@zschillzz wrote:I'm curious to know what everyone's opinion is on the current state of Battlefield 2042. I have come across many issues playing the game, and constantly find myself coming back like an abused spouse. Clearly this isn't a great relationship right now. Furthermore I figured if enough people comment on this thread we can get EA's attention and see if we can get some changes faster. And if the game doesn't start changing things up, I'm going to start shorting EA Stock and get my money back from the pre-order.
As you've seen, opinion is rather divided on the game.
Many, many comments I've seen (not on this thread, I would add) seem to suggest that the posters basically wanted BF4 on Frostbite 3. I think a lot of players were expecting BF4 due to the similarity in setting and hardware.
Personally, I never really liked BF4 all that much - I much preferred BF2, BF3 and BFV. In that respect, I'm not disappointed in the game because I'm not... fundamentalist about BF4. It's still active, it plays amazingly on contemporary hardware (thanks, Moore's Law!) and if I want to play BF4, I'll just... go play BF4.
I'm not particularly fussed about the specialist system, although I do find the end-of-round lines to be pretty cringey. I just view it as an elaborated class system anyway - the individual perks and features are within broader "classes," but you have more freedom of loadout. I don't think specialists break teamplay either; there are more direct causes of that, namely the lack of VOIP and, initially, the 'balance' decisions made around certain vehicles, weapons and team actions (I'm looking at you, revive animation that could be used to tell when your boiled egg was going to be ready).
The early game balance was a mess. As the devs have tweaked, players have learnt, and weapons and gadgets have been unlocked, it's become much more playable. Even Hourglass can be pretty fun as infantry if you equip the SOFLAM and your team actually run M5s. In that respect, the dunes in the centre of the map make sense from a gameplay perspective. Initially, the bowls around the B, C and D flags were just a deathtrap for infantry, but now there's a definite risk-reward relationship for armour or CAS that might want to farm there.
You might have inferred that I love the SOFLAM. This is correct; my love for it is proportional to my hatred of low-skill helicopter farmers. Seeing multiple rockets climbing up and obliterating the Nightbird is something I like rather too much.
Overall, I think 2042 is all right. It's not, in its current iteration, the greatest Battlefield installment, but it's by no means as bad as is claimed. Can it be improved? Sure! There are many areas where it can be made better. Did the developers murder my family while they slept? No.
@filthy_vegans wrote:
@zschillzz wrote:I'm curious to know what everyone's opinion is on the current state of Battlefield 2042. I have come across many issues playing the game, and constantly find myself coming back like an abused spouse. Clearly this isn't a great relationship right now. Furthermore I figured if enough people comment on this thread we can get EA's attention and see if we can get some changes faster. And if the game doesn't start changing things up, I'm going to start shorting EA Stock and get my money back from the pre-order.
As you've seen, opinion is rather divided on the game.
Many, many comments I've seen (not on this thread, I would add) seem to suggest that the posters basically wanted BF4 on Frostbite 3. I think a lot of players were expecting BF4 due to the similarity in setting and hardware.
Personally, I never really liked BF4 all that much - I much preferred BF2, BF3 and BFV. In that respect, I'm not disappointed in the game because I'm not... fundamentalist about BF4. It's still active, it plays amazingly on contemporary hardware (thanks, Moore's Law!) and if I want to play BF4, I'll just... go play BF4.
I'm not particularly fussed about the specialist system, although I do find the end-of-round lines to be pretty cringey. I just view it as an elaborated class system anyway - the individual perks and features are within broader "classes," but you have more freedom of loadout. I don't think specialists break teamplay either; there are more direct causes of that, namely the lack of VOIP and, initially, the 'balance' decisions made around certain vehicles, weapons and team actions (I'm looking at you, revive animation that could be used to tell when your boiled egg was going to be ready).
The early game balance was a mess. As the devs have tweaked, players have learnt, and weapons and gadgets have been unlocked, it's become much more playable. Even Hourglass can be pretty fun as infantry if you equip the SOFLAM and your team actually run M5s. In that respect, the dunes in the centre of the map make sense from a gameplay perspective. Initially, the bowls around the B, C and D flags were just a deathtrap for infantry, but now there's a definite risk-reward relationship for armour or CAS that might want to farm there.
You might have inferred that I love the SOFLAM. This is correct; my love for it is proportional to my hatred of low-skill helicopter farmers. Seeing multiple rockets climbing up and obliterating the Nightbird is something I like rather too much
Overall, I think 2042 is all right. It's not, in its current iteration, the greatest Battlefield installment, but it's by no means as bad as is claimed. Can it be improved? Sure! There are many areas where it can be made better. Did the developers murder my family while they slept? No.
Spot on and pretty much reflects my thoughts.
Since I have only played the beta, I can not comment on the current state of the game.
But I can state that at least 2 critical things are still missing before I buy the game
As a 50% pilot Joystick support is a must. It's possible to use K / M, it's just not any fun.
Server browser is also a must. I really do not like matchmaking and the lack of choice it brings.
I like to chose what map to play and the rotation.
The bugs aren't what caused me to stop playing. It's the horrible design choices like creating maps around Battle Royale, and then deciding to shoe horn conquest and breakthrough back in halfway through development. Leaving us with huge barren maps with no gameplay flow.
So for me it's mostly the boring maps. Followed closely by.
Horrible soldier movement and aiming mechanics
No scoreboard or global chat
All of them are design decisions by DICE, and working as intended.
If you are expecting “an upgraded BF4”, which is basically what EA/DICE pretended the game was gonna be pre-launch (“it’s BF4 on steroids”), then you may become disappointed, especially if the move from having 4 classes to now using Specialists is something you can’t accept / can’t get used to.
But if you take the game for what it is - a hero-based shooter built on the Battlefield franchise - then you can have a lot of fun. But also a lot of frustrating moments (bugs, bad balancing, bad technical performance).
The good news is things just started getting improved by EA/DICE. We all know how it is with any new Battlefield launch.
I pre ordered the Gold edition on PS5 and I genuinely like the game and have had some exciting battles on breakthrough and Rush. Having had the console for nearly a year now it's the only full priced game I've bought and can't say I regretted it. Yeah it has its flaws and some crap maps and it's not as good as BF3 or 4 when I played them on PC back in the day but I'll give it it's due as I'm enjoying it and it does have potential.
My two biggest complaints are no console native K+M to compete with PC and there not being a scoreboard.
@xtraKrazy
Anyone who says otherwise is just being a whinger because they are scared of change.
——————————————————-
Was this necessary when you otherwise had some good suggestions.
@SirBobdk wrote:@xtraKrazy
Anyone who says otherwise is just being a whinger because they are scared of change.
——————————————————-
Was this necessary when you otherwise had some good suggestions.
I dunno man... There's a lot of needless salt being thrown around.
Simply put, if the standard classes are so important to players, they could just use a loadout like one of those classes and be done with it. Instead, we get hyperbolic complaints that the game has been destroyed, which is clearly nonsense.
Apparently, the devs aren't allowed Christmas until the game has been fixed to the liking of certain sectors of the community. That certainly sounds like whingeing to me.
