Forum Discussion
228 Replies
I think the tweets were a bit tone-deaf and possibly trying to obfuscate the issues surrounding this game. BF2042 has a TON of bugs in this game that, IMO, need immediate attention and communication. Example - playing controller on PC is almost impossible due to bugs. This needs to be fixed ASAP as it's an in-game feature. This issue has one of the largest threads in the Bug Reports forum. I don't want to hear "git gud and play with mouse and keyboard" or "hey try this workaround". We need to hear an official response and/or acknowledgement from EA that the bug is being worked on. That's just one example of MANY bugs that need to be fixed (don't even get me started on hit reg or trying to find a cross platform friend or the poor PC performance issues). We understand that introducing new features such as scoreboards take time. But lumping ALL of the game's issues into one tweet is not a good look.
And I don't like this whole implication that we, the consumer, are the problem when we have been asking for more communication since the game was released back in November. We bought a game that we expected to at least be playable for the majority of the paying customers. There's now plenty of stats and evidence showing that my prior sentence is not the case. And yet we get that tweet directed at us? In the words of so many people on Twitter, "do better".
They had a special group, Game Changers, set up a long time ago to provide ideas, features, feedback, and critique on the next BF game ( 2042 ). Seems they ignored most if not all of it. The lead designer "left" for a new studio immediately on launch of 2042 ( read between the quotes on that one.. ). This game is 100% a mess and needed at a minimum another year of development, play testing, and map design. EA deserves all the hatred for pushing this out the door, DICE upper management that let this disaster happen deserve 100% of the hatred, but I cannot blame the devs who have been doing what they were told to do. I don't think this game can be rescued at this point, releasing it in such a mess prior to taking a long vacation was a mistake, they should have held it back longer.
Well they have to spend that battlefield 2042 bonus cash sometime!
Meanwhile they left the player base with broken faulty product over Christmas…… am I supposed to be sympathetic?
I'm sorry, since when did it become a "brutal expectation" to deliver a functional, properly-specced-out, working game at launch?
I've worked in programming, testing, and software quality assurance for thirty-five years. Right now I'm a QA lead supervising four people working on an application. I know that games are hella complicated, far more so than most business applications, but I'd rather have resigned than sign off on the way that 2042 came out. It is not a "brutal expectation" for long-time Battlefield fans to expect a Battlefield game from something with the name "Battlefield" on it. Other than maybe parts of the Portal mode, this isn't a "love letter to the fans," it's a money grab.
I wish you guys didn't get the raw hatred you're probably getting from some quarters, I get that. That, you don't deserve. But...you DO deserve to hear, loud and clear, just how mad the loyal playerbase that has stuck with the Battlefield series for nigh on twenty years is about Battlefield 2042. You need to hear it, and your bosses at EA need to hear it. If you don't want to deal with "brutal expectations" coming off the holiday break, then either give us a proper and working Battlefield game, release the damned thing after the new year, or get out of the business.
@0ld_yell0w wrote:Basically youre saying STEAM stats is lying because those are the numbers most people here use.
The numbers are accurate; it's the assumptions people make about those numbers that are often flawed.
The trend absolutely does not look good. However, there's a thread on this very forum (it might even be on the front page) claiming that 90% of all players have stopped playing, based on (you guessed it!) Steam Charts. It's just not a justified interpretation. There's another post somewhere with the claim that less than 10,000 people now play Battlefield 2042, based on (you guessed it!) Steam Charts. Again, this is not justified.
The sample size is large enough to draw inferences from, and yes, the raw numbers do tell a story, although it's often not what people say it is. However there are important caveats because of the assumptions we have to make, such as the ratio of Steam sales vs. Origin sales (Steam doesn't track games not launched through its service) and Xbox and Playstation numbers (the platforms for which the game was primarily developed), which are again not publicly tracked. Moreover, there is also the question of whether console players play the game in the same way that PC players do, i.e. PC players tend not to sit on the sofa gaming. If concrete figures were available for all platforms, we could start doing some stats. There's plenty of qualitative evidence here and on Reddit, etc. to flesh out the numbers, although I'd also expect EA to at least collect focussed reports from some players.
I'd point out that the game runs like absolute crap on 4-core CPUs, and that there's probably not much that can be done about it; it's the cost of 128 players. A little over 50% of all CPUs on the steam hardware survey are 4-core or fewer parts. The question is, then, how many of those players bought 2042 and can't play because it's a stuttery mess?
Using Steam Charts is enough to give a general indication that something is amiss with the game population, but unless you have access to richer data, there's not much more that you or I could justifiably say apart from "the game's not very popular on Steam."
The funny thing is, they don't need time to fix some of the issues they created themselves. The biggest thread here is about progression in solo/coop and they have refused to even mention that mode. All they have to do is flip the switch and that entire subset of players would come back to the game while they fix the more time and labor intense stuff.
I agree that the Reddit/twitter crowd can get out of hand, i mean its only a video game.
But looking at these developer responses, I can only shake my head. What did they expect? Like CP2077, they full on well knew that the game wasn't ready. Features were cut they KNEW people, esp. fans, would be moaning about. Dont forget, people are not begging them to completely redesign the game. Most of begging for BASIC core elements. So while the negative onslaught maybe Brutal, you have to face the consequences of releasing something that was half finished. I have zero sympathy for them. Sorry.
@Chief2GFD wrote:@Buzzfunk I'd say that more than likely it was EA/Dice management that wanted the game released, not the devs. So to trash the devs for the decisions made regarding the game itself and when it was released is ridiculous.
then they should grow a pair and tell us that was why it was released as such or at least "leak" the info
Featured Places
