DICE's silence

@Trokey66The fact that half of the games mechanics and features are designed for BR? You would not diversify the games design which has been a successful staple for the series just to try something another game has. It wasn't even innovative. They were chasing profit figures.

I was about to suggest it can be hard to visual how the game is designed perfectly for BR without working on games yourself but it's glaringly obvious. I mean the multiplayer backdrop gives it away before you even play a match. No Single Player? I wonder why.

Publishers don't just switch up a games design structure so much, especially when they need to please investors. You would only do so if you saw higher profits prospects which makes sense, as that seems to be what they were chasing. It's a very sound explanation until someone else proves otherwise.

---

@LeMairyHuff wrote:

@Trokey66The fact that half of the games mechanics and features are designed for BR? You would not diversify the games design which has been a successful staple for the series just to try something another game has. It wasn't even innovative. They were chasing profit figures.

I was about to suggest it can be hard to visual how the game is designed perfectly for BR without working on games yourself but it's glaringly obvious. I mean the multiplayer backdrop gives it away before you even play a match. No Single Player? I wonder why.

Publishers don't just switch up a games design structure so much, especially when they need to please investors. You would only do so if you saw higher profits prospects which makes sense, as that seems to be what they were chasing. It's a very sound explanation until someone else proves otherwise.

---

if it is glaringly obvious that the game was designed for BR it shouldn't be difficult for you to give us some concrete examples and explain how those are for BR and NOT for a typical FPS

My biggest surprise is really, EA could had it all:

If Battlefield is a franchise why not make various titles that appeal to certain gamers? 

Battlefield: Hazard Zone a stand alone BR title with specialists, maybe free to play. Let the kids go nuts and let them enjoy their Woody skins.

Battlefield 2042 should've been what we all loved about BF. Mayhem, destruction, levolution, squads, super fun vehicles and weapons. Keep it serious. 

Seriously, they would have killed 2 birds with a single stone. Same engine. They could have used variations of the maps for either. The Specialists would have made total sense in that way. They could have just looked at BF V and take what worked and go from there. It should have been a NO Brainer. Really. Heck, even the forum top Banner is featuring a plain soldier that's not even in the game. I rest my case.....

@Trokey66Or in this case common sense and first hand experience which I don't expect you to know. How do you defend it? What other causes would destroy those years of development?

I'm not sure why you're trying to convince people otherwise. The guy who documented everything I said leaked very accurate info about the game before its release. Who am I more likely to believe - You or him? (Rhetorical question)

@PsubondWell... if you'd put any thought into your reply you'd realise that if they were going to make any BR, it would be a derivative of Battlefield. EA already have Apex Legends - a diversified title from the rest of their portfolio. They already have market research on how Warzone is performing (which is as close to BF 2042 in terms of (comparable) scale, budget and innovation as you're gonna get) so therefore they wouldn't invent another IP. It's cheaper to reuse everything they've already created for 2042 and use the research of the nearest and similar competitor.

Try your hand at an argument which would make sense. I would love to know what else they could have derived it from with those UI and feature sets. I don't suppose you'd be able to enlighten me on what that could be, no?

---

@Trokey66 wrote:
@LeMairyHuffWhere is the evidence from DICE that BF2042 was intended as a BR game that changed direction?

And I don't mean the 'community' subjective, convoluted assumptions.

---

From Tom Henderson who claims to have sources in Dice and EA.

He's also the original source claiming steam makes up 20% of the online player count.

---

@LeMairyHuff wrote:
@Trokey66Or in this case common sense and first hand experience which you can't see for yourself. How do you defend it? What other causes would destroy those years of development?

I'm not sure why you're trying to convince people otherwise. The guy who documented everything I said leaked very accurate info about the game before its release. Who am I more likely to believe - You or him? (Rhetorical question)

---

He was also the same guy that many on the reddit 2042 sub were asking for his leaks to be removed from the sub due to how much he got wrong.

So go ahead and believe everything he tells you.

I say it again...

IMO, the specialists ABILITIES are not bad. They need tweaking but the idea is cool and I do enjoy hacking a Heli and using AA on them because they are unable to release flares. 🙂 They allow for some cool tactics that to be honest, i wouldnt wanna lose now. 

I think the problem is more about presentation and removing well known past core elements that worked. Was there really a need to remove Global chat? I know we discussed this to death already but i cant think of a single reason. Same for server browser etc. And had they stuck to their own trailer and marketing (See above Banner for the design of soldiers) and make the game less silly (See the Woody skin), I guarantee you that we wouldn't be where we are today. Ok less destruction - I can live with it. Sad to see it go but ok. No Levolution - same. Its a bummer and i enjoyed these events a lot in past games. OK. But at the very least make the RU team look like RU forces. Someone on REDDIT did a quick skin thing in 30 mins and it looks awesome. All these things i mentioned are not unrealistic nor would they take years to develop. No one asks them to start from scratch but I have yet to see a sign from Dice that wants to put in the effort to turn this around. 

Just geve the game a try after 3a 4 weeks, still the same crap.

First thing that i noticed( crossplay off, pc only) that it takes a long time to hop in a game. Turned crossplay on and didnt took long to play.

I used the word play, but that was hardly what i did... felt moore like shooting silhouettes and (foam)bullets needed a busticket to get to players.

Also walking and running around is like running in a babywalk chair.

Nope...still too many bugs, glitches and utterly nonsens too have fun.