@@grexlort speak for yourself man, bf1 multiplayer was a hell of a time and the campaing wasn't really bad. Altough having the switching mecanic would have been a really smooth aproach...
I remember playing the first level and thinking, "wow, this is such a fantastic idea. This campaign will really show me the horrors of war" and then I played Through Mud and Blood and hit such an insane level of disappointment that the mechanic was a one-time thing that to this day I don't like that story even though it's objectively pretty alright compared to the rest.
@@SuperMarcolau well, the point is that those were stories told by survivors, tall tale in most cases. Pilot story is outright making flashback to real events. He killed his copilot and deserted. Crew of Black Bess died and their story is unknown. Old italian is telling a tale about a horrors of war to his daughter and his armor suspiciously becomes impenetrable the moments his daughter starts to worry about his own old man health and he just shrugs everything off and story continues. The story of a female arabic fighter is narrated by Lawrence, not by the character itself... because Lawrence had likely invented her. And so on. Instead of this BF V just turns that into Enemy at the Gates with porn cliches. The Last Tiger is the ONLY one moderately not insulting to actual history and nations involved.
Really great point. This makes a lot of sense of why I thought BF1’s opening was so immersive and emotional. Every time I died as a player I was swapped to someone else, and it really gave it that feeling of “these are real people in a real war with real consequences.”
I was sitting here trying to figure out when he would wrap the entire thing and talk about Battlefield's Lost Mechanic.. like.. you know. A guy who works on cars and stuff.
Forget the hotswapping. Just give me single player multiplayer matches again. I want to play all of my DLC maps without having to worry about the population of online players dwindling, or servers being shut down. This is the fundamental flaw with all battlefields since Bad Company.
@@Rustojaw but that's part of the issue. None of the DLC feel special anymore and you really don't have a reason to play it. You used to play games because they were fun, especially with friends. But now you play games because they give you a swanky camo for your gun and a bonus to your vehicle that lets you kill people 10% faster. But that's not a good reason to continue playing and ensure its replayability. If you don't play it because you enjoy it, then why bother playing in the first place? It's all artificial "progression" where "progression" somehow equates to having fun in a game. But years ago, you never really played games to level up for the necessity of just leveling up. It was a status symbol more than anything. Let's say in 10 years, how many people do you think will still be playing the original battlefront 2, and who will be playing the recent one? When the playerbase dies, content halts, and the servers are shut down? Will you play arcade? Tiny closed off maps with a small amount of dumb bots that is a fraction of the size of a mutiplayer map? At least battlefront HAD an arcade mode; BFV has NOTHING! What, you're going to play war stories? Combined arms? Why bother when battlefield 2 is already on your computer, waiting for you to play it? There's no long term investment in games anymore. They can make the destiny promise of having 10+ years of support, but it's all bullshit to trick players into thinking they actually care about their experience. They don't even bother hiding extortion anymore.
@UClGiKQRdxslnznc-uEOx3cA you completely missed the point and stretched it to another subject , dlc splits community and the game ends up dead and maybe you playing a few dlc maps , granted current quality of live service is terrible ...but if they nail it down it's better value than a few dlc.weapons and maps with a low pop count by a year and half
They need to bring back custom 3rd party servers, pistol only matches in 4 were pretty fun (you were killed via server command if you killed with anything not a pistol or melee as a warning), and its the only way to preserve playability when official servers are canned and/ or playercount dwindles, and might also help with not being able to play dlc maps once they are no longer new, although more often you just see "24/7" versions of one or two popular vanilla maps. Having a sandbox type mode like bf 1943's tutorial mode where you can mess with vehicles in addition to guns would be nice too.
I hate looking through Battlefield 4 servers seeing a bunch of cool maps, but people only wanna play Shanghai, locker, and golmud, it’s a shame cause some are really pretty and could have some really fun chokepoints
The taking less damage when not looking at enemies is actually a really common tactic for shooters, without mechanics like this shooters end up feeling very unfair as you tend to die to enemies that you didn't know were there. Bioshock has a more interesting tweak of this where enemies will always miss their first shot at you, in order to give the player time to react to their presence.
Wait so are you telling me the reason why look away from enemies give you less damage (or less likely get hit by enemy bullet like call of duty for example or BioShock like you say) because to make it much more fair because if not then that means unfair okay I guess
I’m not sure if you can even call Battlefield 5s intro hot swapping. When ever you die in it it is always scripted; you will always be shot down by that one spitfire, you will always die to that out of place Tiger Tank, you will always be killed by that BF109 while on the bridge. At least in BF1s intro you could last for as long as you could, eventually getting overwhelmed and gunned down.
Call of Duty Black Ops 2 had a similar mechanic in the so called "Strike Force Missions". You could play it kinda like an RTS and order soldiers around or take control of any of them and switch between them whenever you wish. There were only about 5 of those mission though and the fans didn't like it that much afaik (they felt as a side-game, not really too in-depth).
These missions only had a small influence on the campaign (if Chinese are you allies or not, if that character is going to survive or not, ...). If playing them would give you a complete different ending, the opinion about them could be better.
The fact that your ai teammates were brain dead forced you to do all the dirty work your self turning what could’ve been something interesting into survival mode without buyables
Nah, as one of those many people that didn't like the strike missions (but appreciated the attempt) I would've been very annoyed if they affected the ending significantly. I was already annoyed that the game told me my ending would be worse if I didn't take them seriously (read: actually play them). If I got an intentionally unsatisfying ending because I skipped all but the mandatory ones, I would've been pissed and declared the whole campaign a failure. Thank God they didn't do that though and it remains my second favourite cod campaign and also the last one I completed tbh.
The only memories I have of Battlefield 2: Modern Combat is dropping into some snowy city and never being able to beat it because I had no idea what the fuck was happening
This video blew my mind. I remember playing a game with that hot swapping when I was young - one of the most exciting game experiences of my life, really felt like a real battle. I had forgotten the name of the game. It was definately this one Thanks for making this video and reminding me of that time
The hotswapping mechanic reminds me of Driver: San Francisco.. That was a great implementation of that mechanic too.. They even wrapped a plot around it lol
Shatrunjay Pathare Driver SF had some of the most fun multiplayer modes in a racing game ever as well. Such a shame not a lot of people stuck around to play them
you wouldn't believe how much times my 10 year old self replayed that damn mission. which i finished in the end by pure chance.. Damn that Commander 31
wait I just realize that this mechanic along with commander mode become a call of duty black ops 2's spec ops mode which player can select to play as a random soldier on the field
I like how titanfall 2 deals with the whole “op main character” situation, with being a pilot. Seeing the opening cutscene about how pilots are inherently Almost unstoppable to regular people, due to their skill
Skill ? Maybe. But i think it has more to do with there equipment (including Titans) being way above and beyond, compared to what usual soldiers get in that universe.
@@MeowMeowMeowMeowMeowMeowMeowww yea but either way it shows how their dominance isnt because of plot armour its because they're on an entire diffetent class.
It's mainly about the pilots having superior skills that they can have better tech rather than being a normal soldier in the field and somehow kill every enemies
HOLY SHIT ! Yes, this IS the game i was looking for a few years back. The ability to swap between soldier is really cool and engaging. Haven't finished it yet since my CD got corrupted but now i might be able to :D
I wish codemasters would try making another Operation Flashpoint. Dragon Rising had so much potential that is makes sad to think that they could have been a competitor in the FPS genre today had they improved the games core theme of realism.
rushing through those rocket silos with constantly spawning enemies, running out of them bevore they'd explode just to find out you wheren't half way there and boom, your comander starts talking with you abbout surviving the appocalypse or you somehow made it to kill that commander 31
BF2:MC had such a confusing name. I was at a BF2 tournament that was being recorded for TV and the little intro video they had made to introduce the game to viewers was actually of BF2:MC. I found a producer to let them know and he sent me to a place I had never seen in person before: their trailer full of recording equipment, tv monitors all over the walls with feeds of all the cameras. Then I had to explain to these nice professional people there that there are actually two completely different BF2s and it actually does matter which one they showed in the intro. Thanks for that awkward experience, EA
man i played modern combat on 360 a good amount back then, i liked how you could make piles of brass when shooting stationary. it seemed the casings never disappeared, i really like that in games
I remember playing battlefield: modern combat as a kid. It was my first ever battlefield game, and I played it constantly because it was just so different and so fun
If you combine Battlefield 2: Modern Combat's "Hot swap" mechanic with a non linear storyline, then they can fit together very well. So for example if you are playing a mission were you are trying to assasinate a high value target and if you fail, then instead of restarting the level, you can continue but the story would be different then it would be if you completed the mission. So you can see how it would work perfect together...
You could manage strageic assets with branching mission paths. Like save an artillery outpost and you get a tactical barrage on future missions or you could try to take an airfield so you'll have constant cap, or this is where I think it could really come into its own you try to do both but that means splitting your forces. Meaning that if you are good enough you could get both befits. The best part is there are so many different scenarios where you could just copy straight from history no questions asked. It also makes Co op really easy to implement. Hell you could even have large scale scenarios with a game master type person who manages the opposition.
Ah, so you mean a little like Mass Effect, except changes in the Story arent out of choice, but how well you do certain missions and whether you succeed (as in missions are structured in a way that allows failure as an option). Sounds brilliant.
@@builder396 yeah kinda. If you're fimailar with Company of Heroes 2's Ardennes Assault campaign that's the sorta structure I had in mind. It would need to modified of course but it would be really good
@@seanmac1793 Slight miss there, only have the first. But Hearts of Iron can be a good example, too, as the entire game is extremely nonlinear and both mistakes and successes have undeniable consequences which, apart from events, are usually not scripted but just flow from the game mechanics.
Try playing ravenfield, it's just like battlefield but with bots the best things about it? You can play with as many bots as your pc wants, if you have a good enough pc you can play with 300+ bots There's a LOT of mods in the steam workshop, ranging from meme weapons, to current modern weapons, to futuristic weapons and historical weapons (ww1, ww2, vietnam, etc) and ragdoll physics
damn battlefield 2 modern combat was my first battlefield! and i loved it! the mechanics were good(especially the hotswapping) the levels were fun and challenging and was over all fun.
I must have spent hundreds of hours playing it as a kid; one of those games I'd always come back to and replay, though I'm sure that MC shows its age now.
I would love to see a battlefield campaign with hotswapping and the crew mechanic from Steel Battalion Heavy Armor. In SBHA, you have a pool of crewmembers with enough characterization to keep them distinct. When a crewmember dies in a mission, it's permanent through the campaign, and they are replaced by another character in the pool for the next mission. At the end of each mission you saw a group photo of all crewmembers with a mark etched on those that have died in the campaign.
I wish more games had this amazing mechanic. It left me amazed and made the same so much better. I could play any class I wanted and it felt way more realistic as soldiers would die because they're not hollywood protagonists.
Oh man, I remember having a demo disc for the ps2 with a modern combat demo on it! I spent so much time playing that demo level. Those were the good old days...
I played a BF2 demo with Oman a couple of years ago. I spent the entire evening on it. I was playing against bots but it was so great. The class systems, the sensations, it was like playing SWB2 on my PSP again. One of the best evenings in my life.
- watch the video. - "battlefield 2 modern combat" appears, *iwonderwhereitcomefrom - snowy map scene appear~ - HOLY SHIT, I REMEMBER THIS GAME WAS SO HARD BACK WHEN I PLAYED IT. Damn, that was nostalgic . yeah, i dont know it was a different mechanic in battlefield series. but i like it to be honest
Holy shit holy shit I completely forgot about this game! Feels like a fever dream of my childhood. I was to young to really progress that far in it but I never forgot it. I've been trying to remember it's name for years thank you
HOTSWAPPING WAS THE BEST!!!! I was so disappointed when I realized they'd never use it again. The Harlem hellfighters campaign story made me think they'd bring it back at first. Then I was disappointed.
Battlefield has all this big levels, so why not make campaign where the players are let loose on each map to do an objective or more, and make the player do how it wants it to be done. Does he want to do it stealth? Let him do it. As a sniper? Yes. Or as a pilot or tanker? You could even put sidequest and alternative missions to do. You could even bring a squad with you, and be a co-op experience or with AI. Imagine the way you play in a Far Cry game, but instead of an open world, open levels with different objectives. Of course with this method you can't really do the big battles like in World War 1, but you can always mix it in between the open levels. But the missions doesn't need to be so linear, when the map are so big and open. Use the big and open maps to your advantage.
Olyphantastic This was basically how the Arabian missions were done in the BF1 campaign- there was one at least, where you were let loose in the entire map and given 3 commanders to kill, however you saw fit.... IMO the best mission in the game.
Arma 2 operation arrowhead had missions like that, in one you played as a tanker and you had to lead a bunch of other tanks to destroy enemy hardpoints but you had alternate missions like saving people in an allied plane that had crashed, and the time spent affected the outcome of various objectives ( e.g if you took too long the pilot and crewmates were captured by the enemy forces and in the next level you were able to rescue them.)this let you approach missions however you wanted and you could prioritize what objectives to do first
I was soo hoping that One was going to bring this mechanic back. It just would have worked so well. Instead we got several small scale (in comparison to other titles in the franchise) one man army stories where aside from the opening mission, you just don't die. I was honestly disappointed, though I enjoyed the game overall.
That was the biggest disappointment for me in battlefield 1's single player. I thought they brought back Hot Swapping due to footage of the first mission. But when it came out, the campaign was disappointing, only missions I liked were the first two. Actually, the rest of the campaign feels like a poor-man's Far Cry with how its objectives are placed and how AI reacts.
It's funny, I had never played Modern Combat... But when I booted up BF1's "campaign" for the first time and did the intro mission, I was really really hoping that the entire game was basically the player swapping between different roles during large-scale battles. BF1 in my opinion was one of the weakest and unbalanced entries in the series on the Multiplayer side of things, and while War Stories had opportunity... I feel like it just boiled down to really predictable, boring plots that felt incredibly artificial. I haven't bothered replaying any of the Battlefield campaigns other than BFBC1 and 2, every other game I've played that has a campaign, I played it once, and never bothered with it again. But if DICE decided to bring Hot Swapping back into a main-series Battlefield game that actually functions... Well, for me that would be something I'd probably sink a lot of time into. But I think DICE only makes single player offerings these days just so they can add it to the list of "things" the new games have, rather than to actually give the players a memorable experience. Remember when they boasted their whopping NINE vanilla maps in BF1? And remember how all of those maps other than Quentin Scar and Monte Grappa were either grenade clusterfucks, or sniping matches? Despite how unbalanced the vanilla maps were, EA was just so ecstatic to be like "LOOK AT ALL THE CONTENT GUYS! GIVE US 10/10 PLS" and in truth, a lot of the things EA and DICE do is just for the sake of appearances. DICE and EA don't really give a crap about single player it seems, as every attempt they make seems to be focused on graphics and spectacle, rather than the experience, which is again why I believe they only do it to be able to show it off. Which is pretty unfortunate... Despite what big-shot companies like EA and Ubisoft seem to believe, there ARE people like me who enjoy being able to play games by themselves once in a while. Two of my favorite games in the last 5 years have been Prey 2017 and Resident Evil 7, and these games were both pretty well recieved and clearly made a lot of money. Prey 2017 is pretty much confirmed at this point to be getting either a sequel or a full-on expansion, so its fair to assume the game has enough of a following to warrant spending money and dev time on something like that. And these things give me hope that more excellent single player experiences that aren't mindlessly wandering around picking up crap (lookin' at you Skyrim) will come about in the future. It's just a massive disappointment for me that Battlefield, which is easily my favorite FPS franchise, seems to have little interest in putting actual effort into their single player experiences.
"Activision fanboy" Kid, you clearly don't know how to be critical of things you enjoy. I love BF1 and enjoy Battlefield in general but BF1 has been such a pain to play on Consoles, is greatly unbalanced in a number of ways, and the campaign was just a generic collection of war stories with no challenge, tension or substance. Side note, thinking you can dismiss someone being critical of something you like by simply calling then a "fanboy" of a rival franchise is automatically a sign that you lack any critical thinking skills required to counter any criticisms you disagree with, so I cant imagine any intelligent responses coming from you after this reply.
@@fadhilahzaidan4946 that's what I meant there is a difference between a well thought out challenging but fair stealth section and one where it's resets you the second you've been spotted because your toenail was out of cover. Edit fat fingers on phone can't type for crap
They gave us a hint of that in the BF1 prologue where you play as different Harlem Hellfighters but you only swapped on death. On a thematic level, 100% one of the strongest game openers I remember to date.
Love seeing my favorite game getting some love in the Battlefield community. For Xbox and PlayStation, this was the first Battlefield for many of us and remains my favorite BF campaign and online experience.
Modern Combat on OG Xbox also had some uh....problems. My copy of the game on the final level would always encounter a really warped psychedelic console freezing crash. I too remember that "don't look at them to avoid damage" bug.
HELL YES! Thank you for doing a video on this! i remember getting Modern Combat back on the PS2 and had tons of fun with it, the hotswapping feature was definitely one of the greatest things it brought in, and as a first battlefield title for the consoles no less. They need to bring it back at least for campaigns.
Battlefield 3's storyline was amazing, the co-op missions were a good addition, and the multiplayer was epic. I personally feel BF3 was the peak of the series.
Bf2s campaign may have been broken, but instantly switching between classes in the thick of fighting made it easily one of better single player experiences in the whole series
Honestly my favorite moment in any battlefield game is the first level of Battlefield 1.The scene where you fight and when you die, you die. And then switch to a new person. Basically the closest Dice came to HotSwapping in their recent games. I've never play Battlefield 2 but i would love to see this mechanic
I've played Modern Combat 2 on the PS2 a lot more than I would care to admit, mostly because you can do some really funky stuff with hotswapping once you get into the Hotline Miami mentality of repeating levels. Excellent video. I've always thought the mechanic would make the singleplayer campaigns of modern Battlefield games far more engaging.
DICE is a very well talented group when it comes to art, immersion and gameplay. I really don't know what went wrong with Battlefield V. I still like it but it is my least favorite.
Nice. I enjoy these sorts of videos a lot - the ones which cover lesser-played games, and give them time in the spotlight. As someone who's only really played the atrocious BF3 campaign, which Battlefield campaigns are worth playing?
Bad Company 1 is great. It's got massive open ended levels, an amazing set of characters and a great story. The only issue is for some reason when you die you just respawn a few meters from where you were, completely killing the crazy intensity the game otherwise would have had. BC2 is good as well, but it's a linear, Cawadoody esque roller coaster semi serious military shooter, but at least has hillarious banter between characters in game. Even despite its shortcomings, the multiplayer is still played today iirc, and it's second only to BF2 (i.e. it's really fucking good). If you think BF3 was bad, BF4 is an absolute fucking trainwreck. Barely made it 3 missions for giving up (although the fact it was unstable as fuck at launch and crashed every 5 minutes might have been more the reason).
Bad Company 1. BC2 is also pretty alright but BC1 is better in my opinion, it's more open like Battlefield and more humorous. BF3 is immersive but boring, BF4 is just boring. BF1 is too easy, and it is more open but it's pretty boring too. edit: forgot BF2MC (never played it) and Hardline (pretty easy and boring).
MOH Airborne had a fantastic feature similar to this, where, when you died, rather than resetting, the battle continued with you respawning as another paratrooper, allowing you to drop in where you pleased, making playing aggressively and potentially dying almost rewarding.
Battlefield is a great multiplayer franchise, but sadly, due to the selling point of big sandbox maps with vehicles and destruction, making a single player campaign that lives up to it is near impossible in the hands of the developers (DICE), because multiplayer has always been the main focus of the series, unlike most of the Call of Duty games, wich focused on both single player and multiplayer.
But focusing primarily on multiplayer isn't a bad thing, especially since Battlefield is geared more towards and specialized in multiplayer. Don't get me wrong, I like the hot swapping idea, but the video kind of portrayed the multiplayer in a very faulty way. Not to mention running around killing AI is fun, but often in most games I've played gets very, very repetitive at times. Not saying it can't work, but it's much more harder to tackle if they want to get a campaign where you progress towards an objective, defeating AI done the right way. They need to make it challenging, yet fair to start with. And the outcome of success should feel very rewarding, as opposed to feeling like a chore. I think one of the big issues with it is making it is the replay ability. Is it something you are going to play once, enjoy it and then when you go to play it again, its more underwhelming because you get a repetitive vibe? Or is it something you are going to play once and want to play again, and again and again? The flaw with AI, is they become very predictable. Which creates repetitiveness, making it harder a harder subject to tackle and get right. Playing against other players on the other hand is the opposite and you never entirely know what is going to happen in a instance, which creates longevity. When comparing an AI to a player. AI for example, you know you could run into an enemy and if you are familiar with said enemy you'll know it has a certain set of moves and you'll know it's difficulty. Players for example, you can blindly run into not knowing if it's a bad, average, or more skillful leaning player. And even then, a considerably bad player can be unpredictable and find a way to one up you. So the engagements in games between AI compared to other players is much different. Overall, I like the idea, and I would really be fond of seeing a campaign with the hot swapping mechanic. Point being is it's a risk and it's something you can't tackle very easily if you want to get it down right. Sorry if my grammar is a bit retarded, but I got off work late and it's the middle of the night.
I remember this! Hot-Swapping was so under-rated! It was imperative to switch from assault to sniper etc ... so AWESOME! Thanks for covering this @raycevick
goddamn imagine a mission that just says "get your army to take this hill". and it gives you an inventory of things to use from artillery to helicopters to covert units. you could get the covert troops to infiltrate it and plant bombs or something then suddenly take the choppers to make them panic and then over run them. the campaign could have equipment and morale and a kind of chain of command that helps effiency it would be amazing
Battlefield isn't trying to be a simulator like that , hot swapping is made to make battles seem large scale and realistic, instead if the protagonist dying and restarting, you can hot swap untill your squad are all dead , switching tactics from unit to unit
OMG dude you've hit the nail on the head that DICE already hit the nail on the head. Hotswapping really was such an amazing mechanic that would completely bring the Battlefield to life. It could be brought back well
Battlefield's Real Lost Mechanic: ＥＮＥＭＹ ＢＯＡＴ ＳＰＯＴＴＥＤ.
ENEMY SUBMARINE SPOTTED!
Enemy Wheelbarrow spotted. Ha ha!
"get back in the fight or I'lL fInD sOmEoNe WhO cAn"
My GRANDMOTHER could do better!
O V E R
I thought this was how BF1's campaign would be after playing the opening level.
yeah, kind it was a shame.
bf1 was shame for bf veterans, from the superhero campaign to the casual multiplayer
@@grexlort speak for yourself man, bf1 multiplayer was a hell of a time and the campaing wasn't really bad. Altough having the switching mecanic would have been a really smooth aproach...
I remember playing the first level and thinking, "wow, this is such a fantastic idea. This campaign will really show me the horrors of war" and then I played Through Mud and Blood and hit such an insane level of disappointment that the mechanic was a one-time thing that to this day I don't like that story even though it's objectively pretty alright compared to the rest.
@@SuperMarcolau well, the point is that those were stories told by survivors, tall tale in most cases. Pilot story is outright making flashback to real events. He killed his copilot and deserted. Crew of Black Bess died and their story is unknown. Old italian is telling a tale about a horrors of war to his daughter and his armor suspiciously becomes impenetrable the moments his daughter starts to worry about his own old man health and he just shrugs everything off and story continues. The story of a female arabic fighter is narrated by Lawrence, not by the character itself... because Lawrence had likely invented her. And so on.
Instead of this BF V just turns that into Enemy at the Gates with porn cliches. The Last Tiger is the ONLY one moderately not insulting to actual history and nations involved.
Really great point. This makes a lot of sense of why I thought BF1’s opening was so immersive and emotional. Every time I died as a player I was swapped to someone else, and it really gave it that feeling of “these are real people in a real war with real consequences.”
My heart broke a bit everytime that happened, so I started trying even harder to survive
Battlefield 2: Modern Combat was my first battlefield game believe it or not, completely forgot about it, but hot swapping was fun
Same
was also my first, i remember being so dissapointed to find that the multiplayer servers were down D:
Same
An extremely good yet forgettable game. Couldn’t agree more
XxX Guilty King XxX my younger self got stuck on a sniping level lol
I was sitting here trying to figure out when he would wrap the entire thing and talk about Battlefield's Lost Mechanic.. like.. you know. A guy who works on cars and stuff.
Yeah the guy that got left behind after chasing his team mates vehicles around the map, waving his spanner at them incessantly! :)
I’m guessing you didn’t know what the term ‘mechanic’ meant in games beforehand.
@@HeavyMoonshine19 im guessing youre really smart
Duncan McGee well I mean it is really obvious what mechanic means in the context of a game
Same
Holy shit, hot swapping looks awesome..
No one seems to remember gta V!
don lll GTA V trash
it was so fun
It was awesome, a great mechanic that I would like to see revisited
It was awesome, a great mechanic that I would like to see revisited
Every time someone asks;
”Should There be a single player in the next Battlefield?”
I think of this video
"Huh, wonder what this is about."
*One video later*
"Holy shit."
Forget the hotswapping.
Just give me single player multiplayer matches again. I want to play all of my DLC maps without having to worry about the population of online players dwindling, or servers being shut down. This is the fundamental flaw with all battlefields since Bad Company.
Tbh they removed dlc maps so you won't have that issue now
@@Rustojaw but that's part of the issue. None of the DLC feel special anymore and you really don't have a reason to play it. You used to play games because they were fun, especially with friends. But now you play games because they give you a swanky camo for your gun and a bonus to your vehicle that lets you kill people 10% faster. But that's not a good reason to continue playing and ensure its replayability. If you don't play it because you enjoy it, then why bother playing in the first place? It's all artificial "progression" where "progression" somehow equates to having fun in a game. But years ago, you never really played games to level up for the necessity of just leveling up. It was a status symbol more than anything. Let's say in 10 years, how many people do you think will still be playing the original battlefront 2, and who will be playing the recent one? When the playerbase dies, content halts, and the servers are shut down? Will you play arcade? Tiny closed off maps with a small amount of dumb bots that is a fraction of the size of a mutiplayer map? At least battlefront HAD an arcade mode; BFV has NOTHING! What, you're going to play war stories? Combined arms? Why bother when battlefield 2 is already on your computer, waiting for you to play it? There's no long term investment in games anymore. They can make the destiny promise of having 10+ years of support, but it's all bullshit to trick players into thinking they actually care about their experience. They don't even bother hiding extortion anymore.
@UClGiKQRdxslnznc-uEOx3cA you completely missed the point and stretched it to another subject , dlc splits community and the game ends up dead and maybe you playing a few dlc maps , granted current quality of live service is terrible ...but if they nail it down it's better value than a few dlc.weapons and maps with a low pop count by a year and half
They need to bring back custom 3rd party servers, pistol only matches in 4 were pretty fun (you were killed via server command if you killed with anything not a pistol or melee as a warning), and its the only way to preserve playability when official servers are canned and/ or playercount dwindles, and might also help with not being able to play dlc maps once they are no longer new, although more often you just see "24/7" versions of one or two popular vanilla maps. Having a sandbox type mode like bf 1943's tutorial mode where you can mess with vehicles in addition to guns would be nice too.
I hate looking through Battlefield 4 servers seeing a bunch of cool maps, but people only wanna play Shanghai, locker, and golmud, it’s a shame cause some are really pretty and could have some really fun chokepoints
The taking less damage when not looking at enemies is actually a really common tactic for shooters, without mechanics like this shooters end up feeling very unfair as you tend to die to enemies that you didn't know were there. Bioshock has a more interesting tweak of this where enemies will always miss their first shot at you, in order to give the player time to react to their presence.
Wait so are you telling me the reason why look away from enemies give you less damage (or less likely get hit by enemy bullet like call of duty for example or BioShock like you say) because to make it much more fair because if not then that means unfair okay I guess
I'm so fucking glad someone's finally acknowledging this.
i remember playing it when i was really young and it always stuck out in my mind
Every Raycevick video ending ever
"I like big butts...
and I cannot lie"
*bass drop*
Well, who doesn't?
420 likes
Oooh a Battlefield video!
Yea, hot swapping was a interesting idea, somewhat touched again in BF1's intro mission, however its not on demand sadly
Oooh, a dan 1 :]
Oooh a DANNYonPC comment!
Oooh
But it wood be great to have dou... wood love to see hot-swaping return to Battlefield in the future
YOU = NOOB
7:56
that's actually a feature they decided to put in for the French release
"Have you brought your white flags signori?"
What I hate the most is how they tease Hotswapping but never deliver it, for example: The intros to Battlefield 1 and Battlefield V
I’m not sure if you can even call Battlefield 5s intro hot swapping. When ever you die in it it is always scripted; you will always be shot down by that one spitfire, you will always die to that out of place Tiger Tank, you will always be killed by that BF109 while on the bridge. At least in BF1s intro you could last for as long as you could, eventually getting overwhelmed and gunned down.
@@visiblejeff8886 i saw the tiger tank spawn in then shoot me then despawn
@@visiblejeff8886 in bf1 you eventually get killed by artillery
Suco Dang.
Well I guess it was the biggest killer so that’s kinda okay
Call of Duty Black Ops 2 had a similar mechanic in the so called "Strike Force Missions". You could play it kinda like an RTS and order soldiers around or take control of any of them and switch between them whenever you wish. There were only about 5 of those mission though and the fans didn't like it that much afaik (they felt as a side-game, not really too in-depth).
These missions only had a small influence on the campaign (if Chinese are you allies or not, if that character is going to survive or not, ...). If playing them would give you a complete different ending, the opinion about them could be better.
The fact that your ai teammates were brain dead forced you to do all the dirty work your self turning what could’ve been something interesting into survival mode without buyables
I forgot that fact. x)
Yeah, even the bots in multiplayer have a better IA.
Nah, as one of those many people that didn't like the strike missions (but appreciated the attempt) I would've been very annoyed if they affected the ending significantly. I was already annoyed that the game told me my ending would be worse if I didn't take them seriously (read: actually play them). If I got an intentionally unsatisfying ending because I skipped all but the mandatory ones, I would've been pissed and declared the whole campaign a failure. Thank God they didn't do that though and it remains my second favourite cod campaign and also the last one I completed tbh.
I actually liked the strike force missions, just a bitch to play on the hardest difficulty which I did.
why every developer needs this guy as a game design advisor
Lies Indies pretty much only have that will to make a good game to why they live.
Ikr
Hot swap could be used so well in a new Battlefield game
No thanks, I'd rather have a big battle online against people than shoot bots offline with a fancy camera change button.
Great Not Yes, but imagine the following: *You're not the only person in the world.*
Why not both?
Dread Not you act like both can't be done
Dread Not he is just talking about a campaign
This was awesome in Driver: San Francisco
The amount of shit the "shift" got before the release, I'm glad the devs managed to pull it off and make a great game.
nostalgia
Raycevick: Made video about Battlefield. Had Battlefield in the title, and only uses footage from Battlefield.
RUclips: This is definitely Fallout 4.
So, what we need is something stronger than Plot Armor?
Uriah Siner armour*
We need metal gear rex for this
What battlefield 1 did on the first mission is what we need
@@LFXGaming British english degenerate type it how u say it u can barely speak your own language its crazy
Neither British nor American English is phonetic, you double dingus.
The only memories I have of Battlefield 2: Modern Combat is dropping into some snowy city and never being able to beat it because I had no idea what the fuck was happening
Lol same. I rented it from Blockbuster for my ps2, got too frustrated, and returned it.
This video blew my mind. I remember playing a game with that hot swapping when I was young - one of the most exciting game experiences of my life, really felt like a real battle. I had forgotten the name of the game. It was definately this one
Thanks for making this video and reminding me of that time
One of the original Ghost Recons maybe?
I remember playing this on the Xbox, didn't even realise it was battlefield until now. I loved this game as a kid.
CaptainP12 black ops 2 strike missions mabye ?
Hutchiboy44 could be but bo2 is a pretty recent game
Thank you for mentioning BF2:Modern Combat's mechanics,it's pretty underrated and literally forgotten in the franchise.
finally someone talking about this stuff. I remember playing this when I was young and recently reflecting on it.
NO NO NO WE NEED MORE LOOT BOXES THAT'S WHAT THE STOCK HOLDERS NEED
The hotswapping mechanic reminds me of Driver: San Francisco.. That was a great implementation of that mechanic too.. They even wrapped a plot around it lol
Shatrunjay Pathare Driver SF had some of the most fun multiplayer modes in a racing game ever as well. Such a shame not a lot of people stuck around to play them
Hotswapping was also done in COD: Black Ops 2's campaign.
Shatrunjay Pathare battlestations Pacific does it too. It's a pretty nice game.
7.62 x39mm wasn’t hot swapping you swapped not by choice and if your character died you restart
My 9 year old self couldnt handle the difficulty spike of the last mission of modern combat, that shit was unfair
Arapaima Legion Me as well, I remember i had to stop playing the game due to the last mission
you wouldn't believe how much times my 10 year old self replayed that damn mission. which i finished in the end by pure chance.. Damn that Commander 31
wait I just realize that this mechanic along with commander mode become a call of duty black ops 2's spec ops mode
which player can select to play as a random soldier on the field
You mean those weird RTS/tower defence missions?
I like how titanfall 2 deals with the whole “op main character” situation, with being a pilot. Seeing the opening cutscene about how pilots are inherently Almost unstoppable to regular people, due to their skill
yeah that's true, that's the only game that gives context to a gameplay mechanic besides dark souls that I remember
Skill ? Maybe. But i think it has more to do with there equipment (including Titans) being way above and beyond, compared to what usual soldiers get in that universe.
@@MeowMeowMeowMeowMeowMeowMeowww yea but either way it shows how their dominance isnt because of plot armour its because they're on an entire diffetent class.
It's mainly about the pilots having superior skills that they can have better tech rather than being a normal soldier in the field and somehow kill every enemies
HOLY SHIT ! Yes, this IS the game i was looking for a few years back. The ability to swap between soldier is really cool and engaging. Haven't finished it yet since my CD got corrupted but now i might be able to :D
Behind The Card some other games have it too
Which games?
Underrated wolf, SUPERHOT
I remember BF2 Modern Combat, my first Battlefield game.
DG same mate. Back when i did not know what wifi was and i was still in public school.
I wish codemasters would try making another Operation Flashpoint. Dragon Rising had so much potential that is makes sad to think that they could have been a competitor in the FPS genre today had they improved the games core theme of realism.
It really was a good concept. There is a reason Arma Is so popular.
I was thinking of Dragon Rising and a second leter saw your comment!
ARMA 3 DEMOLISHED operation flashpoint FRANCHISE.. sorry caps
Damn I remember playing this Game on PS2, the final Mission was really hard AS hell, especially as the Chinese!
rushing through those rocket silos with constantly spawning enemies, running out of them bevore they'd explode just to find out you wheren't half way there and boom, your comander starts talking with you abbout surviving the appocalypse or you somehow made it to kill that commander 31
BF2:MC had such a confusing name. I was at a BF2 tournament that was being recorded for TV and the little intro video they had made to introduce the game to viewers was actually of BF2:MC. I found a producer to let them know and he sent me to a place I had never seen in person before: their trailer full of recording equipment, tv monitors all over the walls with feeds of all the cameras. Then I had to explain to these nice professional people there that there are actually two completely different BF2s and it actually does matter which one they showed in the intro. Thanks for that awkward experience, EA
Freeman: Guerrilla Warfare will change all that.
Baya Rae *flashbacks*
what game shall not be named?
Ha, just got done playing that game... how convienent
a name Half-Life 3, I suppose.
Vitor Demarque Quirino I’m gonna be that guy, he means Hunt down the Freeman
man i played modern combat on 360 a good amount back then, i liked how you could make piles of brass when shooting stationary. it seemed the casings never disappeared, i really like that in games
I remember playing battlefield: modern combat as a kid. It was my first ever battlefield game, and I played it constantly because it was just so different and so fun
If you combine Battlefield 2: Modern Combat's "Hot swap" mechanic with a non linear storyline, then they can fit together very well. So for example if you are playing a mission were you are trying to assasinate a high value target and if you fail, then instead of restarting the level, you can continue but the story would be different then it would be if you completed the mission. So you can see how it would work perfect together...
Kinda like black ops 2?
You could manage strageic assets with branching mission paths. Like save an artillery outpost and you get a tactical barrage on future missions or you could try to take an airfield so you'll have constant cap, or this is where I think it could really come into its own you try to do both but that means splitting your forces. Meaning that if you are good enough you could get both befits. The best part is there are so many different scenarios where you could just copy straight from history no questions asked. It also makes Co op really easy to implement. Hell you could even have large scale scenarios with a game master type person who manages the opposition.
Ah, so you mean a little like Mass Effect, except changes in the Story arent out of choice, but how well you do certain missions and whether you succeed (as in missions are structured in a way that allows failure as an option). Sounds brilliant.
@@builder396 yeah kinda. If you're fimailar with Company of Heroes 2's Ardennes Assault campaign that's the sorta structure I had in mind. It would need to modified of course but it would be really good
@@seanmac1793 Slight miss there, only have the first. But Hearts of Iron can be a good example, too, as the entire game is extremely nonlinear and both mistakes and successes have undeniable consequences which, apart from events, are usually not scripted but just flow from the game mechanics.
I loved playing Battlefield against bots. You could make a ton of fun mods using them.
everyone try ravenfield
Try playing ravenfield, it's just like battlefield but with bots
the best things about it?
You can play with as many bots as your pc wants, if you have a good enough pc you can play with 300+ bots
There's a LOT of mods in the steam workshop, ranging from meme weapons, to current modern weapons, to futuristic weapons and historical weapons (ww1, ww2, vietnam, etc)
and ragdoll physics
sees new Raycevick video.... grabs popcorn
grabs lube
James West You did me an amuse.
damn battlefield 2 modern combat was my first battlefield! and i loved it! the mechanics were good(especially the hotswapping) the levels were fun and challenging and was over all fun.
ViRuS__lOaDiNg Same!!! Nice to see another who have the same battlefield as their first :)
Righteous, Modern Combat was my first Battlefield as well.
I must have spent hundreds of hours playing it as a kid; one of those games I'd always come back to and replay, though I'm sure that MC shows its age now.
So basically a battlefield roguelike?
I want. Now.
Roguelite*
Roguelikes are better than roguelites
yeah but this wouldnt be a roguelike. because its not turnbased and there is no permadeath
nothing about that is roguelike lmao
Again I see you frick
I would love to see a battlefield campaign with hotswapping and the crew mechanic from Steel Battalion Heavy Armor. In SBHA, you have a pool of crewmembers with enough characterization to keep them distinct. When a crewmember dies in a mission, it's permanent through the campaign, and they are replaced by another character in the pool for the next mission. At the end of each mission you saw a group photo of all crewmembers with a mark etched on those that have died in the campaign.
I wish more games had this amazing mechanic. It left me amazed and made the same so much better. I could play any class I wanted and it felt way more realistic as soldiers would die because they're not hollywood protagonists.
Oh man, I remember having a demo disc for the ps2 with a modern combat demo on it! I spent so much time playing that demo level. Those were the good old days...
I played a BF2 demo with Oman a couple of years ago. I spent the entire evening on it. I was playing against bots but it was so great. The class systems, the sensations, it was like playing SWB2 on my PSP again. One of the best evenings in my life.
Liam Hitchens me too on Xbox
Spirz Same, except I played the multiplayer. Even though there was only 1 map, I had so much fun playing it.
If offline multiplayer in battlefield used hotswapping with randomly generated battles, that would be great.
What you talking about “early 2000s”
It’s 2019 and my internet is hardly any better than it was in 1999.
NGC 7635 it wasn’t as accessible and relied on as it is now
Ahhh a fellow Australian i see
The average Argentina experience
- watch the video.
- "battlefield 2 modern combat" appears, *iwonderwhereitcomefrom
- snowy map scene appear~
- HOLY SHIT, I REMEMBER THIS GAME WAS SO HARD BACK WHEN I PLAYED IT.
Damn, that was nostalgic .
yeah, i dont know it was a different mechanic in battlefield series. but i like it to be honest
We actually have a community project working to bring online multiplayer back. Join our Discord if you're interested.
category:gaming
Game: Fallout 4
what
Unfortunately some players yet don't know what is Team Work
to face high latency, unfair matchmaking, afk teammates, have very slow progression... these are the things i like in multiplayer shooters
Don't forget the constant insults to your parentage.
Been awhile since I left my obligatory Canadian joke in your comments.
Canada isn't real.
ItsDmaster you better apologize
Holy shit holy shit I completely forgot about this game! Feels like a fever dream of my childhood. I was to young to really progress that far in it but I never forgot it. I've been trying to remember it's name for years thank you
Hot swapping was my favorite.I have been looking for a game like bf2 ever since, I can't believe no one has used this mechanic since
Call of duty black ops 2 did it very well. Shame they only used it in 4 missions
HOTSWAPPING WAS THE BEST!!!! I was so disappointed when I realized they'd never use it again. The Harlem hellfighters campaign story made me think they'd bring it back at first. Then I was disappointed.
