I know why Rocketleague is so good, even better than BF1

[moonbogg]

Its the intimacy of only a few players combined with skill based competitive play. All the popular competitive games have this formula. Intimacy enhances the risk of defeat and the thrill of victory. Its more personal.

StarCraft 2: Typically 2-4 players
CS:GO: 5 vs 5
DOTA 2: 5 vs 5
Quake 3 Arena: 4 vs 4

Games that feature large teams aren't celebrated as being truly competitive unless clan matches are held, which are typically small team based matches, again, emphasizing the intimacy aspect. The reason clan matches are competitive is due to the intimacy where more attention is placed on each player due to smaller numbers.
Jump in a 64 player game of BF or a large COD game, no one cares if you die. There's no risk or reward. If you play poorly or die in any of the listed games, the consequences can be the loss of the game and are devastating to the team. The risk is great.
That's why I am losing interest in BF and can't stop playing Rocketleague. 2 vs 2 Rocketleague is intense and highly focused. Its my main game now, not BF. BF feels shallow and pointless.

 

[ImpulsE69]

Well BF for the most part has NEVER really been about team play. On the surface it is supposed to be, but the reason I never was a huge fan of it is because no one ever worked together ,it was basically everyone for themselves.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

You haven't seen intimate until you've watched a dozen people get telefragged in a row in a 64-player Q2 deathmatch.

Having said that, I agree with you. Less is more. Especially less caustic players.

 

[SharpHawk]

It's like the social phenomenon of living in a city: there's more people yet they're more isolated from one another.

I still can't believe BF stopped having proxy chat.

 

[moonbogg]

Well BF for the most part has NEVER really been about team play. On the surface it is supposed to be, but the reason I never was a huge fan of it is because no one ever worked together ,it was basically everyone for themselves.

Yeah its still like that of course. You have to do clan matches for it to be a team game.

You haven't seen intimate until you've watched a dozen people get telefragged in a row in a 64-player Q2 deathmatch.

Having said that, I agree with you. Less is more. Especially less caustic players.

For sure. Large player counts are fun in their own ways and have special benefits that can only come from having more players. Its a give and take thing it seems.

 

[gorcorps]

It's better because it's different. Everything else you mentioned is yet another sequel of yet another shooter.

 

[NoSoup4You]

They're both good, but yes the outcome of a BF match isn't predicated on your performance. I've been on losing teams where our top player had 100+ kills and maybe only a dozen deaths, yet our team still lost. Especially now with BF1 not counting kills as tickets.

I haven't played Rocket League in a while but it's a great game. I think what put me off was that I made the mistake of watching an esports Rocket League match and I realized they are basically playing a totally different game than I am. Those players are incredible, I literally have no idea how they perform all those air manuevers... it's nuts.

 

[moonbogg]

They're both good, but yes the outcome of a BF match isn't predicated on your performance. I've been on losing teams where our top player had 100+ kills and maybe only a dozen deaths, yet our team still lost. Especially now with BF1 not counting kills as tickets.

I haven't played Rocket League in a while but it's a great game. I think what put me off was that I made the mistake of watching an esports Rocket League match and I realized they are basically playing a totally different game than I am. Those players are incredible, I literally have no idea how they perform all those air manuevers... it's nuts.

I thought I was pretty good at rocketleague, then I played some tutorials last night and I can hardly make a damn goal. Its hilarious.