Battlefield V


I think the ‘hardcore’ ‘softcore’ thing stems from the fact that if you label something ‘hardcore’ the natural assumption it to call the opposite of it ‘softcore’. That’s not intended in a derogatory way - it’s just a label.

Calling it ‘hardcore’ is marketing bullshit anyway. In the past, modes that used to lower HUD content and screen markers were known as ‘realism’ modes… in that you wouldn’t have a number on screen to know your ammo left, health and live map.

We’ve had this conversation before about ‘normal’ ‘softcore’ and ‘hardcore’. Let’s not go there again. Some people prefer one, some the other. Back in the day, we always played in ‘realism’ modes. As the battlefield franchise progressed, what that actually means has changed. I still prefer the 60% health that you get in Hardcore - but equally, I think there are mechanics in the game that are lost if you don’t play in Normal too.

Horses for Courses.


Its like a pub changes its name, people that have been going there for years will always call it by the name they know it by, people who just start going there call it the new name.


What was the map like? The one for bf1 was terrible, and i’m not convinced metro was a fair representation of bf3 either. The E3 footage looked like they had quite low pop servers so figures it’ll play differently with 64 on a map that’s likely not designed for that number.

Hardcore is a concession made for people who want a lower skill ceiling for whatever reason (not got the aim or time, just fancy an easier game for an evening, want to grind levels as classes you don’t like playing etc), and that’s fine. It’s not how the game was designed to be played, the same way a bunch of the maps won’t be designed to cope with 64 players or certain game modes, and the way sniper rifles aren’t intended to be used as point blank cannons but will be.

Sorry, but when was normal battlefield called softcore? Your example would be applicable based on regular battlefield previously being called softcore and therefore you’d be justified in continuing to do so, but it has never been called that. That’s a derogatory term you’ve used for it based on your personal preference for the lower skill ceiling of hardcore, otherwise it’d just be it ‘normal’, or ‘regular’.

If I call someone a cunt, and then someone calls them by their name, i’m not justified in continuing to call them a cunt because that’s what i’ve always called them.


Well the map is ok ish. Not great. If they did not design it for 64 players they should have limited the servers to a lower number as they are all set to 64 players. In regards to softcore vs hardcore. That is what the modes have been called previously and not just in BF. Now BF1 did not really have a proper HC mode, so they are doing away with that.
I do like some things they did with this new one, where the spotting is greatly reduced. Some downsides I can see already and those are mainly for trying to take on ground troops from a plane.
Also the visuals have gotten a bit too much and by that I mean that what I would call “visual clutter” has gone a bit too far, it makes it very hard to identify movement of a player from all the effects.


In my opinion, I disagree with the first point there.

Hardcore has a vast amount of differences other than just being able to kill people quicker - which is down to everyone’s health being at 60% rather than 100%.

There fact that you don’t auto regenerate health is the biggest - meaning that your medics have a vital purpose.

The removal of 3rd person cameras made tanks and other vehicles much harder to defend against Support or Spec Ops running in with C4 and allowed you have a greater awareness of units moving around you.

There was an absense of crosshairs and hitmarkers as well.

Now - I’ve not played a lot of BF1… so by all accounts many of these things may have changed. But I certainly don’t see the mode as being a concession to make it easier.

As for whether it is derogatory or not… I don’t know. I don’t see anyone that plays Normal mode as being inferior to me. Its just a choice. Personally, I don’t like emptying an entire mag into someone before they die. On the flip side, I can understand it if people hate sniper taking them out with OHK.

Personal preference.


yeah but they might be specifically testing the load. it’s a test, so the gameplay experience isn’t a priority :confused:

I find not auto-regenerating health is so that people can get more kills and stop people retreating to get health, to the point it makes medics less useful, even pointless on some maps. It’s part of why i didn’t play medic much in bf4 with ziip, along with the paddle nerf.

removal of 3rd person camera is so that people can close in on vehicles and take them out easier, so that vehicles are less dominant and you don’t have to work as hard to balance them out, so that you don’t have to work as hard to compete with them when you encounter them.

Similarly with the 3d spotting, it’s disabled so that enemies won’t be able to snipe you as easily from range and you don’t have to pay as much attention to stealth or using cover, to make the game simpler/easier.

It’s all about taking what they hope is a balanced and somewhat tactical shooter and turning it more into deathmatch-style carnage that’s easier to hop into and get kills because that’s what some people want, but it is a lower skill ceiling. in battlefield, the idea is you won’t get a OHK with a sniper rifle, but through teamwork or squadplay, good use of your pistol, or grenades, or supporting vehicles, or squadmates, or rushing and knifing, the enemy can still be killed.

