Also, to say it's in a better state than BF4 at launch? That's not saying much. BF4 you couldn't connect to at all. LOL!!!
It was a very different issue. BF4 had all the content you'd want in a Battlefield game, but no one could connect to it. So once they fixed that side of things, they had a bunch of launch content plus a season pass of 5 DLC packs well under way. That's what made the wait tolerable. I already knew I wanted to play the game. The Siege of Shanghai beta was excellent. So when the game finally stopped rubber banding for me (about 5 months after launch), my patience was rewarded with 18 of the eventual 33 maps to play and one of the best Battlefield games DICE ever produced. By comparison, BFV was cancelled with 18 maps total.
How long before we get 18 maps in BF2042? Yes...yes I went there. lol!!!
@ArchAngeL-PCX It took 14 months to get 18 new maps.
@Chief2GFDFor BFV? Yeah it did. I meant 18 maps total btw, not 18 new ones. I know better than to ask that lol.
BF4 had 10 maps at launch. China Rising DLC added 4 a couple months later. Second Assault DLC added 4 more maps by March of the next year. That's what was ready to play when it stopped rubber banding for me. And Naval Strike DLC showed up a month or so later with 4 more maps.
That's the benefit of Premium Pass. It locked them into having to deliver 5 DLC packs they already promised. BFV and these "live service" games promise nothing and can give you as little or as much as they want...or be cancelled at any point.
@ArchAngeL-PCX I agree that the Premium pass was a good idea and maybe they should have gone that route with 2042.
