Battlefield 1 Catch-All: It is LIVE!

39.99 is the new expansion only, or the full premium pass? Because for the premium pass you will get a lot more than just the first expansion and I see the premium pass for about U$S 40 on g2a https://www.battlefield.com/games/ba...

Hi, Setrio

I just checked and £39.99 buys the Premium Pass, which covers all of the planned DLC releases. As far as I can tell that's 16 new maps, 20 new weapons, and a few variations-on-a-theme 'new' classes and 'new' modes'.

In addition to value for money, I guess I'm also concerned about;

- My own interest in BF1 diminishing, and;
- The player base splintering with each successive DLC release, and therefore waiting times going up.

The current release schedule appears to anticipate expansion packs in March, July and November. Will any of us still be playing in November? Red Dead Redemption 2 will be out by then!!

I have the same concerns than you, I don't know how long I'll be playing the game, that's why I don't bought the PP.

Exactly! This is where the current DLC business model of publishers comes in to conflict with my playing model as a gamer!

The Season Passes for both Star Wars: Battlefront and Battlefield 1 effectively required me to make a judgement in Month 1/Year 1 about whether I would still be playing in Month 1/Year 2. I couldn't even be sure that I'd like the either game at the end of the first week!

I've bounced off enough games in the last 18 months to be unwilling to take a punt like that (I see you hiding on my shelf Enslaved, South Park Stick of Truth, and Journey).

I love the game but I'm concerned about fragmentation. The first DLC shouldn't be too bad, but after that I'm worried everyone will have moved on to the new hotness.

Well, BF4 still has a strong community and many players on their servers...so I think BF1 will have players for long time.

In past BF games there seemed to only be one splinter, people who did or did not buy the Premium Pass.

I will be picking it up because I hear there are some new Operations, and do I love me some Operations.

Kamakazi010654 wrote:

In past BF games there seemed to only be one splinter, people who did or did not buy the Premium Pass.

Well that was the content splinter. But then the player base splinters were worse where good matches become all but impossible to play on older map packs. I really wish they would address this somehow. Something like making the previous map pack part of the vanilla rotation, for free, when the new ones are released.

EvilDead wrote:
Kamakazi010654 wrote:

In past BF games there seemed to only be one splinter, people who did or did not buy the Premium Pass.

Well that was the content splinter. But then the player base splinters were worse where good matches become all but impossible to play on older map packs. I really wish they would address this somehow. Something like making the previous map pack part of the vanilla rotation, for free, when the new ones are released.

That was primarily due to the way private servers were able to be configured. Right now from what i can tell is that the bulk of the population is still playing on EA servers. At least no where near the way it was in BF4.

As for the gap between those with Premium or without that's only ever a window of a couple weeks.

ranalin wrote:
EvilDead wrote:
Kamakazi010654 wrote:

In past BF games there seemed to only be one splinter, people who did or did not buy the Premium Pass.

Well that was the content splinter. But then the player base splinters were worse where good matches become all but impossible to play on older map packs. I really wish they would address this somehow. Something like making the previous map pack part of the vanilla rotation, for free, when the new ones are released.

That was primarily due to the way private servers were able to be configured. Right now from what i can tell is that the bulk of the population is still playing on EA servers. At least no where near the way it was in BF4.

Huh? This happened on EA servers too and has plagued every battlefield that has had DLC paid map packs. When the new hotness comes out a large group stops playing yesterdays hotness. After this happens a few times you have severely segmented the community by map packs on top of all the game types they offer.

EvilDead wrote:
ranalin wrote:
EvilDead wrote:
Kamakazi010654 wrote:

In past BF games there seemed to only be one splinter, people who did or did not buy the Premium Pass.

Well that was the content splinter. But then the player base splinters were worse where good matches become all but impossible to play on older map packs. I really wish they would address this somehow. Something like making the previous map pack part of the vanilla rotation, for free, when the new ones are released.

That was primarily due to the way private servers were able to be configured. Right now from what i can tell is that the bulk of the population is still playing on EA servers. At least no where near the way it was in BF4.

Huh? This happened on EA servers too and has plagued every battlefield that has had DLC paid map packs. When the new hotness comes out a large group stops playing yesterdays hotness. After this happens a few times you have severely segmented the community by map packs on top of all the game types they offer.

EA servers run all maps. You weren't able to edit them to change the map rotations (or other settings). What you see was people migrating to private servers with hand selected map rotations and leaving the EA servers empty.

The custom servers on BF1 (Unless it's been changed) only allow 6 maps on their rotation so unless they change it'll be like before (new maps being the main priority and a couple favorites). My point was that the custom server population seems (anecdotally) smaller than before. One reason is it's hard to build a community around them with the way their setup and another is that on the smallest maps it requires 10 people to get one started. BF4 you could configure that down to only needing 2 people.

