As always, appreciate the feedback on the content gang! Continuing to try new things and implement a bit more "personality" into the content, so very keen to hear your thoughts!
Thanks for the much-needed update! Your personality shines through the otherwise fantastic video production, so imho, you can leisurely concentrate on producing new content. Also, got some new material for "Clips of the week", most of it on my channel.
I feel like Battlebit is basically already a perfect balance between mil-sim and arcade. I think making a mil-sim mode would be the only choice if they want that in the game or else the game will die.
What I don't understand is why the devs don't simply follow in the footsteps of war thunder and have both an arcade mode and tactical mode. Separate options, with the more mil-sim mode having these newer tweaks and arcade playing into that image of what battlebit has become in the eyes of the public. (Edit) Got to the end of the video and realized you brought it up.
That's pretty much what they're doing, any time they talk about MilSim on discord it's a MilSim MODE, not an overhaul removing existing mechanics. I don't know why Camikaze is freaking out about it.
@@Cifer77because the devs have a different aproach as how the arcade mode should be compared to how the comunity envisions it, players like the fast paced action and the crazy battlefield type plays you can pull of the base game but the devs think it should be a little slower just to be a simpler to enjoy and easier to aproach than the mil-sim mode which is fair but that is not what most people want to happen
Splitting a community this size isn't a great idea. It's already hard to get populated servers in some regions. Splitting the community will just mean that there's 2 unpopulated game modes.
@@WillfromBrooklyn player numbers are dwindling even now as it is. I feel. A possible solution is bots, guys who play Battlefront brought that up. Of course bots would then open up the possibility of LAN, singleplayer and custom campaigns. Modding always has the chance of saving games.
I'm a fan of where Battlebit Remastered was at when it launched: a hybrid milsim/arcade shooter. I'm not big on pure milsim games because I find them too slow/punishing for my tastes, but I've grown tired of arcade-style shooters because they've saturated the market for so long. Battlebit provides a nice middle ground: a somewhat arcadey shooter that uses milsim-like mechanics to slow down the gameplay and add some flavor to what frankly might be an otherwise bland game if it was purely an arcade shooter. Maintaining that balancing act between arcade and milsim shooter is where I feel Battlebit should try to stay, rather than branching the game off into an arcade mode and a milsim mode. I wouldn't mind a more tactical/milsim heavy mode for the game, but I don't think that the creation of one should result in the base game becoming too arcadey.
@unityman3133 I like 3D spotting in Battlefield because I find spotting people a bit too difficult with how player models can blend into the terrain at long ranges. But in Battlebit, I had no problem seeing people without 3D spotting; I was fine with the previous spotting where you could mark where someone was but not their exact location as they move. (The 3D spotting on vehicles is nice though as an engineer main, but that was already a thing prior to 3D player spotting.)
@@amazin7006 Well it's an arcade style shooter with some milsim mechanics. It has a realistic magazine management system instead of the arcade ammo pool mechanics. It also takes to more "realistic" health systems such as Squad instead of taking the Battlefield route. And with custom community servers, it's possible there's one out there where people play it in a milsim style. Whether you like it or not, it is a hybrid.
Wall of text coming. But I've paraphrased the recent Devcast on the top, so if interested, read the first paragraph! The Devcast from 3 week ago was really where Oki and team opened up about what they want to change about the game, how they feel about the game etc. Its yet to be uploaded afaik, which sucks because they went over SO much changes, but I'll try to paraphrase some of them here: - They feel like there is no importance/purpose to killing enemies. Its obviously the main focus of the game, but.. you don't kill enemies to take an objective, the gameplay generally revolves around: Spawning, Flanking, Killing a bunch of enemies, Get killed, Respawn, and just repeat it all over. Pushing objectives is just something you do at the end of a flank, and not WHY you flank. - Milsim mechanics can just be ignored due to arcade mechanics being more convenient and quick.(example, why wait for an ammo drop if you can just die and respawn with full ammo, you're so fast that running back would still be quicker than finding a support, or waiting for an ammo drop) - No matter what gamemode and objectives they insert into the game, it won't change HOW people play the game, and they feel exasperated at that. In my opinion, the most important of all, its something Oki said in a channel on discord: "One of most wishes I had was, make arcade players enjoy milsim to some extend. I used to be an arcade player, when I was introduced to milsim, I was blown up and it was so unique to me. I wanted BattleBit to be the gap between extreme milsim and the arcade, where they can taste this as well. Yet I lost this game to arcade playerbase currently. Anything that is bit more immersive is a backlash, anything that remotely slows the game is a backlash." he's talking about how he wanted to bridge the gap between "hardcore" milsim games like Squad and Arma, and arcade shooters. People talk as if Oki is/was slowly trying to turn everyone into hardcore milsim players, or turn the game into a milsim game while that was never what he was trying to do. He was trying to make a game that could introduce arcade players to milsim elements, while still having arcade mechanics too. There was always going to be a hardcore/milsim mode. Arcade people think that Oki is trying to turn the main game into that... it was never going to be like it, but still they act as if he is worse than Satan and wants to destroy the game by turning the base game into a hardcore milsim. But due to the near childish outrage, personal attacks and harrassement, they feel forced to continue making changes that takes the game further and further away from any meaningful milsim mechanics. Taking a look at how little open people are to the new sound system, its apparent. Yes, it sucked total ass, and it currently (as of the making of this comment) is ass, but as a system, its not bad. It just required TONS more testing, but somehow Oki decided to push it out early due to some imaginary deadline of "Christmas Period Release". ALL changes except for: - Lean Spam Removal - The new sounds system Have ALL been making the game more and more arcade. ALL changes, 100%. Outside of those 2 exceptions, not a SINGLE change has been made to bridge the gap between milsim and arcade shooters in any way. Not a single one. Due to riding on the positive feedback from the insane launch, and then continuing to appease that playerbase, to now receiving tons of hate and harrasement and seeing a drop in playerbase whenever they make a change/too little testing etc, they've really put themselves in a hard position. Concretely, some random examples of changes that has made milsim mechanics redundant/ made the game more arcadey: - Bandage heals - Bandage number increase - Scope glint changes - Sniper Vapor trail While I get a lot of arcade players are upset, dissapointed and dont really have confidence in some of the dev team after the changes we've seen lately... It's probably due to how much I've been on the subreddit and discord, but I am absolutely appaled at the behaviour of mainly the arcade playerbase who don't care about having objective play, good gameplay for the majority etc, but only prioritize their own fun. I really wish people would be more open minded and give stuff a chance, instead of metaphorically flinging their shit and crying for "REVERT!!1!" at the seemingly smallest change they don't like. Seeing the amount of backlash on the whole "inertia" debuckle, and how people acted like it was the end of the world when Oki suggested making "180 midair turning" less effective.. I just.. could not. I don't want the base game to be a hardcore milsim. But on the scale of "Milsim to Arcade shooter" the game should be somewhere between BF and say... Insurgency Sandstorm/Squad/Hell Let Loose, the game is even more arcadey then BF... It's on the wrong side imo. In my humble opinion, I'd love to see Oki get another dev to keep the base mode as it is right now, or just slightly more meaningful milsim mechanics without hampering the current feel of the game. While Oki just starts dedicating his time to the milsim mode, or even a new, the "Bridge between arcade and milsim" game he envisioned. Sorry for the wall of post, and while I dont really have anything against discussing this, I just feel like the community, both people wanting more milsim, and the arcade players who's brains have flatlined, have handled this whole thing super bad. Peace. Also, you rock, Camikaze.
You should really checkt and point out rising storm 2 vietnam probably the best Mix if acade and milsim ever created. Its the most immersive and yet really fun game i know.
I think Battlebit should introduce Milsim-iness not as a core feature / change to the whole game, but as a separate game mode (/ separate game?) that one can choose in the main menu and switch to. This way, people can keep teh BattleBit they know right now, but players who would enjoy the additional realism aren't left out either.
Edit: My main point (I didn't make it very clear) is slowing down the game a little, isn't making it a Milsim. If anything, it puts it in line with older battlefield titles I can’t really blame them In terms of how speedy the movement is. That’s basically most shooters nowadays, and it makes battlebit look less unique. That said. I’m pretty sure they said they would add a separate milsim mode. Honestly, I don’t see the issue with the possibility of maybe decreasing players overall speed, because the one thing I KNOW annoys people, is shooting at someone point blank, and they start throwing their mouse around like they’ve put their sensitivity to max and then they kill the guy or run away. I’m guilty of doing it myself in a panic, but I know it isn’t any fun to deal with. Not to mention, by lowering the speed a bit, it’ll probably feel *more* like battlefield. I think people forget that they really didn’t let you be a speed demon in 2, 3, 4 and 1 *also man please devs gimme the option of PiP, it looks cool damn it reeeee*
>design milsim elements like bandaging, healing, building, destruction >accelerate gameplay, imbalance guns for race-to-the-bottom arcade pacing >zero milsim elements are used, only exploited but now it's suffering an identity crisis? this was week 3 mate
I hate the way that Battlebit has become a run and gun shooter. Haven't played in two months because it just wasn't fun for me at all anymore, and it's too bad. I understand the feeling of separation because from the first week it's become very different mechanically. More milsim aspects would make me actually interested in the game again, but I'm not sure I see that happening anytime soon.
I bought the game expecting a more milsim environment but was pretty disappointed with the community and the lack of meaningful communication between teammates. I'd love a milsim approach in the game.
