Forum Discussion
Traversal: Moving objectives (in CQ only, nothing about Breakthrough) shouldn't take months to figure out, or even a month. It's an improvement, but it's a lame, slow improvement.
Civilian vehicles will help as well, but the problem is that there remains way too much running. Spawns should be closer to spawn points, maybe consider adding "mini-objectives" to act as halfway/mobile spawn points. Allows for more combat points (without simply adding more flags), DIFFERENT combat points, and can greatly reduce how far a player has to run to get to active combat at an objective.
As is, this is a lame band-aide. It's better than before, but getting slapped in the face is usually better than getting stabbed so that's not saying a lot.
Cover / LOS: *-poor way to show off the changes with low-res shots (why no videos? Are these shooped prototype images because they team couldn't add in some cover in-engine in a month+?) It's something, but most of it just feels like y'all took the shipping containers and tossed them about aimlessly without any rhyme or reason. Why are there shipping containers haphazardly placed at a solar far? Or literally on the fields of produce? Or in the middle of what is otherwise a fairly pristine city?
It doesn't make sense within the context of the maps those objects are placed in and feels like "minimum-viable-creativity/effort" from the team. Like this "minimum-viable-game" and the "minimum-viable-support" it's receiving from the skeleton crew left on it.
As for the gazebo in Kaleidoscope...why? The new location is a good idea, but...why? It's grossly out of place with the rest of the map and again, makes no sense. These all seem like quarter-baked changes that don't take anything outside of "maps" into consideration. This is why focusing on singular issues at once sucks, and is a losing strategy for trying to turn this game around.
Intensity: No clue why it took 5 months to realize taht there are too many combat vehicles and they can be pulled too quickly but hey, we all work at our own pace and there seems to be a skeleton crew left on this game.
Anything about dropping vehicles in cheesy locations like rooftops? Because that's beyond lame and dumb. What about vehicle balance and vehicle vs. infantry balance? Without changes here this isn't going to have as big of an impact as y'all think.
And still discussing larger map capture areas? Why? With 128 players they need to be bigger since it can be too easy to effectively "turtle" a smaller capture point, or conversely too easy to be overwhelmed at a capture point with limited access to cover and opportunities to fight your attackers while contesting the point.
Are the discussions like, 2 people trying to do everything? It sure sound like it given how much they can discuss at a time.
Paths: Literally what the heck does the image even show? I get it, smaller map and a lot less geometry budget eaten up by that building that can be used elsewhere but...you're not done prototyping moving flags/spawns to begin work on pathing?
Seriously, how few people are working on this game? Where's the commitment from DICE? Where's the urgency to deliver fans the game we were sold on and y'all promised? Where's the extraordinary efforts to win back trust and respect from your fans rather than just move onto the next BF title that, at this point, y'all will screw up as well?
I feel bad since we're at least getting communication but like..this still sucks and still gives, at least me, no reason to have any confidence in the future of this game or that DICE actually takes improving it seriously and gives a crap about all their fans that wasted their money on this unfinished title.
Yes, I'm salty. I'm expecting a lot more out of a AAA studio with hundreds of employees following an extremely poor release of the latest entry in a franchise they've worked on for 20 years. It sure seems like DICE just doesn't give a crap.
Traversal:
Removing traversal by foot was not a high demand. Making it less painful to traverse by foot was. Adding transport vehicles would be nice (not sure how implementing a jeep that carries 4 people kills a game’s performance, but this is DICE we’re talking about so I’ll buy that for a dollar), but shouldn’t be your sole solution. I was able to traverse most BF maps by foot in the past with little problems/pain if a vehicle wasn’t available. It is a map design issue more than it is a vehicle one. Add a jeep….it’s that easy for the quick solution. You are going from A to B through Z with this “motor pool mixup.”
Cover And Line of Sight:
Not sure what these pictures are supposed to be demonstrating. All I see are randomly blurred out parts from small/vague screenshots. If anyone can point out what I’m supposed to be noticing, that’d be appreciated.
Immersion:
Plopping down a dirt FOB in the middle of a Pristine city doesn’t make it more immersive. If anything, I’m wondering why the city that had the funds to keep the rest of the area immaculate wouldn’t afford the PMCs providing them their freedoms with sufficient resources to build a base. Don’t know about you but I’m more interested in preserving and fighting for civilian structures that could revitalize their economy or support their medical capacity….not some HESCO barriers.
Intensity:
Vehicle dominance caused by poor map design. A killing lane from on high where vics can just camp and obliterate infantry was a huge problem on Breakaway where you decided to put a flag with no cover is a prime example of what I’m talking about.
The chaos is because of the 128 players in and of themselves, let alone no way to communicate in conjunction with role confusion caused by the specialist system were the three big culprits. This was exacerbated by map design. Add to this the Helo murder fest that was the littlebird and the ineffectiveness of the MANPADs made it impossible to forge any direction as the foot soldiers they were simply taking it from all angles (both laterally and vertically).
Paths:
Again, I’m not sure what I’m supposed to get from this picture other than you removed a series of buildings and water recycling apparatuses. Is this an out of bounds area now? The pathing issue once again comes from map design choices due to the forcing of 128 players. In order to accommodate that many people while having room to have large vehicular combat, there needs to be open space that does not help the cover-to-cover needs of infantry. With the majority of the maps apparently wanting this level of “combined arms events” happening at every capture point on every map, you run into your infantry line of sight issues, cover issues, and traversal issues inherent with that choice.
Game Update Timeline:
No one knows when Season 1 is going to be released with the exception of the vague “summer” time slot. Is this June? Is this the end of August? If it is anything other than the first day of summer, you are in for a world of hurt. With a steady 30% loss of players per month, you are looking at less than 1% of your player base remaining at its highest level of daily player numbers by the time June rolls around. If you are content with the end of summer being the release of Season 1, you are looking at releasing a patch for your bots to play. At that point, serious consideration should be given to holding all releases until you can soft-relaunch the game with a major patch that brings multiple maps, server browser, specialist removal, class system installment, and complete bug fixes. You’ll really only have one chance to bring people back in large enough numbers to pull this game from the land of the dead. If you do this release like it’s looking like you will, you will barely reach Season 2 with the legal obligation for burning resources (and whatever developer draws the short straw) for another 2 seasons to fill out the year’s sales promise.
.......
Thump
About Battlefield 2042 General Discussion
Recent Discussions
- 11 hours ago
- 15 hours ago
- 16 hours ago