There are official EA servers that just run specific map packs. They rotate between the 4 of them. That is what I'm talking about, not custom servers that run the same hand selected maps over and over.

So you have:
EA official base game map servers
EA Map pack 1 servers
EA Map pack 2 servers
ect..

Edit: So by the time map pack 4 came out not many were playing map pack 1. The division of the player base would continue with every new map pack. My suggestion was to roll older map packs into the base game rotation for free.

Arise!!!

I'm thinking about picking this up (yes, I'm late to the party) but the specs might be a problem. The minimum listed for a processor is an i-5 6600K. Really?

Is anybody playing with something older? If so, are you experiencing any issues? I'm running an i-5 3570K but shouldn't have problems with any other components.

Not I, but the BF games have been the most CPU intensive shooters than any others.

I'm running an I5-2500k with an 8gb 480x. Runs awesome at 1080p

El-Producto wrote:

I'm running an I5-2500k with an 8gb 480x. Runs awesome at 1080p

I was also able to run it just fine with an i5-2500K. That minimum requirement has got to be wrong.

I think that is just for maintaining a minimum of 60 FPS. If you are OK with occasional dips below that in 64 player matches it won't be an issue as long as the video card is up to task.

Thanks everyone. I rechecked Origin to make sure I didn't misread it. The listed minimum spec for Intel processors is an i-5 6600K.

Gotta be a typo.

:edit: for spelling

It's not a typo, they are just playing it really safe. I recall seeing a benchmark where any any processor below that has dips below 60 fps paired with a GTX 1080. It really doesn't matter in 99% of the time unless your GPU is bottle-necking. What GPU are you working with?

EvilDead wrote:

It's not a typo, they are just playing it really safe. I recall seeing a benchmark where any any processor below that has dips below 60 fps paired with a GTX 1080. It really doesn't matter in 99% of the time unless your GPU is bottle-necking. What GPU are you working with?

An i-5 3570K.

It seems extremely cpu dependant. Just a question of what platform to get it on (PC or PS4). I'm running 16gb of RAM and will have a 8gb R480 inside of a week.

From a quick googling on the benchmarks it looks like you will get FPS dips to about 45 in 64 player conquest. The game is super CPU dependent keeping it maxed out at 100% on all 4 cores.

Edit: Here is a thread with a very similar setup. Some people report stuttering while others don't. It looks like it can be mitigated buy limiting the FPS in the game settings or over clocking the CPU. You might have to mess around with the settings a little bit but I think you will be fine. Usually the physics settings are the most CPU taxing.

I'd gone from i7 920 (@3.6Ghz) running on a 1060 to i7 4770k (@4.2Ghz) running on a 1060, the difference was marked. I went from averaging 60-80 FPS to 120-130 fps (same settings for both rigs... fyi I play with everything on Low except Meshes).

And note that that jump is from the first first (or second) generation of an 8 core processor to a more recent one. BF1 seems to use all available Cores, so working with 4 processors or less MAY be impacting your performance if your GPU is being bottleneck.

Also when I went from 8GB of RAM to 16GB of RAM I finally started averaging 130-140 instead. And now that I mention it, it's POSSIBLE the ram was affecting me on the 920, though I was running a different set of RAM totalling 12GB, a quad channel generic RAM at very low frequency speeds..

@Pikey - Both of those are 4 core processors but have 8 threads unlike a lot of the i5s. I made a similar leap from the 920 to the 4790k.

@EvilDead-Thanks for the info. My GPU arrives today and the game will be here on 3/1.

I won't be able to do anything about the card install the weekend but I might start to bump up the CPU, time permitting.

Nice, the game is a ton of fun. Enjoy!

When are they releasing the new DLC? Come on!!

I was super disappointed when I first got my 480x, it wasn't the jump I hoped.

Then I implemented a bunch of stuff in this thread and it runs incredibly!

https://www.reddit.com/r/Battlefield...

EvilDead wrote:

@Pikey - Both of those are 4 core processors but have 8 threads unlike a lot of the i5s. I made a similar leap from the 920 to the 4790k.

Ah yeah, my bad I kind of make the mistake of blurring the lines between 8 threads nad 8 cores often, but yeah I meant threads.

El-Producto wrote:

I was super disappointed when I first got my 480x, it wasn't the jump I hoped.

Then I implemented a bunch of stuff in this thread and it runs incredibly!

https://www.reddit.com/r/Battlefield...

Frostbyte seems to play very nicely with AMD overall, especially with that thingy stuff that AMD runs and such.