As soon as you allow OHKs then you remove the skill from learning to use/do any of those other things well and make it about individuals getting what they want. That’s not squad play or team play, that’s just ego, and that’s what generic deathmatch serves, while battlefield attempts to be something more involved.


no you are incorrect there


Then I must have been playing the last 15 years only concerned about my ego then, and completely missed the point of the entire series. :face_with_raised_eyebrow:


only if your every moment playing battlefield has been about getting one shot kills…


And you cut the last piece of that sentence from the quote. Generally people have been calling it softcore, that it a term that might not show up on your screen there but it is widely used. Also it does not mean that it is used as a negative term.


:stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye: No never been interested as playing a sniper/scout class. Not me, nope. :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

In fairness, I think you may be right with later versions of the game. I still proclaim that a ‘hardcore’ mode that is infact a ‘realism’ mode wasn’t done to fulfil the purposes that you’ve laid out in your argument - but that’s not to say that isn’t how it has become in later iterations, if you get what I mean.

It’s like anything, you introduce something for one reason, and then it gets used/abused for another. Back in the days of BC2, hardcore wasn’t to try and ‘deathmatch’ the game up. But, that may well be the case more now. I don’t know.

Suffice to say, there is one problem between changing gamemodes - and that is you get used to that particular style of play. On Normal, I tend to stop firing sooner (usually before the person is dead lol) for example.

When I finally get my hands on BFV, I’ll probably play some normal and see if there is more team orientated gameplay.


I feel like I remember there being lots of 3rd party servers for BF3 that had either ‘HARDCORE’ or ‘SOFTCORE’ in their name. I could be imagining this but I don’t remember picking up that language from ZiiP, I remember it being something I picked up naturally while playing the game.

With regards to the skill ceiling: I can see the point being made, but at the same time a big part of me disagrees (likely a lot to do with bias) because of the Time To Kill between the two modes.

TTK for normal has always felt to me like it gives the attacked player a much larger lee-way than in Hardcore since you have a more significant amount of time to react to an attack in most Inf Vs Inf situations. In Hardcore you have much less time because you can be taken out so quickly so, in my opinion, have to play more carefully - squaded or not.

I understand that this means Hardcore becomes more chaotic but from my perspective it means I have to play more carefully if I don’t want to be taken out 4 seconds after I spawn. When I’ve played normal I find the TTK much more forgiving leading me to take bigger risks, be less aware of my surroundings and generally play less cautiously. In hardcore I take much smaller risks, use cover better, generally play more carefully than I would otherwise do in Normal.

All my take on things. All my opinion. And I state that because a lot of us commenting in this thread are forgetting ourselves, taking it all very personally and becoming far too upset about utterly, utterly meaningless things.

In complete honesty this and the Microtransactions thread are reminding me an awful lot of the similar BitTech threads that existed shortly before I vacated the place.

We’re not talking to each other as a community, we’re talking to each other as internet randoms screeching at each other to try to prove who is right - something I am and have been guilty of but really have tried to temper when responding to this and other threads that have been hotting up recently.

Maybe we all need to step back a bit?


Is it PQ o’clock yet?


yes as it wasn’t relevant to the screen shot i was showing from BF4

this is coming down to the way used to be and the way things are.

After playing BF1 exclusively in operations a normal game setting the ‘TTK’ is fine and it forces to to take cover and think about your actions and work with your squad and team, one of the corner stones of battlefield the squad game play

i use the name for things that the developer has put in the game as thats the name that the things are.


Wow: 8 posts between the time I started writing my reply and actually replying.

This thread is really moving at some pace.


Actually I think this is the other way around. When in HC you have to play more carefully, then the medic class and squad play comes in to play.
So if you are in a tank with 1 or 2 seats the other people on your squad have to cover your back and do callouts.
Also HC generally would get rid of killcam and 3d spotting. Hence making things harder.
It is not just about the time to kill.
So essentially I disagree with Adrock and yourself on this completely.
This is also why I like the way they did the spotting now on BFV.
Second edit then on top of that is that if I use a sniper and shoot someone in the head they should die, regardless of the mode.


Dag nammit, going to have to reinstall BF1 now and play in normal mode to see if it improves my opinion of the game.


this all a moot point for me any way has i don’t play on hardcore servers any more i ignore that they are there any i have a fun time just playing the game plus to go back to the origional point it’s an alpha things are being worked on ect ect plus it’s a game who gives a fuck you like what you like i like what i like if they don’t overlap fine if they do fine to


I think Reno was referencing my point about TTK - I tried to make a different point to Jes and Adrock about the speed at which you kill/die being shorter in HC, my point being that I feel HC forces you to be more careful because you can be taken out so quickly.

I don’t think that is the only point. I think other points made about vehicles, 3rd person, spotting, regenerating health are all relevant.


Just watched the Westie video you posted @Reno ! Looks great! Some obvious bugs and issues which is totally expected, but overall looks like great fun :smiley: