A suggestion. Battlefield 2042 is a hero shooter. It doesn't have to be.
I don't know why they thought that was a good idea. It's like some exec saw Apex Legends being popular and said "This is popular, therefore Battlefield players will also love it".
You have to at least consider how your audience will possibly react to it. The change to specialists is so foreign to the Battlefield series.
I get that they want to innovate. That's fine. BFV had some great changes. The movement and of bfv was one of the best changes in the Battlefield series. Fortifications were a great addition. The scoreboard kept track of revives. The revive system itself was different and provided players a chance to warn teammates of nearby danger.
All of those changes listed as examples built upon Battlefield features and did not remove them completely
When I play 2042, I ask "Why am I seeing the exact same character with the same backstory on the opposite side", "Where are the medics", "Who is who?", "What is so special about Falck that makes it so nobody else can use the syringe gun?", " What is so special about <insert hero 1> that makes it so <insert hero gadget> cannot be used with <insert hero 2-...>?
And that last question is NOT meant to suggest that hero gadgets should be unlocked to use for all heroes.
It is meant to illustrate that there are 10 heroes who could conceivably be placed within the Battlefield class system (y'know. The one system that has been in all of the prior games).
When I first saw the specialists, I thought "Oh. Casper is going to be a Recon class and have Recon traits, gadgets, weapons", Falck is going to be a Medic class and have Medic traits, gadgets, weapons, Boris is going to be a support class and have Support traits, gadgets, weapons, etc..."
I did not expect whatever we have now which I consider to be more akin to a hero shooter than a Battlefield game