I believe this from back when I first played that the movement meta was something the devs never envisoned. They wanted the leaning and prone from milsim, only for the animations and lack of adverse aiming to have these have more effect in CQB than its intended context. From a dev standpoint, I feel this can leave you in no mans land in terms of direction and community. That said, when the pop went down and mostly veterans cheesing the lean/prone/vault were left, I lost interest in the game. Imo that is not Battlefield movement, it is COD, and I am not interested in that anymore.
It’s not even cod either it’s much faster. Personally I love it but I can see how it can be off putting to some but once you learn to counter the zoomers they really don’t pose much of a threat. I’m much more worried about snipers a mile away than I am some crazy movement spammer even after the sniper “nerfs”
@@Frogstoneygood luck trying to counter 8 medics coming at you in fast speeds, spaming lean and drop shots while you're either in a building or caught in the open.
I love the way the game is now. It’s what makes Battlebit, Battlebit. Oki making the changes we all think he’s planning on doing will kill the game. I always see the same guys playing almost everyday over on BBOCE, doing what they do because I know they enjoy the games mechanics and how it’s currently played. There’s been multiple discussions across multiple discords basically begging Oki to not change the game to a milsim. With that being said, add a milsim mode. Leave the fast paced, arcade-y game how it is, there are diehard fans who would kill to keep it the way it is.
well personally im waiting for the "milsim" or hardcore mode that they prommised befor EA went live, i personally love 1 shot headshots and a more tactical game approach way more, since my main game (squad) has died bcs they completely changed their gameplay mechanics i was hoping to find what i lost here in BBR but. dont get me wrong i like the base gamemode that is offerd right now but i havent actually played the game for a couple of months bcs for me its become stale and to casual. i think what they should do is keep this gameplay mide for what it is and just develop the hardcore "milsim" mode and make it a seperate list/quque inside of the game.
I hope so too, I got into Battlebit for a similar reason because the Battlefield series is dead to me. This game is my replacement and i'd hate to see it become like another milsim or too arcadey. It hits the right spot imo between arcadey and milsim.
The ever present question of "are we making the game we want ?" or "are we making the game that will reach the broadest audience ?". It's hard to answer. But I certainly hope the devs will find an answer that makes them happy.
Splitting the game into 2 wont fix the game. Spliting creates 2 different possible weapon metas, 2 different matchmaking pools, 2 mastly differing communities arguing what should and shouldnt be strong in 1 game mode or the other, perfect example being warzone. Battlebit needs to define itself somehow and fast.
They ruined sniping for the sake of their vision. Now you're either playing really really slow long range sniping or you're going full arcade movement shooter blazing fast chaining headshots before you're noticed.
For me something what I would really enjoy is adding second mode which milsim characteristic such as a player decrease by 50% reduced HUD (making checking ammo in magazines finally useful) and other.
I'm only 8 mins in currently but I do want to say that if people continue to press, right or wrong, for the developers to go down a path they don't want they're eventually going to run out of passion for the project.
I don't know, I loved this game, my entire Arma group moved over for about 200 hours in the first 30 days most of us... but every change has just made the game less apealing to us. The last straw for a lot was the self healing buff, an attempt to fix the medic meta by making everybody stupidly healthy was terrible, the game's pacing was OK in the first weeks while people were learning the maps, but has only grown less fun and more boring and samey since... And onboarding new players? Its a 'fun and chill time' for those of us with a decent ammount of game and map knowledge... the metrics show exactly how much fun new players are having playing against the remaining playerbase. Reminds me a lot of PS2, so I'm not surprised you love how it plays now, but I think it is going to have just as much trouble holding a fanbase as planetside, and it doesn't even have the MMOshooter lure... They can see where the winds are blowing already, and think they are better off changing direction and trying to become lowpoly squad rather than fizzling and dying in the ever fickle tides of twitchy arcade shooters.
@@frankreynolds9930 Niche games keep players after their flash in the pan is over, arcade shooters get forgotten in a few months... Seen the active player counts lately? Dont get me wrong, I get why people would be mad, and I agree that leaning into the milsim side is turning your back on the millions for the thousands... but the millions already left my dude, roblox with M249s had its 6 weeks.
@reidwallace4258 Have you seen mil sim game player count. Even the best has 15k as their limit. Atleast arcade games has chance to attract lots of players even if it's short term. Just look at six days of fallujah game. So hyped and now dead.
You know what I kinda like about battlebit is that it keeps changing a little. Another thing to keep in mind is that the develops don't really owe us anything. Most of the players that don't play anymore bought it dirt cheap and got 30-100+ hours of good fun, those people have gotten their moneys worth.. the rest of us who like that shit keeps changing and evolving.
Keep it simple, more modes means more balancing, means splitting the player base, means someone will always be unhappy. Either take it back to it roots, lose the arcade player base but be happy or embrace what it has become and lean into it.
It's an Early Access game with devs that are still trying to figure out what kind of game they want it to be. Every time they talk about the future of MilSim mode, it's always a MODE. The arcadey game that people want to SPRINT and JUMP 24/7, LIKE YOU DO, isn't going anywhere. But if most the population moves to the MilSim mode, you'll have to accept that fate.
I'm not a fan of the new audio changes. Sounds like I playing starwars with the and you here every single single sniper on the map. Directional audio seems to also be much worse
It's funny you bring this up now in this way as I personally feel a lot of the recent changes have pushed it more towards the arcady feel. The recent nerf to snipers in particular. I have to say this really put me off. I somewhat burnt out of battlebit on release after sinking a lot of time into the game and was just getting back into it before said nerfs. Unfortunately for me the sniper changes really killed my desire to revisit the game long term as my preferred playstyle of stealthy flank sniping is all but impossible with the inclusion of trails.
But it was deserved though. Getting 1 taped by an M200 from a mile away with no counter play as any other class was rough. Now, with trails and glint in 4x, you at least know WHERE you are getting sniped from and can position accordingly. M200s is why I basically avoid the desert map like the plague.
@@TheClone37 If someone can hit you in the head 1st time from over 500m away you are either facing someone skilled enough that it wouldn't really matter what they were using they would still likely outshoot you or, alternatively, it means you are not moving enough and that's entirely on you. It's really easy to tell where sniper are up to 500m away. Scope glint is more than sufficient and allows players with better positioning to get more done. Additionally if you ever do die to a sniper you know exactly where they are as the death screen points you straight at your killer. You can then choose whether to counter snipe them or find a different approach as another class. The slow multi person ttk of the bolty means it will always be most effective to run other weapons regardless. The changes now just mean that the only effective way to snipe is to do it from 9 miles away which is what the change was supposed to combat. Prior to the trails my typical range fo sniping was 100-300m typically from a wide flank or ideally, having snuck through enemy lines, from behind. Now if you take a single shot the entire map knows exactly where you are making long range camping the only practical way to snipe as only other snipers can interact with you in any way. Additionally my preferred playstyle could actually impact a game. Making the sniper class actually valuable. Now with snipers just sat at the back they are all but irrelevant to the actual score or objective of the game. Just having snipe offs with the enemy doing the same thing. As with trails you can no longer remain hidden. Contradicting the whole purpose of a sniper that being to provide supporting fire from a concealed position. I can honestly say as someone with more vector kills than any other weapon I never really find snipers to be problematic nor did I die to them often. If you remain mobile and use good pathing rather than just sprinting at the biggest scrap you will seldom die to sniper fire unless you stay stationary.
@qwertyg3666 to that wall of text: "neat" I used to be like you, but about a different class, in a different game, in a different time. "Infiltrators are fine!" "You can always switch classes and try to counter snipe me!" "Cloak doesn't need to be removed, there's only a few places a sniper can use anyway!" "Kill cam ruined sniping! There's no point in sniper rifles now!" "If I killed you, you deserved it" "I only get a couple kills an hour, why do you care how I get mine!" You know what changed? I decided to give the rest of the game a try. I doubled down on armor, flanked with a light assault, and learned to brawl with the HA. It was while playing these other classes I learned that yes, all the things said about infill were true because I only cared about what I was doing, not the fact that I was on a ridge filled with other infils, or the one guy at 600m out doming people able to see ANYONE approaching, or the fact that once killed, a sniper isn't dealt with because that position can always be run back to for the whole battle(match). I suggest, if you truly are stuck in that mindset you have, it's time to explore the rest of the game and learn to enjoy it for what it is.
@@TheClone37 I have more time and more kills on non recon classes than I do on recon. I know how to play them and I do so highly effectively. The issue isn't I can no longer play the game. The issue is killing skill intensive playstyles that were both fun and rewarding by adding something meant (and failing) to tackle something else entirely. Recon was already the 2nd slowest class and the least armoured and now it doesn't have stealth either. Leaving as the only option in playstyle to be sit at the back of the map where other players can't interact with you except with snipers. The exact playstyle they said they wanted to nerf.
Personally the best moments in the game comes from the more tactical & mil-sim but still casual encounters, holding a stronghold or pushing slowly block by block. I guess the best approach would be to have more hardcore lobbies separately for people like me while keeping the medic run&gun lobbies for people who enjoy more direct gunfights.
I think if they fill out their team a bit more and getting to do that double dip into milsim territory would could effectively increase their reach well, but, as you said, they need be careful of not over-extending themselves. It's all about what's feasible and what's not, and with their team as is, I'd say they should pick at it if they have the time, but not to focus on it too heavily until they've got some backup on their team to help with the increased workload. If they can do that they'll have a very special game that's competent in two distinct, but very well loved sub-genres of FPSs. Kind of curious to see if they can pull it off.
We've seen too many great games turn their core gameplay around and it almost never works. I hope these devs see it. Even though this might not be exactly the game they were hoping to create, it has gained a lot of players and the community is already there.
Just to keep things clear: your entire premise (that devs are making the game milsim) is based off of 1) a dev stream you haven’t watched but that a 3rd party told you about and 2) one change weeks ago which they rolled back. The game has never been as “arcadey” as you’re describing. I’ve played since launch and I’ve never thought of it as arcadey. I’ve always thought of it as a hybrid, arcadesim if you will. That uniqueness is what sets it apart.
I much prefer the battlebit arcade battlefield that we have now over a more battle sim. But it could slow down a bit, even up to 10% slower, so it feels more "decision based" and less "twitchy"
I'm really excited for a more milsim approach to BBR, being a fan of a lot of milsim games myself, but big huge mega agree on them needing to at least keep the core experience familiar to what people currently "expect" out of it. Really hope they have the resources to continue work on both. Also this is the most sane, coherent take on BBR's current development path that I've seen in a minute lmao
Ya know, I play several hours a day, and stay active on the Discord. But the only time I suspect Battle Bit is having any problems is when I watch it's content creators. I'm not suggesting you can't say anything negative about Battle Bit, but it's becoming obvious that's the kind of content that you all prefer.
They 100% need to change this game. I binged on this game for a few weeks, unlocked everything, then quit and never looked d back. I was successful from the get go, so that wasn't the problem. I came from a comp team in Planetside 2 and a lot of that transferred. Anyway, I left battlebit because it was too simple. It just felt like whack-a-mole going from point to point. Just lowering the player speed would mean there would have to be some thought about positioning, setting up a hold because you couldn't just sprint back to the other side of the map if you lost a point. Coordinated helo drops would become more important. But the other problem that's just as big is the lack of community. Planetside nailed it with easy to join outfits. Make some way to easily group up with players you know so there would be a foundation for teamwork. It's community that makes or breaks a mmo, and battlebit has none. Just log on, usually don't talk to a soul, and mindlessly farm until you get bored. I can appreciate the movement meta and fast pace, but that's just such a waste with the amount of teamwork such large groups of players can bring. My suggestion would be to tweak small matches to be more fast paced, and make large matches more tactical. Even if gameplay stays the same between the modes, have more spawn options and smaller maps for more fast gaming.
Have a chill game? Is that even possible if u arent running around like a poisoned rat? U basically get hunted down if you dont move 25meters every 2 seconds
I feel that the new update has put the game in a confusing place, with both milsim orientated squads and more causal gameplay focused squads. it clashes heavy with the games maps and how the game is played overall, milsim players are going to get destroyed by casual players because they are slower and more focused on the objective, whereas casual gamers are more focused on the kills.
I'm surprised to hear your description of what was on offer at release as a casual arcade shooter. I thought it was clearly described as a middle ground between arcade and milsim. That's why I bought it and that's why I've been dissapointed in how arcadey it's become, or at least how arcadey the meta has become. I don't need it to be Squad but I'd love it to slow down it's pace a bit.
I mean look at the graphic style, dont think anyone is jumping on for some realistic shooter. Make it arcadey to fill the gap that cod and battlefield have left
I think the game is better as an arcade shooter with some milsim mechanics that promote teamwork. Games like Squad are terrible because of how close to milsim they are... Realism != fun. That's why we play videogames in the first place :). I personally love the speed the game plays at. It feels like you can play really slow and methodical, or ramp it up to 11. The velocity you can build up while moving makes this an incredibly addicting game with a good learning curve, IMO. Let's just have separate game modes, or let people customize the experience up the wazoo in Community Servers.
Completely disagree there. There's a ton of rifles that out compete SMGs that also have slower firing rates... Unless all you're doing is playing Namak. @@TackyBunny
I think they're in a tough spot - the player numbers are way down from release, and they're trying to think of ways to get people playing more. But if it turns into a milsim I probably wouldn't be that interested in it. It might get an influx of players for a bit (heh) but their main issue is player retention. I think BF2042 also stole back a lot of the people who were initially hyped for BBR, especially with those previews of the game basically bashing 2042. But by the time they got the game into early access 2042 had clawed back a lot of players, and the player numbers have only dropped since then.
i mean, there has been a lot of players who either tried or came back to the game when it was on free weekend. so i guess that's it? it wasn't because of the 2.2.2 update either
As long there is no wind which is affecting a rpg (The right way!!), the need to have to apply a tourniquet and packing some "holes" with QuikClot or having "icons" in my sight everywhere I would not say it is a MilSim. However I agree that Battlebit is Battlebit and I agree that it should be itself.
To be fair I'm not one for mil sim due to the fast TTK but I do like where 2019 PS2 was at with not slow but not fast gameplay but more medium speed. I struggle to find a replacement for that nich. As most games seam to go full arcade shooter, or mil sim with slow pace gameplay with burst of intense action.
I think making a whole separate gamemode just for the milsim is not the optimal choice It just splits up the playerbase and screws with balance. War thunder was able to pull it off because its only competition was wargaming's world of series where vehicles have health and camo makes your vehicles straight up turn invisible whereas you just need to change a few letters in battlebit's name to find its competition
The BattleBit dev team should've expanded already, even 3 or 4 more developers would help a ton. If Battlebit completely shifts to more milsim the game will die.
Some of the players I interacted with said they came from Battlefront 2, they have bots there and that didnt take way from the enjoyment. That should at least help in map population. I come from a milsim background in gaming so I welcome the milsim mode as advertised before. Im content that battlebit is somewhat of a hybrid though in its current version. I literally play this game more than the other milsim games I played before. As it is the playerbase is dwindling despite it leaning in to the arcadey elements more. My opinion, Im still waiting for LAN, Singleplayer(offline) and Mods.. and maybe bots(which then can be modded). You cant please everybody, so let them please themselves. Modding always has the chance of saving games. I'm a broken record but I think the ARMA 3 model works just fine. You can see a lot of content even now whether it be with a huge number of people or with a small group of friends doing PvP, PvE or anything in between.
Its better to pivot onto another mode. The core mode is already where it should be, there's not much to change besides adding more content. Expanding something like the milsim mode gives opportunities for other types of players to join, similar to what CoD did with Warzone or GTA did with online, Fortnite did with no-build. You can't revive a game by just throwing money at the base game mode... Next up would be a "vehicle sim" mode.
Exactly i only ply fortnite bc of no build, just like i only play bf4 hardcore. A milsim Mode wont nessearyly splut the Player base, but Enhance the game.
Honestly I'd love both. Sometimes I'm in the mood for Battlefield, sometimes I'm in the mood for Squad. I like battlebit as a good middle ground. I welcome some more hardcore mechanics, as long as it doesn't go full milsim where I run for 20 minutes then get domed by some guy a kilometer away.
I personally have been loving the way the developers have been taking to this game. My one gripe on the recent changes would be the muffling of sound when you're down. Being concussed when bullets are flying near you is a GREAT addition in my eyes because it slows the pace down, it makes people think twice if they should run out of cover or not. This bullet suppression has also helped me personally with my biggest gripe the game has and that's the snipers. The recon class has become atrocious to deal with, in most game lobbies I've been the majority of the time I've been in has been hit with the m110, m200, mk20, L96, etc. With at least some situations now i can have myself or my support teammates suppress those pesky snipers. The new sounds and bullets trails have also improved some of that as well because now i can at least save myself encase that sniper misses his first shot and i know now that i have an enemy recon pinning me down. This may be copium or a genuine take but I feel i would have a LOT more fun if they were to just simply remove the recon class all together and make a new one like a Breacher with shotguns. This way this new class can be a priority roll of carrying explosives, being better at close combat situations but not mid or far ranges, possibly adding a new armor type like flak armor where it makes it easier for the breacher class to survive explosives like anti-personal mines or RPG fragmentation. At the end of the day I've enjoyed these newest updates, its brought back more of that casual gameplay, before them i was running into tons and tons of sweaty competitive players and my game time was ruined and I would ultimately changes games after 2/3 matches where I'm just stomped into the ground. I want a more milsim experience, i want something thats more like Squad or Arma but has the replay-ability like Battlefield. I work long shifts and the last thing i want to do is get on this game and be completely swarmed by the likes of the CatEat Clan or have a spawn-die simulator from snipers, and too be frank because of what i previously mentioned its made me burn out from the game and leave it for a while. I wish the best for this game and i hope to come back to it with a better light.
@TackyBunny lol what? Waki, sandy sunset, New Basra, Oil fields, and more are ALL sniper hellscapes. Just because you play Namak all day doesn't mean they favor SMGs and all maps are SMG preferable
It would to be 5v5, 6v6 max 8v8 mode to be a tactical shooter. There is no way 127 ppl can make a plan and comunicate to win the match. But thats why I love this game. Fun, chill, arcade game ❤
I think the only way to make both side happy. It would have to be an more simulation game mode on the options. It will let the developers put more simulation stuff in the game without dividing the community.
What the devs have learned from this (hopefully) or even we as the battlebit community is that a game gets played to the limits of what the game's design allows. For example: if the game allows lean spam(ik it's nerfed just an example), drop shots, air strafe, running extremely fast then people will abuse all that to its fullest extent despite it being 'unrealistic' or 'not the way the devs wanted it to be played'. That being said. It's still possible to play a bit more milsim style and do good despite the somewhat strangely fast pace of the game. I play both fast and slow depending on the mood. Heavy armor, m4 extended mag or ranger/light armor smg, both of these work, but are not equally as good. I feel like the devs can encourage variety by allowing the classes to have more loadouts for example you could have 3 loadouts for assault, one with heavy armor lots of utility and a extened mag gun and one with a smg that's fast etc. (Extended mag stats do need a rework). What is annoying also is how people purposefully go to meatgrinder areas and transport players even heli pilots drop people in the meatgrinder obj despite there being 5 objs left to capture that no one is defending. That type of stuff leads to burnout for me, cause in a meatgrinder match even being in the top 10 in a 256 player lobby feels barely rewarding. Playing with a squad, flanking the meatgrinder and capping objs would be more fun, but sometimes no one on your team wants to do that with you and none of the heli pilots want to support that playstyle.
Ive always been skeptical of "listening to your player base". A lot of the time, people think they want something new, something different when what they really want, is a game mechanic from another game that seriously alters the current gameplay. This leads to an identity changed from what the game developers really wanted and thus, disappointed in what they wanted and what they have.
the devs from eft never wanted to make eft in its current form. it was envisioned as a means to an end. to make money, so they can make their "true" vision come true in form of a different second game. to put it simply: if the devs of battlebit remastered think they are already there (required funds), a second seperate game would be the most reasonable direction. selling a mil sim to shooter fans has at best a 5% conversion rate. if they redirect the game as is, it will earn as most favorable outcome: 95% spite.
A high-paced arcade shooter with milsim elements sprinkled on top is what made me fall in love with Battlebit. It's the only game I've played since I heard about and purchased it the day of early access release. If it turns into a full-blown milsim game, I'm out. I can't get into a flow state in slow paced games. I need the adrenaline laden plays to keep my mind focused. Turning a corner, seeing 5 guys right there healing up and reloading, tossing a c4 around and taking them all out with that satisfying KCHNK sound is fantastic. I also like that our fully grown men can squeeze through a little 8 inch square window at full sprint speed. It's goofy, it's fast, it's fun. All that goofiness aside, the skill ceiling in BBR is really high, which leaves people like me with a permanent carrot on a stick to chase. I love it!
I think they can easily keep the same modes and just add a 6v6 arcade/search and destroy mode. It will really round out the game allowing you to play from 128 people lobbies to 12
I would play this game if there was any sort of situational awareness. The sound is still dreadful, and you have no means of easily recognising where enemies are. It is more beneficial to just run around like an idiot than actually follow the flow of battle. Once they actually sort that out I would consider this on a level with something like Planetside
Honestly I actually wanted Battle bit to be SLIIIIIIGHtly more arcad-ey I.e. not having to worry about bleedout... admittedly I think the games move speed could be slowed down slightly maybey like 5-10% for run speed
The peeps over in the official BB discord throw a fit if they see any changes happening. Also wow I didn't know Karmakut did a video on BB back in its Squad-like days.
Oki and the team can do it, they just need to think of hardcore like battlebit+. Adding easy to balance mechanics like audio tweaks and gameplay tweaks while not changing health or gun stats will mean that they only need to balance 1 version of the game.
While I don't particulary hate new audio system as a whole (apart from some guns sounding kind of worse than before, or just straight up muffled) I really really dislike those "laser gun" sounds you can hear while bullets fly near you. It's just off-putting to hear those idk why.
This makes me think that the best would be to split both approaches into two different games, but then again, this is a 3 man operation, I can only think scaling this and hiring people and all that jazz would only drive both projects to their downfall in order to become profitable
The last update feels like it wholly embraced the arcade-style gaming. Getting sniped by MP5s and LMGs at distance is always fun. Not my style at all and that's unfortunate as I enjoyed BBR before this latest update. Back to Squad/Insurgency...
I think they should just work on bringing it to consoles/steam deck so i can play with more of my friends. Having said that, lowering movement speed would not impact my experience at all
My opinion so far is to let the devs do what they want. People complain about the game, and yet they still play because they know it's better than a lot of options. I know that even if the devs switch over to more milsim play, I'll still stick with Battlebit because guess what, that still sounds fun. Besides, the one thing I hear people complain about the most is the speed of the game being a little ridiculous.
i do hope sgt oki-doki push this game toward mil-sim. Battlebit remastered can also follow the step operation harsh doorstop where the bluedrake also say that OHD will be where you can play game like insurgency/squad depend on the game mode. instead releasing the different game , sgt oki doki and team should add mil-sim mood to current game and for the current moment maybe he and team should open like several mil-sim test server.
Being a big fan of the MW19 gameplay... the lack of audio when hurt is one of THE MOST infuriating gameplay decisions that game did. Dramatically kills the pace (and not in a good way), and make people who haven't been hurt but bum rushing such a pain.
Pure milsim games are terrible. I'm not playing a VIDEO GAME for realism. If I wanted realism, I'd go down to the real-life range and fire some rounds.
Sounds like the dev team had poor direction in the first place. It'd be a predatory practice to change the game after however many tens of thousands of people bought it with one gameplay style in mind.
@@frankreynolds9930not really, when the game blew up with popularity they had way more mis-sim mechanics that the game has it now. In fact, i would say now is the worst tine for you to try to play bbr for the mil-sim because it's non existent
Your gameplay footage is misleading. Instead of showing you making so many frags, why not show how you get fragged even without making a single shot? Or simply being fragged even without knowing what hit you? Many youtubers show only the wining footage of any game, which does not do justice to real gaming experience.
It wouldn't surprise me if 'you made this happen' low-key bitterness was at work with medics not getting the p90 and the, uh, thoroughness of the recon balancing if those kinds of things are responses to the game being played in ways other than how they envisioned it. While I trust the devs' vision, trying too hard to nudge people toward behaviors, like how they play a game, is usually full of disappointment. The latter seems especially likely, given gamers' rebellious/spiteful streaks.
You make a great point while also raising a feasible solution... take what's here with BB, and make a tactical sim as a separate game. Great both the markets. 👍
"we are disappointed on how arcady our game has gotten" "we will add insane sniper trail" yea... devs are nothing more than a bad joke. they killed this game for good. 2500 players peak says it all.
Can’t agree more with everything you laid out here. 350 hours in BBR and I’ve more than gotten my moneys worth. But instead of leaning into what makes the game shine (movement, gunplay, chaos) they want to make a Mil sim? lol
Uts nothing New mate, people like me have been waiting for hardcore since the changes started, hc used to be a future of all fps Heck even cod. Instead of letting ok follow his passion his creativity his Vision. You want to Limit him. Limiting developers instead of letting them do thier tjing is exactly why we needed battle bit in the first place!
Called this problem since the closed early access weekends. Devs were too arrogant. I guess this is what happens when an ignorant community funds your patreon with 15k$ a month unconditionally, you just get to be arrogant. Evidently the fun is over for them.
As always, appreciate the feedback on the content gang! Continuing to try new things and implement a bit more "personality" into the content, so very keen to hear your thoughts!
Hi
Thanks for the much-needed update!
Your personality shines through the otherwise fantastic video production, so imho, you can leisurely concentrate on producing new content.
Also, got some new material for "Clips of the week", most of it on my channel.
Man, what if Battlebit, despite its obvious inspirations, is just its own genre? Neither Arcade nor Milsim, just Battlebit.
I feel like Battlebit is basically already a perfect balance between mil-sim and arcade. I think making a mil-sim mode would be the only choice if they want that in the game or else the game will die.
What I don't understand is why the devs don't simply follow in the footsteps of war thunder and have both an arcade mode and tactical mode. Separate options, with the more mil-sim mode having these newer tweaks and arcade playing into that image of what battlebit has become in the eyes of the public.
(Edit) Got to the end of the video and realized you brought it up.
The milsim is in development tho. You cannot expect three guys to rush it down, when there were more important Things to do.
That's pretty much what they're doing, any time they talk about MilSim on discord it's a MilSim MODE, not an overhaul removing existing mechanics. I don't know why Camikaze is freaking out about it.
@@Cifer77because the devs have a different aproach as how the arcade mode should be compared to how the comunity envisions it, players like the fast paced action and the crazy battlefield type plays you can pull of the base game but the devs think it should be a little slower just to be a simpler to enjoy and easier to aproach than the mil-sim mode which is fair but that is not what most people want to happen
Splitting a community this size isn't a great idea. It's already hard to get populated servers in some regions. Splitting the community will just mean that there's 2 unpopulated game modes.
@@WillfromBrooklyn player numbers are dwindling even now as it is. I feel. A possible solution is bots, guys who play Battlefront brought that up. Of course bots would then open up the possibility of LAN, singleplayer and custom campaigns. Modding always has the chance of saving games.
I'm a fan of where Battlebit Remastered was at when it launched: a hybrid milsim/arcade shooter. I'm not big on pure milsim games because I find them too slow/punishing for my tastes, but I've grown tired of arcade-style shooters because they've saturated the market for so long. Battlebit provides a nice middle ground: a somewhat arcadey shooter that uses milsim-like mechanics to slow down the gameplay and add some flavor to what frankly might be an otherwise bland game if it was purely an arcade shooter.
Maintaining that balancing act between arcade and milsim shooter is where I feel Battlebit should try to stay, rather than branching the game off into an arcade mode and a milsim mode. I wouldn't mind a more tactical/milsim heavy mode for the game, but I don't think that the creation of one should result in the base game becoming too arcadey.
whats your opinion on 3d spotting
@unityman3133 I like 3D spotting in Battlefield because I find spotting people a bit too difficult with how player models can blend into the terrain at long ranges. But in Battlebit, I had no problem seeing people without 3D spotting; I was fine with the previous spotting where you could mark where someone was but not their exact location as they move. (The 3D spotting on vehicles is nice though as an engineer main, but that was already a thing prior to 3D player spotting.)
When the hell was it ever a milsim hybrid? it never was.
@@amazin7006 Well it's an arcade style shooter with some milsim mechanics. It has a realistic magazine management system instead of the arcade ammo pool mechanics. It also takes to more "realistic" health systems such as Squad instead of taking the Battlefield route. And with custom community servers, it's possible there's one out there where people play it in a milsim style. Whether you like it or not, it is a hybrid.
@@lieutenantgodzilla none of those are milsim. There's nothing realistic about the health system either. Battlefield 2 had the same system
Wall of text coming. But I've paraphrased the recent Devcast on the top, so if interested, read the first paragraph!
The Devcast from 3 week ago was really where Oki and team opened up about what they want to change about the game, how they feel about the game etc.
Its yet to be uploaded afaik, which sucks because they went over SO much changes, but I'll try to paraphrase some of them here:
- They feel like there is no importance/purpose to killing enemies. Its obviously the main focus of the game, but.. you don't kill enemies to take an objective, the gameplay generally revolves around: Spawning, Flanking, Killing a bunch of enemies, Get killed, Respawn, and just repeat it all over. Pushing objectives is just something you do at the end of a flank, and not WHY you flank.
- Milsim mechanics can just be ignored due to arcade mechanics being more convenient and quick.(example, why wait for an ammo drop if you can just die and respawn with full ammo, you're so fast that running back would still be quicker than finding a support, or waiting for an ammo drop)
- No matter what gamemode and objectives they insert into the game, it won't change HOW people play the game, and they feel exasperated at that.
In my opinion, the most important of all, its something Oki said in a channel on discord:
"One of most wishes I had was, make arcade players enjoy milsim to some extend.
I used to be an arcade player, when I was introduced to milsim, I was blown up and it was so unique to me.
I wanted BattleBit to be the gap between extreme milsim and the arcade, where they can taste this as well.
Yet I lost this game to arcade playerbase currently.
Anything that is bit more immersive is a backlash, anything that remotely slows the game is a backlash."
he's talking about how he wanted to bridge the gap between "hardcore" milsim games like Squad and Arma, and arcade shooters.
People talk as if Oki is/was slowly trying to turn everyone into hardcore milsim players, or turn the game into a milsim game while that was never what he was trying to do.
He was trying to make a game that could introduce arcade players to milsim elements, while still having arcade mechanics too.
There was always going to be a hardcore/milsim mode. Arcade people think that Oki is trying to turn the main game into that... it was never going to be like it, but still they act as if he is worse than Satan and wants to destroy the game by turning the base game into a hardcore milsim.
But due to the near childish outrage, personal attacks and harrassement, they feel forced to continue making changes that takes the game further and further away from any meaningful milsim mechanics. Taking a look at how little open people are to the new sound system, its apparent. Yes, it sucked total ass, and it currently (as of the making of this comment) is ass, but as a system, its not bad. It just required TONS more testing, but somehow Oki decided to push it out early due to some imaginary deadline of "Christmas Period Release".
ALL changes except for:
- Lean Spam Removal
- The new sounds system
Have ALL been making the game more and more arcade. ALL changes, 100%. Outside of those 2 exceptions, not a SINGLE change has been made to bridge the gap between milsim and arcade shooters in any way. Not a single one. Due to riding on the positive feedback from the insane launch, and then continuing to appease that playerbase, to now receiving tons of hate and harrasement and seeing a drop in playerbase whenever they make a change/too little testing etc, they've really put themselves in a hard position.
Concretely, some random examples of changes that has made milsim mechanics redundant/ made the game more arcadey:
- Bandage heals
- Bandage number increase
- Scope glint changes
- Sniper Vapor trail
While I get a lot of arcade players are upset, dissapointed and dont really have confidence in some of the dev team after the changes we've seen lately... It's probably due to how much I've been on the subreddit and discord, but I am absolutely appaled at the behaviour of mainly the arcade playerbase who don't care about having objective play, good gameplay for the majority etc, but only prioritize their own fun. I really wish people would be more open minded and give stuff a chance, instead of metaphorically flinging their shit and crying for "REVERT!!1!" at the seemingly smallest change they don't like. Seeing the amount of backlash on the whole "inertia" debuckle, and how people acted like it was the end of the world when Oki suggested making "180 midair turning" less effective.. I just.. could not.
I don't want the base game to be a hardcore milsim. But on the scale of "Milsim to Arcade shooter" the game should be somewhere between BF and say... Insurgency Sandstorm/Squad/Hell Let Loose, the game is even more arcadey then BF... It's on the wrong side imo.
In my humble opinion, I'd love to see Oki get another dev to keep the base mode as it is right now, or just slightly more meaningful milsim mechanics without hampering the current feel of the game. While Oki just starts dedicating his time to the milsim mode, or even a new, the "Bridge between arcade and milsim" game he envisioned.
Sorry for the wall of post, and while I dont really have anything against discussing this, I just feel like the community, both people wanting more milsim, and the arcade players who's brains have flatlined, have handled this whole thing super bad.
Peace.
Also, you rock, Camikaze.
You should really checkt and point out rising storm 2 vietnam probably the best Mix if acade and milsim ever created.
Its the most immersive and yet really fun game i know.
You weren’t kidding about the wall of text lol
I think Battlebit should introduce Milsim-iness not as a core feature / change to the whole game, but as a separate game mode (/ separate game?) that one can choose in the main menu and switch to. This way, people can keep teh BattleBit they know right now, but players who would enjoy the additional realism aren't left out either.
That would be the logical step to take. If no one ends up playing it(Like all the other modes in the game) then there's no harm no foul.
That's what they did
Basically hardcore mode
Edit: My main point (I didn't make it very clear) is slowing down the game a little, isn't making it a Milsim. If anything, it puts it in line with older battlefield titles
I can’t really blame them In terms of how speedy the movement is. That’s basically most shooters nowadays, and it makes battlebit look less unique. That said. I’m pretty sure they said they would add a separate milsim mode.
Honestly, I don’t see the issue with the possibility of maybe decreasing players overall speed, because the one thing I KNOW annoys people, is shooting at someone point blank, and they start throwing their mouse around like they’ve put their sensitivity to max and then they kill the guy or run away. I’m guilty of doing it myself in a panic, but I know it isn’t any fun to deal with.
Not to mention, by lowering the speed a bit, it’ll probably feel *more* like battlefield. I think people forget that they really didn’t let you be a speed demon in 2, 3, 4 and 1
*also man please devs gimme the option of PiP, it looks cool damn it reeeee*
>design milsim elements like bandaging, healing, building, destruction
>accelerate gameplay, imbalance guns for race-to-the-bottom arcade pacing
>zero milsim elements are used, only exploited
but now it's suffering an identity crisis? this was week 3 mate
would have more of a playerbase to split if Reddit Karens didn't bully everyone off of proxy chat.
I hate the way that Battlebit has become a run and gun shooter. Haven't played in two months because it just wasn't fun for me at all anymore, and it's too bad. I understand the feeling of separation because from the first week it's become very different mechanically. More milsim aspects would make me actually interested in the game again, but I'm not sure I see that happening anytime soon.
Go play other mil sim game then. General audience wants mil sim arcade hybrid.
@@frankreynolds9930too bad the game is just call of duty with big maps and with a bleeding mechanic, nothing about the game currently is mil-sim.
@nikolasferreira3247 Different Reloading. Mechanics, short ttk are also mil sim features. Nobody cares about mil sim.
@@nikolasferreira3247 "Nothing about the game currently is miilsim." That's just wrong.
I bought the game expecting a more milsim environment but was pretty disappointed with the community and the lack of meaningful communication between teammates. I'd love a milsim approach in the game.
I believe this from back when I first played that the movement meta was something the devs never envisoned. They wanted the leaning and prone from milsim, only for the animations and lack of adverse aiming to have these have more effect in CQB than its intended context. From a dev standpoint, I feel this can leave you in no mans land in terms of direction and community.
That said, when the pop went down and mostly veterans cheesing the lean/prone/vault were left, I lost interest in the game. Imo that is not Battlefield movement, it is COD, and I am not interested in that anymore.
It’s not even cod either it’s much faster. Personally I love it but I can see how it can be off putting to some but once you learn to counter the zoomers they really don’t pose much of a threat. I’m much more worried about snipers a mile away than I am some crazy movement spammer even after the sniper “nerfs”
@@Frogstoneygood luck trying to counter 8 medics coming at you in fast speeds, spaming lean and drop shots while you're either in a building or caught in the open.
I love the way the game is now. It’s what makes Battlebit, Battlebit.
Oki making the changes we all think he’s planning on doing will kill the game.
I always see the same guys playing almost everyday over on BBOCE, doing what they do because I know they enjoy the games mechanics and how it’s currently played.
There’s been multiple discussions across multiple discords basically begging Oki to not change the game to a milsim.
