BF4 is 100x times better game than bf2042
BF4 had battlelog with stats / battle repoerts / platoons / dedicated servers BF4 had main hardcore mode BF4 had classic class system allowing players to have c4 and beacons at same time or mines a...
Forum Discussion
@UnCazualGamer No not really the people that are enjoying the game are actually playing the game and not on a forum bitching and whining. And no the Steam numbers don't mean anything as they make up only a fraction of the player base. The current scoreboard is perfectly functional. I can see my deaths, kills, assists, and other things, and that's all that is needed. And you still have options like discord if you want to communicate just like BF3 had or did you miss what I wrote above about BF3 having no native VOIP.
I bought BF4 at release on PS3 and then upgraded to the PS4 version once they came out. Sure the game had plenty of bugs and net code issues but when I got into a server and was playing it was a really fun game with lot's of customization options and things to unlock. Plus the vehicles all felt very satisfying to drive/pilot and picking a class/loadout actually gave you more options for how to play infantry than the free for all system of 2042. No matter how buggy it was when I did get a good round in I had so much fun it made me want to play it even more, like to the point I was obsessed with playing as much as I could.
2042 might technically be in a slightly better release state but it's a shallow experience and the more I play it the less I like it. Two months from release and I'm down to maybe a couple of hours a week played because the game play is just boring. Besides the lack of customization for infantry/vehicles the maps being so open really diminishes the experience. On most of the maps in 2042 you can move from one capture point to any other on the map with very few, if any, obstacles in the landscape funneling the action. It's just people everywhere going and coming from every direction. You can't really do a proper flank most times because there is no "front", if you get behind one enemy it's almost certain another will be in position to shoot you as soon as you drop the first. So I'd say a big part of what makes BF4 a better experience is the maps have terrain that produces a natural flow where the majority of people advance/retreat together along corridors, causing you to feel like more a part of the team even playing solo. And getting on the flank or rear of the enemy line actually means something.
not even a battlelog....
@TheCompton73 Yes absolutely, BF4 was worth fixing, this game is not, that's the difference. BF4 still managed 6 - 7 out of 10 reviews because the core gameplay is decent, that's not the case with 20 40 poo. Maps lacking cover means infantry play is wrecked to hell. The made these maps for Hazard Zone and just shoehorned conquest and breakthrough onto them, it's blatantly obvious.
Featured Places