This mechanic makes me think of Battalion Wars 2 for the Wii. I loved that game
BF2 Modern Combat was the shit. Terribly dated but very original and very fun.
Not dated enough to still play it, which I do! Amazing at 4K ultrawide.
@@rushnerd True! Isn't it still at a very, very low resolution and just stretched out though?
This is extremely relevant now considering Battlefield 2042 dropped its singleplayer completely and went multiplayer only...
I knew exactly what you were gonna say the moment I saw the title, good job
Battlefield has all this big levels, so why not make campaign where the players are let loose on each map to do an objective or more, and make the player do how it wants it to be done. Does he want to do it stealth? Let him do it. As a sniper? Yes. Or as a pilot or tanker? You could even put sidequest and alternative missions to do. You could even bring a squad with you, and be a co-op experience or with AI. Imagine the way you play in a Far Cry game, but instead of an open world, open levels with different objectives. Of course with this method you can't really do the big battles like in World War 1, but you can always mix it in between the open levels. But the missions doesn't need to be so linear, when the map are so big and open. Use the big and open maps to your advantage.
Olyphantastic This was basically how the Arabian missions were done in the BF1 campaign- there was one at least, where you were let loose in the entire map and given 3 commanders to kill, however you saw fit.... IMO the best mission in the game.
Congrats, you just reinvent Arma 3s' campaigns
Arma 2 Campaign was much better than 3, shame even tho 3 is the better game.
Olyphantastic literally bad company 2
Arma 2 operation arrowhead had missions like that, in one you played as a tanker and you had to lead a bunch of other tanks to destroy enemy hardpoints but you had alternate missions like saving people in an allied plane that had crashed, and the time spent affected the outcome of various objectives ( e.g if you took too long the pilot and crewmates were captured by the enemy forces and in the next level you were able to rescue them.)this let you approach missions however you wanted and you could prioritize what objectives to do first
I was soo hoping that One was going to bring this mechanic back. It just would have worked so well.
Instead we got several small scale (in comparison to other titles in the franchise) one man army stories where aside from the opening mission, you just don't die.
I was honestly disappointed, though I enjoyed the game overall.
That was the biggest disappointment for me in battlefield 1's single player. I thought they brought back Hot Swapping due to footage of the first mission. But when it came out, the campaign was disappointing, only missions I liked were the first two. Actually, the rest of the campaign feels like a poor-man's Far Cry with how its objectives are placed and how AI reacts.
It's funny, I had never played Modern Combat... But when I booted up BF1's "campaign" for the first time and did the intro mission, I was really really hoping that the entire game was basically the player swapping between different roles during large-scale battles. BF1 in my opinion was one of the weakest and unbalanced entries in the series on the Multiplayer side of things, and while War Stories had opportunity... I feel like it just boiled down to really predictable, boring plots that felt incredibly artificial.
I haven't bothered replaying any of the Battlefield campaigns other than BFBC1 and 2, every other game I've played that has a campaign, I played it once, and never bothered with it again. But if DICE decided to bring Hot Swapping back into a main-series Battlefield game that actually functions... Well, for me that would be something I'd probably sink a lot of time into. But I think DICE only makes single player offerings these days just so they can add it to the list of "things" the new games have, rather than to actually give the players a memorable experience. Remember when they boasted their whopping NINE vanilla maps in BF1? And remember how all of those maps other than Quentin Scar and Monte Grappa were either grenade clusterfucks, or sniping matches? Despite how unbalanced the vanilla maps were, EA was just so ecstatic to be like "LOOK AT ALL THE CONTENT GUYS! GIVE US 10/10 PLS" and in truth, a lot of the things EA and DICE do is just for the sake of appearances. DICE and EA don't really give a crap about single player it seems, as every attempt they make seems to be focused on graphics and spectacle, rather than the experience, which is again why I believe they only do it to be able to show it off. Which is pretty unfortunate...
Despite what big-shot companies like EA and Ubisoft seem to believe, there ARE people like me who enjoy being able to play games by themselves once in a while. Two of my favorite games in the last 5 years have been Prey 2017 and Resident Evil 7, and these games were both pretty well recieved and clearly made a lot of money. Prey 2017 is pretty much confirmed at this point to be getting either a sequel or a full-on expansion, so its fair to assume the game has enough of a following to warrant spending money and dev time on something like that. And these things give me hope that more excellent single player experiences that aren't mindlessly wandering around picking up crap (lookin' at you Skyrim) will come about in the future. It's just a massive disappointment for me that Battlefield, which is easily my favorite FPS franchise, seems to have little interest in putting actual effort into their single player experiences.
"Activision fanboy"
Kid, you clearly don't know how to be critical of things you enjoy. I love BF1 and enjoy Battlefield in general but BF1 has been such a pain to play on Consoles, is greatly unbalanced in a number of ways, and the campaign was just a generic collection of war stories with no challenge, tension or substance.
Side note, thinking you can dismiss someone being critical of something you like by simply calling then a "fanboy" of a rival franchise is automatically a sign that you lack any critical thinking skills required to counter any criticisms you disagree with, so I cant imagine any intelligent responses coming from you after this reply.
Also stop putting stealth in games not meant for it
@@fadhilahzaidan4946 that's what I meant there is a difference between a well thought out challenging but fair stealth section and one where it's resets you the second you've been spotted because your toenail was out of cover.
Edit fat fingers on phone can't type for crap
Man this video opened up a deep memory about Modern Combat I did't know I had.
They gave us a hint of that in the BF1 prologue where you play as different Harlem Hellfighters but you only swapped on death. On a thematic level, 100% one of the strongest game openers I remember to date.
Think about Bad Company but you can HotSwap between the characters.
Tym the Slav okay
Omg modern combat! Dem memories
Raycevick
What's you favourite game?
Iron Serbian bf4??! What about bf3 it was way better. And bf2, and bc2
Love seeing my favorite game getting some love in the Battlefield community. For Xbox and PlayStation, this was the first Battlefield for many of us and remains my favorite BF campaign and online experience.
I wasn't expecting to see my first and (weirdly) favorite Battlefield of them all!
Modern Combat on OG Xbox also had some uh....problems. My copy of the game on the final level would always encounter a really warped psychedelic console freezing crash. I too remember that "don't look at them to avoid damage" bug.
How do you fuck that up it’s possible to fuck up a player hit box that bad
Although unrealistic I think taking less damage for enimies don't see sounds like a enjoyable gameplay mechanic if done right.
SUPERHOT SUPERHOT SUPERHOT
THAT MECHANIC WAS TOO FUN
When you blow on your screen trying to get hair off..
Battlefield needs being able to slow down time and deflect shotgun pellets with katanas
I would of never thought that in 2019 I would find the game I played when I was 6. Thank you Raycevick.
HELL YES! Thank you for doing a video on this! i remember getting Modern Combat back on the PS2 and had tons of fun with it, the hotswapping feature was definitely one of the greatest things it brought in, and as a first battlefield title for the consoles no less. They need to bring it back at least for campaigns.