With that being said, add a milsim mode. Leave the fast paced, arcade-y game how it is, there are diehard fans who would kill to keep it the way it is.
ruined audio lol
That's exactly what Oki is doing: add a Milsim mode. Scarce details as of yet, therefore it's best to keep an eye in the Discord.
BET
as a new players they arent bad not knowing old sounds, and footsteps are accurate@@Wolf994-94
1.7k players
well personally im waiting for the "milsim" or hardcore mode that they prommised befor EA went live, i personally love 1 shot headshots and a more tactical game approach way more, since my main game (squad) has died bcs they completely changed their gameplay mechanics i was hoping to find what i lost here in BBR but. dont get me wrong i like the base gamemode that is offerd right now but i havent actually played the game for a couple of months bcs for me its become stale and to casual.
i think what they should do is keep this gameplay mide for what it is and just develop the hardcore "milsim" mode and make it a seperate list/quque inside of the game.
I hope so too, I got into Battlebit for a similar reason because the Battlefield series is dead to me. This game is my replacement and i'd hate to see it become like another milsim or too arcadey. It hits the right spot imo between arcadey and milsim.
The ever present question of "are we making the game we want ?" or "are we making the game that will reach the broadest audience ?". It's hard to answer. But I certainly hope the devs will find an answer that makes them happy.
Splitting the game into 2 wont fix the game. Spliting creates 2 different possible weapon metas, 2 different matchmaking pools, 2 mastly differing communities arguing what should and shouldnt be strong in 1 game mode or the other, perfect example being warzone. Battlebit needs to define itself somehow and fast.
I just wish that they tone down the movement a bit. Seeing someone zig zag jump at mach 5 is so weird.
The movement and the dynamics is the best part of this game. I'm open to be proven it can be better in another way though.
They ruined sniping for the sake of their vision. Now you're either playing really really slow long range sniping or you're going full arcade movement shooter blazing fast chaining headshots before you're noticed.
For me something what I would really enjoy is adding second mode which milsim characteristic such as a player decrease by 50% reduced HUD (making checking ammo in magazines finally useful) and other.
that being said, they realy should slow down the naked medics zooming around with mach 3. Or at least nerf the turning speed while doing so
I'm only 8 mins in currently but I do want to say that if people continue to press, right or wrong, for the developers to go down a path they don't want they're eventually going to run out of passion for the project.
I don't know, I loved this game, my entire Arma group moved over for about 200 hours in the first 30 days most of us... but every change has just made the game less apealing to us. The last straw for a lot was the self healing buff, an attempt to fix the medic meta by making everybody stupidly healthy was terrible, the game's pacing was OK in the first weeks while people were learning the maps, but has only grown less fun and more boring and samey since... And onboarding new players? Its a 'fun and chill time' for those of us with a decent ammount of game and map knowledge... the metrics show exactly how much fun new players are having playing against the remaining playerbase.
Reminds me a lot of PS2, so I'm not surprised you love how it plays now, but I think it is going to have just as much trouble holding a fanbase as planetside, and it doesn't even have the MMOshooter lure... They can see where the winds are blowing already, and think they are better off changing direction and trying to become lowpoly squad rather than fizzling and dying in the ever fickle tides of twitchy arcade shooters.
New players who are mainstream audience will want arcade game anyway. Mil sim game is a niche market.
@@frankreynolds9930 Niche games keep players after their flash in the pan is over, arcade shooters get forgotten in a few months...
Seen the active player counts lately?
Dont get me wrong, I get why people would be mad, and I agree that leaning into the milsim side is turning your back on the millions for the thousands... but the millions already left my dude, roblox with M249s had its 6 weeks.
@reidwallace4258 Have you seen mil sim game player count. Even the best has 15k as their limit. Atleast arcade games has chance to attract lots of players even if it's short term. Just look at six days of fallujah game. So hyped and now dead.
You know what I kinda like about battlebit is that it keeps changing a little. Another thing to keep in mind is that the develops don't really owe us anything. Most of the players that don't play anymore bought it dirt cheap and got 30-100+ hours of good fun, those people have gotten their moneys worth.. the rest of us who like that shit keeps changing and evolving.
Keep it simple, more modes means more balancing, means splitting the player base, means someone will always be unhappy. Either take it back to it roots, lose the arcade player base but be happy or embrace what it has become and lean into it.
Na they need to make an extra Mode, hardcore Mode used to be a core Feature of games, so splitting the Player base is bs.
It's an Early Access game with devs that are still trying to figure out what kind of game they want it to be. Every time they talk about the future of MilSim mode, it's always a MODE. The arcadey game that people want to SPRINT and JUMP 24/7, LIKE YOU DO, isn't going anywhere. But if most the population moves to the MilSim mode, you'll have to accept that fate.
As an old fuck that still likes to game I cannot game with zoomers. Its just not fun for me as its way too fast paced. Give me a slow old dog mode.
I'm not a fan of the new audio changes. Sounds like I playing starwars with the and you here every single single sniper on the map. Directional audio seems to also be much worse
It's funny you bring this up now in this way as I personally feel a lot of the recent changes have pushed it more towards the arcady feel.
The recent nerf to snipers in particular. I have to say this really put me off. I somewhat burnt out of battlebit on release after sinking a lot of time into the game and was just getting back into it before said nerfs.
Unfortunately for me the sniper changes really killed my desire to revisit the game long term as my preferred playstyle of stealthy flank sniping is all but impossible with the inclusion of trails.
But it was deserved though. Getting 1 taped by an M200 from a mile away with no counter play as any other class was rough. Now, with trails and glint in 4x, you at least know WHERE you are getting sniped from and can position accordingly. M200s is why I basically avoid the desert map like the plague.
@@TheClone37 If someone can hit you in the head 1st time from over 500m away you are either facing someone skilled enough that it wouldn't really matter what they were using they would still likely outshoot you or, alternatively, it means you are not moving enough and that's entirely on you. It's really easy to tell where sniper are up to 500m away. Scope glint is more than sufficient and allows players with better positioning to get more done. Additionally if you ever do die to a sniper you know exactly where they are as the death screen points you straight at your killer. You can then choose whether to counter snipe them or find a different approach as another class. The slow multi person ttk of the bolty means it will always be most effective to run other weapons regardless. The changes now just mean that the only effective way to snipe is to do it from 9 miles away which is what the change was supposed to combat. Prior to the trails my typical range fo sniping was 100-300m typically from a wide flank or ideally, having snuck through enemy lines, from behind. Now if you take a single shot the entire map knows exactly where you are making long range camping the only practical way to snipe as only other snipers can interact with you in any way. Additionally my preferred playstyle could actually impact a game. Making the sniper class actually valuable. Now with snipers just sat at the back they are all but irrelevant to the actual score or objective of the game. Just having snipe offs with the enemy doing the same thing. As with trails you can no longer remain hidden. Contradicting the whole purpose of a sniper that being to provide supporting fire from a concealed position.
I can honestly say as someone with more vector kills than any other weapon I never really find snipers to be problematic nor did I die to them often. If you remain mobile and use good pathing rather than just sprinting at the biggest scrap you will seldom die to sniper fire unless you stay stationary.
Yeah, the sniper changes have been a real gameplay killer and are honestly a head scratcher when the devs seem to not want make the game too arcadey.
@qwertyg3666 to that wall of text: "neat"
I used to be like you, but about a different class, in a different game, in a different time. "Infiltrators are fine!" "You can always switch classes and try to counter snipe me!" "Cloak doesn't need to be removed, there's only a few places a sniper can use anyway!" "Kill cam ruined sniping! There's no point in sniper rifles now!" "If I killed you, you deserved it" "I only get a couple kills an hour, why do you care how I get mine!"
You know what changed? I decided to give the rest of the game a try. I doubled down on armor, flanked with a light assault, and learned to brawl with the HA. It was while playing these other classes I learned that yes, all the things said about infill were true because I only cared about what I was doing, not the fact that I was on a ridge filled with other infils, or the one guy at 600m out doming people able to see ANYONE approaching, or the fact that once killed, a sniper isn't dealt with because that position can always be run back to for the whole battle(match). I suggest, if you truly are stuck in that mindset you have, it's time to explore the rest of the game and learn to enjoy it for what it is.
@@TheClone37 I have more time and more kills on non recon classes than I do on recon. I know how to play them and I do so highly effectively. The issue isn't I can no longer play the game. The issue is killing skill intensive playstyles that were both fun and rewarding by adding something meant (and failing) to tackle something else entirely. Recon was already the 2nd slowest class and the least armoured and now it doesn't have stealth either. Leaving as the only option in playstyle to be sit at the back of the map where other players can't interact with you except with snipers. The exact playstyle they said they wanted to nerf.
Personally the best moments in the game comes from the more tactical & mil-sim but still casual encounters, holding a stronghold or pushing slowly block by block. I guess the best approach would be to have more hardcore lobbies separately for people like me while keeping the medic run&gun lobbies for people who enjoy more direct gunfights.
I think if they fill out their team a bit more and getting to do that double dip into milsim territory would could effectively increase their reach well, but, as you said, they need be careful of not over-extending themselves. It's all about what's feasible and what's not, and with their team as is, I'd say they should pick at it if they have the time, but not to focus on it too heavily until they've got some backup on their team to help with the increased workload. If they can do that they'll have a very special game that's competent in two distinct, but very well loved sub-genres of FPSs. Kind of curious to see if they can pull it off.
