What’s your guys rating so far?

[gabagool]

Curious because I’m interested in getting the game but want your guys’ opinions!

[Chubzdoomer]

For me it's a 7/10. There's massive potential, and the alpha test is already more stable and performant than any Battlefield alpha/beta test I've ever participated in. Heck, if they pushed it out the door tomorrow I don't think anyone would complain about it being too soon.

The graphics are pretty good and the gunplay feels very satisfying and responsive. Killing other players feels like it should IMO, and when I get killed I almost never feel like I've been "wronged" by the game (the feel of the weapons and the netcode are both in a surprisingly good state, at least in my experience). The weapon customization also seriously rocks.

The main negatives I have are the audio, infantry movement, and "operator" system.

The audio/sound design "feels" like something you would expect from a cheaply-made F2P game. Weapons lack "OOMPH" and directional audio seriously sucks. You can't even really hear footsteps from nearby enemies. The whole soundscape just sort of blends together, and so there's no immersion or decision-making based entirely on what you're hearing, unlike in most Battlefield games (including the widely-hated 2042) in which the audio alone can tell you an awful lot about the current situation.

The infantry movement also just feels sort of... stiff and clunky? I can't really pinpoint why, but it doesn't have the nice, smooth feel of a Battlefield game or even Call of Duty. I won't say it feels downright bad, but it does feel a step behind the "big players" in the MP FPS genre and I would like to see it spruced up a bit. Also, I really wish tactical sprint were removed all-together in favor of a faster sprint, even if it takes players an extra second or two to reach top speed.

And the operator system... we all know how this panned out for Battlefield 2042, becoming one of its most despised features, and so I won't go into great detail here. I would much rather they had gone with a traditional class system, rather than give us "clone wars" in which we're surrounded by teammates who look virtually identical to us, and are fighting enemies who look virtually identical to us. It's just so stupid to have dozens of clones of very specific people/personalities within a 'serious' warlike setting. I would much rather have generic soldiers.

Although I wrote more about the negatives than positives, I really do think it's a solid game and I think it will give Battlefield some serious competition until EA/DICE drop the next major game. It plays well overall and is very stable/polished all things considered. I've also been impressed with the amount of teamwork I've seen from complete randoms. In Havoc Warfare, you really do have to fight and push together in order to succeed. There's very little room for selfish 'sweats' who try and do everything all by themselves.

[SirBrutal]

7/10 so far. it's looking good, and runs really well on my 2070. looking forward to seeing the new maps and tweaks they do.

[Fimmerson]

If you are in to COD and Tarkov this is the aweful child of both, I played this for about 7 mins and then uninstalled. I am not a fan of COD at all it is a terrible game. I will give this another shot once the campaign comes out but till then I am sorry to have wasted a slot for some one else by signing up for the testing.

[dblkil]

7/10

Nothing original but it does a lot of things right.

I'd rather play The Finals for now, very fresh theme and game mode.

But for whatever reason The Finals popularity seems to be tanking.

This one got a lot of hype.

I also played couple of hours of xdefiant.

Didn't like it, I like this game better.

Battlefiled itself vs this? BF is annual release and gets abandoned after a year or two or so.

Game as a service should have longer lifespan than that.

[󠀡󠀡]

1/10
its not battlefield and its not battlefield killer
after few hours uninstalled and back to battlefield 2042

[kalashnjkov21]

Originally posted by 😎:

1/10
its not battlefield and its not battlefield killer
after few hours uninstalled and back to battlefield 2042

I left 2042 because the gunplay in this game is much better. What is your reason to continue playing 2042 ?

[Zylfrax791]

So far I'd say 8/10. Kind of disappointing that you can't get rid of the crosshairs and remove the minimap and HUD for a more hardcore/realistic feel. Other than that the game runs and looks incredible and overall the gunplay is amazing.

[decizion]

2/10, it's not a Delta Force game it's a failed Battlefield and Call of Duty copycat.

[EVONiEE 疾風迅雷悪魔]

still worse than 2042 mechanically.
- movement and action is not fluid enough

- too easy for full auto long range with any weapon

- weapon balance is quite bad, so many over performing and easy weapon

- the combination of game mode and map we can play in this test is so bad.
some sector dont have enough flank or no viable flank. some side have too much high ground, some sector is literally clump up meatgrind like redacted and metro which is complete ass.

- the vehicle-inf dynamic does not fully fleshed out with only breakthrough mode atm

- disguised bot

fix all of them and this is a real contender.

[Ayva]

6/10

[BunnySpirit]

Originally posted by kalashnjkov21:

Originally posted by 😎:

1/10
its not battlefield and its not battlefield killer
after few hours uninstalled and back to battlefield 2042

I left 2042 because the gunplay in this game is much better. What is your reason to continue playing 2042 ?

Is it though? To me it feels more in between COD and Battlefield, and kinda closer to COD. It's not that it's bad, it just feels very casual and I actually prefer the gunplay of BF games. Movement isn't as good as 2042 either.

At times it does feel like a Free2Play game, but it does have a lot of potential and it's good to have some competition. Now is it going to make people switch? Hard to say but I doubt it, there isn't enough in there to have a definitive answer though. It does a few things very well, but some choices are rather curious.

So far I would say a 6/10 but mostly wait&see. Will definitely try again.

[kalashnjkov21]

Originally posted by EVONiEE 疾風迅雷悪魔:

- too easy for full auto long range with any weapon

- weapon balance is quite bad, so many over performing and easy weapon

.

This game is less arcade, more mil sim than COD and BF. If you say some weapons are just op and need to nerf, your suggestion is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. I always want all guns have their stats close to real life as much as possible and they will auto balance themselves.

[EVONiEE 疾風迅雷悪魔]

Originally posted by kalashnjkov21:

Originally posted by EVONiEE 疾風迅雷悪魔:

- too easy for full auto long range with any weapon

- weapon balance is quite bad, so many over performing and easy weapon

.

This game is less arcade, more mil sim than COD and BF. If you say some weapons are just op and need to nerf, your suggestion is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. I always want all guns have their stats close to real life as much as possible and they will auto balance themselves.

this game is so far away from milsim lmao.

even on milsim game like squad, they had to balance each faction overall strength including loadout / weapon.

[kalashnjkov21]

Originally posted by EVONiEE 疾風迅雷悪魔:

this game is so far away from milsim lmao.

even on milsim game like squad, they had to balance each faction overall strength including loadout / weapon.

If not milsim, i will say it is a bit more like Tarkov than BF and COD. just gunplay

[Zer0Stxtic]

4/10 The game just feels and plays and even looks like a cheap mobile game. it's nothing special at all and i believe the hype around it is just people hungry for a new FPS.