Battlefield 3's storyline was amazing, the co-op missions were a good addition, and the multiplayer was epic. I personally feel BF3 was the peak of the series.
best hype every player ever had was for bf3 and the game delivered it perfectly.
100%
@I HATE TOUCANS Maybe your right, Rose Tinted Glasses.
This game really needed offline multiplayer bots.
Bf2s campaign may have been broken, but instantly switching between classes in the thick of fighting made it easily one of better single player experiences in the whole series
Honestly my favorite moment in any battlefield game is the first level of Battlefield 1.The scene where you fight and when you die, you die. And then switch to a new person. Basically the closest Dice came to HotSwapping in their recent games. I've never play Battlefield 2 but i would love to see this mechanic
I've played Modern Combat 2 on the PS2 a lot more than I would care to admit, mostly because you can do some really funky stuff with hotswapping once you get into the Hotline Miami mentality of repeating levels.
Excellent video. I've always thought the mechanic would make the singleplayer campaigns of modern Battlefield games far more engaging.
BF lost mechanic: Being good.
i mean, the games are good, but not the publisher
DICE is a very well talented group when it comes to art, immersion and gameplay. I really don't know what went wrong with Battlefield V. I still like it but it is my least favorite.
Nice. I enjoy these sorts of videos a lot - the ones which cover lesser-played games, and give them time in the spotlight. As someone who's only really played the atrocious BF3 campaign, which Battlefield campaigns are worth playing?
Game Revo bad company one was pretty cool given the characters, but take that with a grain of salt since it was my first bf
"Lesser-played" games
Bad Company 1 is great. It's got massive open ended levels, an amazing set of characters and a great story. The only issue is for some reason when you die you just respawn a few meters from where you were, completely killing the crazy intensity the game otherwise would have had.
BC2 is good as well, but it's a linear, Cawadoody esque roller coaster semi serious military shooter, but at least has hillarious banter between characters in game. Even despite its shortcomings, the multiplayer is still played today iirc, and it's second only to BF2 (i.e. it's really fucking good).
If you think BF3 was bad, BF4 is an absolute fucking trainwreck. Barely made it 3 missions for giving up (although the fact it was unstable as fuck at launch and crashed every 5 minutes might have been more the reason).
Bad Company 1. BC2 is also pretty alright but BC1 is better in my opinion, it's more open like Battlefield and more humorous.
BF3 is immersive but boring, BF4 is just boring. BF1 is too easy, and it is more open but it's pretty boring too.
edit: forgot BF2MC (never played it) and Hardline (pretty easy and boring).
No
0:39 is that NeoTokyo?!
Yup!!
TheSetupWizard I played with someone on steam with your profile picture. It was csgo
Yep, that is absolutely NeoTokyo.
I was just thinking about how much I love this game!!! As a kid my Dad and I took turns after each swap. I'm so glad you made this video.
MOH Airborne had a fantastic feature similar to this, where, when you died, rather than resetting, the battle continued with you respawning as another paratrooper, allowing you to drop in where you pleased, making playing aggressively and potentially dying almost rewarding.
Battlefield is a great multiplayer franchise, but sadly, due to the selling point of big sandbox maps with vehicles and destruction, making a single player campaign that lives up to it is near impossible in the hands of the developers (DICE), because multiplayer has always been the main focus of the series, unlike most of the Call of Duty games, wich focused on both single player and multiplayer.
But focusing primarily on multiplayer isn't a bad thing, especially since Battlefield is geared more towards and specialized in multiplayer. Don't get me wrong, I like the hot swapping idea, but the video kind of portrayed the multiplayer in a very faulty way. Not to mention running around killing AI is fun, but often in most games I've played gets very, very repetitive at times. Not saying it can't work, but it's much more harder to tackle if they want to get a campaign where you progress towards an objective, defeating AI done the right way. They need to make it challenging, yet fair to start with. And the outcome of success should feel very rewarding, as opposed to feeling like a chore. I think one of the big issues with it is making it is the replay ability. Is it something you are going to play once, enjoy it and then when you go to play it again, its more underwhelming because you get a repetitive vibe? Or is it something you are going to play once and want to play again, and again and again?
The flaw with AI, is they become very predictable. Which creates repetitiveness, making it harder a harder subject to tackle and get right. Playing against other players on the other hand is the opposite and you never entirely know what is going to happen in a instance, which creates longevity. When comparing an AI to a player. AI for example, you know you could run into an enemy and if you are familiar with said enemy you'll know it has a certain set of moves and you'll know it's difficulty. Players for example, you can blindly run into not knowing if it's a bad, average, or more skillful leaning player. And even then, a considerably bad player can be unpredictable and find a way to one up you. So the engagements in games between AI compared to other players is much different.
Overall, I like the idea, and I would really be fond of seeing a campaign with the hot swapping mechanic. Point being is it's a risk and it's something you can't tackle very easily if you want to get it down right.
Sorry if my grammar is a bit retarded, but I got off work late and it's the middle of the night.
Battlefield 2142: “Am I a joke to you!?”
I probably need to elaborate a bit, 2142 has commander mode
2142 is the game that time forgot.
I better hope that small arms fire actually do something in bf5 to vehicles
Imagine battlefield 3's campaign with hotswapping and the weapon system from battlefield 4's campaign with the customization of multiplayer.
Man I got so much nostalgia from this video...modern combat was my first battlefield...the feels man
Also, image if you can hot swap in multiplayer/bot matches
EA never got rid of Hot swapping because once Battlefield died I hot swapped to Squad.
Yo anyone remember a game called Battalion Wars for the Gamecube? That was one of my favorite games and utilized hot-swapping perfectly.
Ooooooh, I've heard about that game.
OMG I'm so happy you made a video about this. I always loved this mechanic but never saw it again!
I remember this! Hot-Swapping was so under-rated! It was imperative to switch from assault to sniper etc ... so AWESOME! Thanks for covering this @raycevick
HOLY SHIT did this bring back some PS2 memories. Loved Battlefield 2 Modern Combat and its campaign is surprisingly good.
Maxim Gun same here man. It was my first battlefield game. You?
Yeesssss first battlefield game I played was modern combat 2 when I was like 7 or 8 shit was soo scary
goddamn imagine a mission that just says "get your army to take this hill". and it gives you an inventory of things to use from artillery to helicopters to covert units. you could get the covert troops to infiltrate it and plant bombs or something then suddenly take the choppers to make them panic and then over run them. the campaign could have equipment and morale and a kind of chain of command that helps effiency it would be amazing
Battlefield isn't trying to be a simulator like that , hot swapping is made to make battles seem large scale and realistic, instead if the protagonist dying and restarting, you can hot swap untill your squad are all dead , switching tactics from unit to unit
My god, seeing that BF2 gameplay gave me childhood flashbacks. I loved it, and the hotswapping was legitimately fantastic.
OMG dude you've hit the nail on the head that DICE already hit the nail on the head. Hotswapping really was such an amazing mechanic that would completely bring the Battlefield to life. It could be brought back well