EA/DICE respond to backlash
... https://www.reddit.com/r/battlefield2042/comments/rx0w9y/eadice_finally_responds_to_the_backlash/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
Forum Discussion
@UP_Hawxxeye wrote:
@babypants1The bombs reload bug was introduced within 1 month within the game and is outstanding.
That K something rifle still has bugged scope and misaligned sights.
BF3, BF4 and BF1 had longer support and more content.
lol. The point was all BF games get a good 18 months of support. Anyone that knows enough to know the hate brigade always pops in full force after a new BF game launches should also know the same thing applies to ~18 months of post-launch support.
And, completely contrary to your retort, BFV got plenty of maps and weapons and content and improvements for ~18 months post launch.
@babypants1As I mentioned in my previous post, the previous games got more than that.
"Plenty" is subjective and relative.
I am on 223 hours on BF2042 and still going strong. I just do not want to see another early drop because of not enough MTX revenue.
Every BF game deserves a BF4 level of post launch support.
@UP_Hawxxeye wrote:
@babypants1As I mentioned in my previous post, the previous games got more than that.yep and I said that's besides the point. It still got ~10 maps, lots of weapons and vehicles, lots of bug fixes, lots of improvemnts and for a good ~18 months.
Thus completely contary to what you stated it doesn't break the 100% record of DICE support providing ample post-launch. support for their BF games for a good ~18 months.
IN case you don't realize, every BF game still has bugs and issues after support stops.
@babypants1does that include bugged weapons and bugged vehicles?
I cannot remember a BF game prior to V where I left it thinking "that gun still does not shoot straight" or "this vehicle still cannot regain all its missing ammo properly"
@UP_Hawxxeye wrote:
@babypants1does that include bugged weapons and bugged vehicles?for a guy that can see the big picture when it comes to the new BF game hate cycle, you sure are having a hard time seeing the big picture when it comes to commiserate ~18 month support cycle.
@babypants1
That still does not address the drop in the quantity (29 vs 19 maps for example). One does not have to be part of a hate brigade to tell the difference.
If you are happy with less content in about the same (or smaller) number of months then good for you.
@UP_Hawxxeye wrote:
@babypants1
That still does not address the drop in the quantity (29 vs 19 maps for example).
If you are happy with less content in about the same (or smaller) number of months then good for you.that's because it is besides the point. NOt arguing which game got the most support on my spreadsheet. Which game got the least support. And where does the post launch support of every other BF game rank in between those on my spreadsheet. They all got a good chunk of support. If it helps you cope, then use BFV as the baseline for this support.
I'm saying for a guy that can see the big picture with the hate cycle, you sure are having a difficult time seeing the big picture with the ~18 month post launch support cycle.
DICE has a great track record of supporting every one of their BF games post launch. Thus not only is 2 way communication rather impossible because int his case it's ~1 person on one side and millions on the other side. But hardly needed as reassurance as their track record speaks for itself and is louder than words.
Every previous BF title still has at least one major bug that has never been patched. They all have had issues, they all have had fixes too. In terms of support, 12 months of support is plenty and DICE has gone beyond that with many of the previous versions. To be able to get patches and new content for one year is pretty darn good if you ask me, heck back in the day you bought a game you played it, you beat it, and that was it.....you didn't get free content after you purchased your game.
- @VBALL_MVP Back in the day you played it and beat it oh and it worked!
@emerson1975 you're right, but it also depended on the game, there were plenty of Nintendo games that had a bug in it that would make you reset the game.
Any LJN game for the NES was a train wreck, and many of the 3rd party atari games were bug ridden.I also though think that back in those days many games were "unique" and didn't have to compete with other developers so they could take their time. For example, what was Mario Bros competition? Nothing, so they could take their time to get it done knowing that they didn't have to compete with another similar title. It also helped that Nintendo had very very strict guidelines in how a game needed to be designed and how it needed to perform before it got out (reaction to make sure Nintendo never put out the garbage that Atari was pushing out).
@babypants1 wrote:
@UP_Hawxxeye wrote:
@babypants1
That still does not address the drop in the quantity (29 vs 19 maps for example).
If you are happy with less content in about the same (or smaller) number of months then good for you.that's because it is besides the point. NOt arguing which game got the most support on my spreadsheet. Which game got the least support. And where does the post launch support of every other BF game rank in between those on my spreadsheet. They all got a good chunk of support. If it helps you cope, then use BFV as the baseline for this support.
I'm saying for a guy that can see the big picture with the hate cycle, you sure are having a difficult time seeing the big picture with the ~18 month post launch support cycle.
DICE has a great track record of supporting every one of their BF games post launch. Thus not only is 2 way communication rather impossible because int his case it's ~1 person on one side and millions on the other side. But hardly needed as reassurance as their track record speaks for itself and is louder than words.
BFV was the US Afghanistan retreat of game supports.
Since you love repeating that 18 month count, allow me to point that that it was 18 months between the end of last named content patch of BFV and the release of BF2042. A gap as long or longer than the new content support of BFV.
In comparison between the announcement of the end of support in BF4 and BF1 there were 7 months and the entire support period lasted 28 months.
Meanwhile BF1 kept getting new content for 16 months with a 9 month gap between BF1 and BFV.
If I still cannot get the point across about how BFV was abandoned early compared to the gap between games then I give up at trying to explain that.All this is unrelated with the hate cycle of unfinished BF games that get finished (or closer to finished in the case of BFV) down the line.
Sure, in isolation BFV can be considered fine in not for the greater legacy of the things that came before it.