I fell in love with the game because it was a blend of the two genres: arcade and milsim. I hope they explore that territory further
We've seen too many great games turn their core gameplay around and it almost never works. I hope these devs see it. Even though this might not be exactly the game they were hoping to create, it has gained a lot of players and the community is already there.
I love the sound muffling. Better immersion. And I love the game. Been logging in multiple times a week since launch
Just to keep things clear: your entire premise (that devs are making the game milsim) is based off of 1) a dev stream you haven’t watched but that a 3rd party told you about and 2) one change weeks ago which they rolled back.
The game has never been as “arcadey” as you’re describing. I’ve played since launch and I’ve never thought of it as arcadey. I’ve always thought of it as a hybrid, arcadesim if you will. That uniqueness is what sets it apart.
I much prefer the battlebit arcade battlefield that we have now over a more battle sim. But it could slow down a bit, even up to 10% slower, so it feels more "decision based" and less "twitchy"
1:56 this low poly game is 10x better than the trash BF games we have gotten recently. It really reminds me of battlefield 4
2k players
I'm really excited for a more milsim approach to BBR, being a fan of a lot of milsim games myself, but big huge mega agree on them needing to at least keep the core experience familiar to what people currently "expect" out of it. Really hope they have the resources to continue work on both.
Also this is the most sane, coherent take on BBR's current development path that I've seen in a minute lmao
Ya know, I play several hours a day, and stay active on the Discord. But the only time I suspect Battle Bit is having any problems is when I watch it's content creators. I'm not suggesting you can't say anything negative about Battle Bit, but it's becoming obvious that's the kind of content that you all prefer.
They 100% need to change this game. I binged on this game for a few weeks, unlocked everything, then quit and never looked d back. I was successful from the get go, so that wasn't the problem. I came from a comp team in Planetside 2 and a lot of that transferred. Anyway, I left battlebit because it was too simple. It just felt like whack-a-mole going from point to point. Just lowering the player speed would mean there would have to be some thought about positioning, setting up a hold because you couldn't just sprint back to the other side of the map if you lost a point. Coordinated helo drops would become more important. But the other problem that's just as big is the lack of community. Planetside nailed it with easy to join outfits. Make some way to easily group up with players you know so there would be a foundation for teamwork. It's community that makes or breaks a mmo, and battlebit has none. Just log on, usually don't talk to a soul, and mindlessly farm until you get bored. I can appreciate the movement meta and fast pace, but that's just such a waste with the amount of teamwork such large groups of players can bring. My suggestion would be to tweak small matches to be more fast paced, and make large matches more tactical. Even if gameplay stays the same between the modes, have more spawn options and smaller maps for more fast gaming.
Have a chill game? Is that even possible if u arent running around like a poisoned rat?
U basically get hunted down if you dont move 25meters every 2 seconds
I feel that the new update has put the game in a confusing place, with both milsim orientated squads and more causal gameplay focused squads. it clashes heavy with the games maps and how the game is played overall, milsim players are going to get destroyed by casual players because they are slower and more focused on the objective, whereas casual gamers are more focused on the kills.
Well communicated teams will always win against casuals because they are always together while casuals are mostly loners.
All I want is for them to remove the sniper smoke trails, it completely killed the game for me because it removed what made sniping fun.
I personally love the notion of adding "milsim" aspects like, "hey getting shot is actually super jarring, maybe you should notice that more"
I'm surprised to hear your description of what was on offer at release as a casual arcade shooter. I thought it was clearly described as a middle ground between arcade and milsim. That's why I bought it and that's why I've been dissapointed in how arcadey it's become, or at least how arcadey the meta has become. I don't need it to be Squad but I'd love it to slow down it's pace a bit.
I mean look at the graphic style, dont think anyone is jumping on for some realistic shooter. Make it arcadey to fill the gap that cod and battlefield have left
I think the game is better as an arcade shooter with some milsim mechanics that promote teamwork. Games like Squad are terrible because of how close to milsim they are... Realism != fun. That's why we play videogames in the first place :). I personally love the speed the game plays at. It feels like you can play really slow and methodical, or ramp it up to 11. The velocity you can build up while moving makes this an incredibly addicting game with a good learning curve, IMO. Let's just have separate game modes, or let people customize the experience up the wazoo in Community Servers.
Completely disagree there. There's a ton of rifles that out compete SMGs that also have slower firing rates... Unless all you're doing is playing Namak. @@TackyBunny
I think they're in a tough spot - the player numbers are way down from release, and they're trying to think of ways to get people playing more. But if it turns into a milsim I probably wouldn't be that interested in it. It might get an influx of players for a bit (heh) but their main issue is player retention. I think BF2042 also stole back a lot of the people who were initially hyped for BBR, especially with those previews of the game basically bashing 2042. But by the time they got the game into early access 2042 had clawed back a lot of players, and the player numbers have only dropped since then.
i mean, there has been a lot of players who either tried or came back to the game when it was on free weekend. so i guess that's it? it wasn't because of the 2.2.2 update either
As long there is no wind which is affecting a rpg (The right way!!), the need to have to apply a tourniquet and packing some "holes" with QuikClot or having "icons" in my sight everywhere I would not say it is a MilSim. However I agree that Battlebit is Battlebit and I agree that it should be itself.
I loved the simple camos back then now its a little annoying.
To be fair I'm not one for mil sim due to the fast TTK but I do like where 2019 PS2 was at with not slow but not fast gameplay but more medium speed. I struggle to find a replacement for that nich. As most games seam to go full arcade shooter, or mil sim with slow pace gameplay with burst of intense action.
I think making a whole separate gamemode just for the milsim is not the optimal choice
It just splits up the playerbase and screws with balance. War thunder was able to pull it off because its only competition was wargaming's world of series where vehicles have health and camo makes your vehicles straight up turn invisible whereas you just need to change a few letters in battlebit's name to find its competition
The BattleBit dev team should've expanded already, even 3 or 4 more developers would help a ton. If Battlebit completely shifts to more milsim the game will die.
Ffs, just spit out the beans. Fking yapping for 95% of the video
If they wanted to slow down the pacing of the game then why speed up the bandaging? Slower bandaging already discourages being too aggressive.
Some of the players I interacted with said they came from Battlefront 2, they have bots there and that didnt take way from the enjoyment. That should at least help in map population.
I come from a milsim background in gaming so I welcome the milsim mode as advertised before. Im content that battlebit is somewhat of a hybrid though in its current version. I literally play this game more than the other milsim games I played before.
As it is the playerbase is dwindling despite it leaning in to the arcadey elements more.
My opinion, Im still waiting for LAN, Singleplayer(offline) and Mods.. and maybe bots(which then can be modded).
You cant please everybody, so let them please themselves. Modding always has the chance of saving games.
I'm a broken record but I think the ARMA 3 model works just fine. You can see a lot of content even now whether it be with a huge number of people or with a small group of friends doing PvP, PvE or anything in between.
Its better to pivot onto another mode. The core mode is already where it should be, there's not much to change besides adding more content. Expanding something like the milsim mode gives opportunities for other types of players to join, similar to what CoD did with Warzone or GTA did with online, Fortnite did with no-build. You can't revive a game by just throwing money at the base game mode...
Next up would be a "vehicle sim" mode.
Exactly i only ply fortnite bc of no build, just like i only play bf4 hardcore.
A milsim Mode wont nessearyly splut the Player base, but Enhance the game.
Honestly I'd love both. Sometimes I'm in the mood for Battlefield, sometimes I'm in the mood for Squad. I like battlebit as a good middle ground. I welcome some more hardcore mechanics, as long as it doesn't go full milsim where I run for 20 minutes then get domed by some guy a kilometer away.
I personally have been loving the way the developers have been taking to this game. My one gripe on the recent changes would be the muffling of sound when you're down. Being concussed when bullets are flying near you is a GREAT addition in my eyes because it slows the pace down, it makes people think twice if they should run out of cover or not. This bullet suppression has also helped me personally with my biggest gripe the game has and that's the snipers. The recon class has become atrocious to deal with, in most game lobbies I've been the majority of the time I've been in has been hit with the m110, m200, mk20, L96, etc. With at least some situations now i can have myself or my support teammates suppress those pesky snipers. The new sounds and bullets trails have also improved some of that as well because now i can at least save myself encase that sniper misses his first shot and i know now that i have an enemy recon pinning me down.
This may be copium or a genuine take but I feel i would have a LOT more fun if they were to just simply remove the recon class all together and make a new one like a Breacher with shotguns. This way this new class can be a priority roll of carrying explosives, being better at close combat situations but not mid or far ranges, possibly adding a new armor type like flak armor where it makes it easier for the breacher class to survive explosives like anti-personal mines or RPG fragmentation.
At the end of the day I've enjoyed these newest updates, its brought back more of that casual gameplay, before them i was running into tons and tons of sweaty competitive players and my game time was ruined and I would ultimately changes games after 2/3 matches where I'm just stomped into the ground. I want a more milsim experience, i want something thats more like Squad or Arma but has the replay-ability like Battlefield. I work long shifts and the last thing i want to do is get on this game and be completely swarmed by the likes of the CatEat Clan or have a spawn-die simulator from snipers, and too be frank because of what i previously mentioned its made me burn out from the game and leave it for a while. I wish the best for this game and i hope to come back to it with a better light.
