Battlefield One is an amazing game, but it might not have a competitive future. We investigate. Battlefield One is kicking butt. It outsold the first week sales of both Battlefield 4 and Battlefield Hardline combined, it's getting great reviews and people are generally loving it. But we don't think it has a lot of esports potential, and we'll tell you why.
For years Battlefield has courted the esports crowd with modes like Squad DM and Squad Obliteration, but it hasn't really gained traction. The key problem is one of differentiation--Battlefield is special because it battlefield games would make large-scale hectic warfare across massive maps, but modes like Squad DM and Obliteration barely take advantage of this.
The problem is as follows--the vehicles that lead to all games cheat download of Battlefield's most exhilarating moments are not balanced for games where the player count is lower than 10 per side.
So to make Battlefield competitive, you need to either eliminate the vehicles or increase the team sizes. Squad DM and Squad Obliteration lower the player count and eliminate the vehicles, and as a play games chance online they're largely indistinguishable battlefield games would make other shooters already on the market.
Why watch 5 v 5 Battlefield games would make when you're already invested in similar matches of Call of Battlefield games would make or Counter-Strike? Destructibility adds a layer of complexity to the game, but the pace of Battlefield doesn't lend itself to the tense information wars of Rainbow Six Siegeso it's outdone on that avenue as well. And that problem increases as team sizes do. A highly competitive battlefield games would make of Small Conquest with 15 players three squads on each side would be fantastic viewing, but the earnings for the players would be significantly reduced.
And less earnings means less availability for players who can't afford to concentrate on the game full time, reducing the overall level of skill in the competitive scene. So by design Battlefield as a series struggles to be competitive. But Battlefield One has further issues hampering its esports potential.
Elite classes would need to be removed. For one thing, Squad Deathmatch is nowhere to be seen. War Pigeons is the closest analogue to Obliteration--instead of a bomb and a rugby match, teams compete over possession of a pigeon. The problem is that the pigeon can be shot from the all games cheat download when it's released for a score, and while it would make for thrilling footage to see teams get epic saves, too many games would end in a nil-all draw or risk going on for hours because good players don't have much trouble shooting the bird.
Prior to BF1, EA and DICE made game server providers sign extensive provider agreements to ensure all games cheat download servers for their games ran under acceptable conditions.
And most GSPs lived up to those agreements, fulfilling their obligations to provide players with excellent servers. A few didn't, however, and the problem for DICE is that players will generally blame the game before they blame the servers.
So Battlefield games would make has taken all the servers back in-house--now if a server runs poorly and EA is blamed for it, the blame will at least be targeted at the right place. The problem this poses for esports is simple--right now clans can't take control of a server of their own to run scrims. Which will be a pain if a random player joins your server while you and your clan mates are attempting to scrim.
Http://gl-grand.website/games-for-kids/games-episodes-for-kids.php while DICE is committed to improving all games cheat download offering, it will take time and it's unlikely that anything like RconNet or Battlecon --Battlefield 4 server tools used extensively by clans--will be battlefield games would make to hook into the walled garden they've created.
If there were to be competitive play in Battlefield One, the game's unique but grossly unbalanced Elite Classes would have to battlefield games would make. There have been instances where good players have been able to wield the Elite Sentry Villar Perosa weapon for an entire round--and with a team click at this page competitive players at their backs they'd be even more unstoppable.
Server admin options need to be improved. There'd need to be restrictions on other elements as well. The Support class has access to mortars which can devastate teams, and it can be exceptionally tough to weed them out if they've chosen their position well. A squad of Supports with mortars could chain their lobbed death and they'd be nigh impossible to deal with. If Battlefield could work out a way to make large team games work, it has oodles of potential. Even now, in public servers, coordinated squads of all games cheat download players can dominate, and two teams full of similarly skilled squads would be a wonderful sight.
Teams would need to work out battlefield games would make and stick to them, they'd need to adjust for the immediate disadvantage to player numbers that armour and planes bring while banking on the advantage provided by their utility.
Scouts, who are mostly utilised by solo players in public games, would provide a tactical advantage in some areas and on some maps, but teams would need to swap them out on others like Amiens. We don't think Battlefield One has much esports potential right now. That doesn't mean people won't try, but it's an uphill struggle for clans who want to play the brilliant World War 1 shooter competitively. If DICE's commitment to Battlefield 4 is anything to go by, however, that might change in the future.
Squad Obliteration wasn't in BF4 at launch, for example, and it was added to give competitive players a more objective focused mode to play. Server administration tools also improved over time, and with all the servers operating 'in-house' at DICE now they might be more willing to give admins control.
For now though, battlefield games would make, you'll just have to play Battlefield One for fun. Luckily it's a whole heap of fun.