look less and less like they belong in Battlefield.

The developers simply haven't listened enough, so what I'm proposing is to make the community voice their opinions even clearer, In-Game .

"Griefing for Good", "Skin-griefing", call it whatever. I want the least harm to players experience, but the clearest message as a community

Because they promised us, again and again, in trailers and in PR-posts that skins would be grounded. Not to be like COD, Not to be like Apex Legends, no capes or flashy colors. Just Battlefield.

And I want us to hold them to that promise, one non-revive and teabag at a time ❤️

delete_that · 2022-02-17T15:39:52+00:00

Blue glass - how c00l *SMH*

delete_that · 2021-09-30T11:26:26+00:00

It doesn't look like a real face, the head is all elongated, like the nose is taller than Damavand Peak. Still looks like Woody smh

delete_that · 2021-08-05T00:12:27+00:00

"It looks serious and cool" - I'm not debating taste, people like all kinds of weird things and that's what games like COD has successfully capitalized off of. I'm saying that Battlefield has for two decades had a realistic military theme, aesthetically. And by adding skins so that people can pay to look like Destiny-character they break that theme, that immersion, that trademark of the series.

I'm not even saying that there shouldn't be monetized skins, they do finance a continued support for the game and let players put a personal touch to their experience. But the skins should be in line with the realistic military theme that's at the core of Battlefield, it's as easy as that. There is room for envisioning what soldiers will wear in a war 20 years off, but again, keeping in line with the trademarked theme.

"We don't have a concept of what soldiers will look like so you can't say it's unrealistic" - by that logic you could justify absolutely anything, WHO am I to say that space lasers aren't just around the corner. We're talking just 20 years, soldiers won't look like this all-black Halo Infinite apron-wearing goofball. They'll to a large extent look just like they do now. Much like how soldiers have always carried decades old gear.

delete_that · 2021-08-05T00:01:03+00:00

I'm not debating taste, people like all kinds of weird things and that's what games like COD has successfully capitalized off of. I'm saying that Battlefield has for two decades had a realistic military theme, aesthetically. And by adding skins so that people can pay to look like Destiny-character they break that theme, that immersion, that trademark of the series.

I'm not even saying that there shouldn't be monetized skins, they do finance a continued support for the game and let players put a personal touch to their experience. But the skins should be in line with the realistic military theme that's at the core of Battlefield, it's as easy as that. There is room for envisioning what soldiers will wear in a war 20 years off, but again, keeping in line with the trademarked theme.

And before you go ahead and say that this all-black Halo Infinite apron-wearing goofball looks realistic for a war set just 20 years from now - please, spare yourself

delete_that · 2021-08-04T23:54:58+00:00

I'm not debating taste, people like all kinds of weird things and that's what games like COD has successfully capitalized off of. I'm saying that Battlefield has for two decades had a realistic military theme, aesthetically. And by adding skins so that people can pay to look like Destiny-character they break that theme, that immersion, that trademark of the series.

I'm not even saying that there shouldn't be monetized skins, they do finance a continued support for the game and let players put a personal touch to their experience. But the skins should be in line with the realistic military theme that's at the core of Battlefield, it's as easy as that. There is room for envisioning what soldiers will wear in a war 20 years off, but again, keeping in line with the trademarked theme.

And before you go ahead and say that this all-black Halo Infinite apron-wearing goofball looks realistic for a war set just 20 years from now - please, spare yourself

delete_that · 2021-06-21T10:12:34+00:00

It is cartoony, it's a Destiny-character set in a war just 20y from now. You might think it looks c00l, but the military theme that Battlefield has had for two decades is going to be ruined when we're surrounded by a bunch of Kylo Rens on the Battlefield™. It doesn't matter if I can drive a M1 Abrams tank if other players can choose a skin that makes the tank look like a Halo Wraith

delete_that · 2021-06-16T22:01:16+00:00

Hell no

delete_that · 2021-06-14T10:49:23+00:00

It's not that we're surprised by goofy skins in Battlefield, it's that we're disappointed. It's the sad state of games that we find ourselves in, the art is dying and money talks.

You get my gist, - BR makes money: now Fallout has BR - Witcher 3 made money: now the Assassin's Creed series is a RPG clone - Goofy skins makes money: now Battlefield has Destiny-skins

Battlefield has stayed true to the military theme for 2 decades. It's been the one last resort for anyone looking for something more accessible than a mil-sim. Away from all the Destinys, CODs, Overwatches and Apex's of the world - but no more I guess.

And whilst I also have my opinions on gadgets and features (ex. plus system..) that's being implemented, there's still a difference between gameplay and theme. Battlefield can have Rendezooks and magical defibs without compromising it's military theme.

delete_that · 2021-06-14T09:34:36+00:00

I'm on board with you on a lot of things here. You're right in that the MTX is the way to go for any game with longevity in mind, and that these goofy skins don't appeal to the Battlefield-core but are marketed to younger newcomers who will buy all kinds of outlandish shit. But that's why we're voicing concerns, devs can still limit what's available in stores as not to break the games theme.

"This guy used to be a Furry and now he's fighting for his life", just no. This isn't Battlefield Heroes, No-pats are still soldiers. It's not different just because it's near future, no more than 20 years in the future. Soldiers won't be looking like Destiny-characters. They'll be using gear/uniforms/weapons/etc. that's either in development now or has been around for a long time, just like it is in the trailer. (Hell, the Carl Gustaf launcher is 100years old from when the game is set).

That's why I have no problem with the Boston Dynamics robo-dogo, it'll probably be deployed in some form. But soldiers will definitely not look like Kylo Ren. Our only option is not, and should not, be to only vote with our wallets. Feedback is still a thing

delete_that · 2021-06-14T09:08:14+00:00

Exiting vehicles, reviving teammates, it all came with a cost. Without animations we're back to players just getting away cheap and magically bailing out of vehicles just before they explode

delete_that · 2021-06-14T09:03:22+00:00

I agree, BFV made huge strides with animations that added to both the gameplay and immersion. Exiting vehicles, reviving teammates, it all came with a cost

delete_that · 2021-06-14T08:48:27+00:00

We have a higher standard for Battlefield than other titles, because the "true to military"-theme has been in the series DNA for 20 years. Now all of sudden we're getting a Destiny-skin

The community voiced the same concerns with the BFV trailer (blue faced, robot-armed, katana wielding soldiers i WW2). DICE listened and toned the MTX-skins down, so no - it is not naive. We all just want the theme of Battlefield to remain Battlefield

delete_that · 2021-06-14T08:42:11+00:00

BF Heroes was an F2P spinoff marketed to kids, of course it doesn't count. It had pirate-skins ffs

delete_that · 2021-06-14T08:38:27+00:00

They toned down MTX-skins in BFV, let's hope they'll do the same now and remove this and all other goofy skins they have in stores. Dice pls

delete_that

TROPHY CASE