@TackyBunny lol what? Waki, sandy sunset, New Basra, Oil fields, and more are ALL sniper hellscapes. Just because you play Namak all day doesn't mean they favor SMGs and all maps are SMG preferable
It would to be 5v5, 6v6 max 8v8 mode to be a tactical shooter. There is no way 127 ppl can make a plan and comunicate to win the match.
But thats why I love this game. Fun, chill, arcade game ❤
I think the only way to make both side happy. It would have to be an more simulation game mode on the options. It will let the developers put more simulation stuff in the game without dividing the community.
What the devs have learned from this (hopefully) or even we as the battlebit community is that a game gets played to the limits of what the game's design allows. For example: if the game allows lean spam(ik it's nerfed just an example), drop shots, air strafe, running extremely fast then people will abuse all that to its fullest extent despite it being 'unrealistic' or 'not the way the devs wanted it to be played'. That being said. It's still possible to play a bit more milsim style and do good despite the somewhat strangely fast pace of the game. I play both fast and slow depending on the mood. Heavy armor, m4 extended mag or ranger/light armor smg, both of these work, but are not equally as good. I feel like the devs can encourage variety by allowing the classes to have more loadouts for example you could have 3 loadouts for assault, one with heavy armor lots of utility and a extened mag gun and one with a smg that's fast etc. (Extended mag stats do need a rework). What is annoying also is how people purposefully go to meatgrinder areas and transport players even heli pilots drop people in the meatgrinder obj despite there being 5 objs left to capture that no one is defending. That type of stuff leads to burnout for me, cause in a meatgrinder match even being in the top 10 in a 256 player lobby feels barely rewarding. Playing with a squad, flanking the meatgrinder and capping objs would be more fun, but sometimes no one on your team wants to do that with you and none of the heli pilots want to support that playstyle.
I hate the sniper bullet trail. So much.
I stopped sniping after that. the cry bullies won.
Ive always been skeptical of "listening to your player base".
A lot of the time, people think they want something new, something different when what they really want, is a game mechanic from another game that seriously alters the current gameplay.
This leads to an identity changed from what the game developers really wanted and thus, disappointed in what they wanted and what they have.
the devs from eft never wanted to make eft in its current form. it was envisioned as a means to an end. to make money, so they can make their "true" vision come true in form of a different second game. to put it simply: if the devs of battlebit remastered think they are already there (required funds), a second seperate game would be the most reasonable direction. selling a mil sim to shooter fans has at best a 5% conversion rate. if they redirect the game as is, it will earn as most favorable outcome: 95% spite.
A high-paced arcade shooter with milsim elements sprinkled on top is what made me fall in love with Battlebit. It's the only game I've played since I heard about and purchased it the day of early access release.
If it turns into a full-blown milsim game, I'm out. I can't get into a flow state in slow paced games. I need the adrenaline laden plays to keep my mind focused. Turning a corner, seeing 5 guys right there healing up and reloading, tossing a c4 around and taking them all out with that satisfying KCHNK sound is fantastic. I also like that our fully grown men can squeeze through a little 8 inch square window at full sprint speed. It's goofy, it's fast, it's fun. All that goofiness aside, the skill ceiling in BBR is really high, which leaves people like me with a permanent carrot on a stick to chase. I love it!
I think they can easily keep the same modes and just add a 6v6 arcade/search and destroy mode. It will really round out the game allowing you to play from 128 people lobbies to 12
I would play this game if there was any sort of situational awareness. The sound is still dreadful, and you have no means of easily recognising where enemies are. It is more beneficial to just run around like an idiot than actually follow the flow of battle.
Once they actually sort that out I would consider this on a level with something like Planetside
Honestly I actually wanted Battle bit to be SLIIIIIIGHtly more arcad-ey I.e. not having to worry about bleedout... admittedly I think the games move speed could be slowed down slightly maybey like 5-10% for run speed
The peeps over in the official BB discord throw a fit if they see any changes happening. Also wow I didn't know Karmakut did a video on BB back in its Squad-like days.
I would be happy if we got a separate game-mode, but your concerns are very valid.
Oki and the team can do it, they just need to think of hardcore like battlebit+. Adding easy to balance mechanics like audio tweaks and gameplay tweaks while not changing health or gun stats will mean that they only need to balance 1 version of the game.
While I don't particulary hate new audio system as a whole (apart from some guns sounding kind of worse than before, or just straight up muffled) I really really dislike those "laser gun" sounds you can hear while bullets fly near you. It's just off-putting to hear those idk why.
This makes me think that the best would be to split both approaches into two different games, but then again, this is a 3 man operation, I can only think scaling this and hiring people and all that jazz would only drive both projects to their downfall in order to become profitable
it's always had an identity crisis, lmao. "muh three devs" who didnt hire any help to fill their new office space. lmao lmfao lol
The last update feels like it wholly embraced the arcade-style gaming. Getting sniped by MP5s and LMGs at distance is always fun. Not my style at all and that's unfortunate as I enjoyed BBR before this latest update. Back to Squad/Insurgency...
I think they should just work on bringing it to consoles/steam deck so i can play with more of my friends. Having said that, lowering movement speed would not impact my experience at all
My opinion so far is to let the devs do what they want. People complain about the game, and yet they still play because they know it's better than a lot of options. I know that even if the devs switch over to more milsim play, I'll still stick with Battlebit because guess what, that still sounds fun. Besides, the one thing I hear people complain about the most is the speed of the game being a little ridiculous.
i do hope sgt oki-doki push this game toward mil-sim. Battlebit remastered can also follow the step operation harsh doorstop where the bluedrake also say that OHD will be where you can play game like insurgency/squad depend on the game mode. instead releasing the different game , sgt oki doki and team should add mil-sim mood to current game and for the current moment maybe he and team should open like several mil-sim test server.
Mil sim game are niche market. No wonder their player count is so low.
@@frankreynolds9930 1.7k players from 86k players
Being a big fan of the MW19 gameplay... the lack of audio when hurt is one of THE MOST infuriating gameplay decisions that game did. Dramatically kills the pace (and not in a good way), and make people who haven't been hurt but bum rushing such a pain.
Pure milsim games are terrible. I'm not playing a VIDEO GAME for realism. If I wanted realism, I'd go down to the real-life range and fire some rounds.
I think they should have both, a casual and a hardcore mode. In battlefield i enjoyed the ability to join hardcore servers from time to time.
Sounds like the dev team had poor direction in the first place. It'd be a predatory practice to change the game after however many tens of thousands of people bought it with one gameplay style in mind.
Well they only started to succeed when they made it more arcade.
@@frankreynolds9930not really, when the game blew up with popularity they had way more mis-sim mechanics that the game has it now. In fact, i would say now is the worst tine for you to try to play bbr for the mil-sim because it's non existent
@@nikolasferreira3247 It blew up because it was like battlefield, not due to being mil sim. Nobody gives a shit about being mil sim.
I feel like it's gotten too competitive to be casual. You can't do anything if you're rusty
Your gameplay footage is misleading. Instead of showing you making so many frags, why not show how you get fragged even without making a single shot? Or simply being fragged even without knowing what hit you? Many youtubers show only the wining footage of any game, which does not do justice to real gaming experience.
It wouldn't surprise me if 'you made this happen' low-key bitterness was at work with medics not getting the p90 and the, uh, thoroughness of the recon balancing if those kinds of things are responses to the game being played in ways other than how they envisioned it. While I trust the devs' vision, trying too hard to nudge people toward behaviors, like how they play a game, is usually full of disappointment. The latter seems especially likely, given gamers' rebellious/spiteful streaks.
When battlebit released it's newest update I took a major break
It not easy to develop and improve but with the feedback from players they can make changes. It hard to balance game play.
Open battlebit, check for active oce conquest servers, 0/254, close battlebit rip
I feel ya bruz - love when I get to play conquest instead of domination on the only populated OCE server
I like the way BattleBit is right now, personally.
You make a great point while also raising a feasible solution... take what's here with BB, and make a tactical sim as a separate game. Great both the markets. 👍
I'm a Halo player. This looks fun but I really struggle to spot enemy in this.
i would love to have big maps and bigger assets but i feel ya if u think it would throw ppl off...
Leave milsim to squad it does it really well
Im not really sure what to think, I just know that the game in it's current state is damn fun
"we are disappointed on how arcady our game has gotten" "we will add insane sniper trail" yea... devs are nothing more than a bad joke. they killed this game for good. 2500 players peak says it all.
Can’t agree more with everything you laid out here. 350 hours in BBR and I’ve more than gotten my moneys worth. But instead of leaning into what makes the game shine (movement, gunplay, chaos) they want to make a Mil sim? lol
Uts nothing New mate, people like me have been waiting for hardcore since the changes started, hc used to be a future of all fps Heck even cod.
Instead of letting ok follow his passion his creativity his Vision. You want to Limit him. Limiting developers instead of letting them do thier tjing is exactly why we needed battle bit in the first place!
There are certain elements of tactical shooters they could implement that would help out a lot. Like limiting the number of snipers to 1 per squad
I was onboard for a slightly milsimish battlefield like game, I ended up with cod³.
I want to play Battlefield on my potato computer. That's the only appeal battlebit had for me. The more they go milsim the less I like it
Well that's exactly why the milsim mode is in development.
Called this problem since the closed early access weekends. Devs were too arrogant. I guess this is what happens when an ignorant community funds your patreon with 15k$ a month unconditionally, you just get to be arrogant. Evidently the fun is over for them.