Let's compare BF 2042 and BF V maps just for fun shall we?
I think this video may be short but makes the point. 3 years of development produced this.
Forum Discussion
63 Replies
- And that BF5 map was the ugliest one! All of the other ones are prettier!
- @JOGAGATYA All the maps of BF V and BF 1 were more detailed and had more grit and character. The muddy trenches of BF 1 were much more interesting than this.
So true, the details were completely different!
Yep, the 2042 maps are depressingly sanitised, a huge step backwards. Especially when you consider the levolution that was central to the hype 6 months ago.
If the next maps are the same, I go will back to BF1 and V. That maps were so much better.
Why aren't there any civilian NPCs, IMO it would be interesting to have XP penalties for hitting civilians...
I kinda got used to the new maps and enjoying the new game but when once in awhile i see BF5 footage, one eye is crying.
- @FlatChat These city maps like Hourglass are devoid of people. Where did they go? There is so little detail. Shooting NPCs penalty is a good idea and might have been fun.
2042 maps are so boring it’s untrue, far too clean and samey
That comparison video is hilarious, they should hang their heads in shame.
Sanitized is a good description. BF V maps have so much detail. They aren't perfect but man, they could not make 7 GOOD maps in 3 years. This is why i have zero faith in Dice. If the visual Fidelity suffers due to the 128 player count -id like to go back to 64 players. I think most of us venting daily here because 2042 should've been a no brainer. A winner. An easy one. Take the best from BF 3,4 and 1, make it a dark and gritty future. Almost Terminator like. Cities torn apart. Ravaged by war with some bad * beats when going into battle. The last stand off between the US and RU. Heck i wouldn't mind the specialists if everything else was great. But it just isn't. You can tell that hourglass for example, seems to be a BR style map. Everything looks like a "play ground" if you know what i mean. Too clean, too boring, nothing is happening. Really the ONLY map i sorta like is Orbital.
But booting up BF 1 and playing man, what a difference in speed, Fidelity and gun play.
Tomorrow, Embark - the OG ex Dice guys will be showing off their first game. Im super excited for it. While not BF, these guys KNOW what sup!
I still believe it was intentional for few reasons (btw, isn't word "few" a funny one, does it mean "a lot" or "a little"?):
- Bigger maps, more players -> performance hit
- New generations do not watch war movies any more, they watch "soap operas" (however they call it these days). Some of us were even in the war. Hell I know how a destroyed building looks like, how the gun sounds, how it feels when a shell drops nearby. MG firing is scary from few kilometers away. Even the small 60mm mortar shell dropping 100m away is SCARY AF not to mention larger guns or Katyusha MRL that eats your soul :D But it's a history for most players now, not a real thing. Our nopads could as well be sanitizing their hands before battle and put on the masks, majority wouldn't care.
I don't hate the 2042 maps, but there are some weird choices.
For example, on Breakaway, why put the most interesting flag (the E flag mountain) WAAAAAY up north where there's ZERO interest to go there? And why is the only route the * zipline?
Imagine how much more interesting it would have been if that flag was closer to the rest, perhaps with some passageways to go up.
Hourglass: What's with that big stretch of desert with NOTHING on it? Reminds me of the BF1 desert map where there was a G flag incredibly far in the middle of nowhere.
I actually think some of them are perfect as they are: Orbital and Discared plays very nice. (And for the record, I remember people whinning about the BF5 maps too)
