@trip1ex wrote:
@DaveTheBrave_USA wrote:
@trip1exActually I think it is interest and moneys worth playability if the desert map in question is Hour Glass for instance, big long sand dunes and empty rectangular buildings with practically no cover or interest. Comparing it to the graphic arts of a destroyed city map is the point.It's a desert map. YOu have not played a big open desert map in BF before? There's been a few. BF1 had one. BF1942. There's been lots of other bigger more open maps. I think there one in BF2 and BF3. BF4 had one.
It's a pointless comparison to compare the graphical detail on a small city map to a big open desert map.
And graphics don't equal playability. All that graphical detail on that BFV map and it was a meh map. Total where's waldo map. Just hide in a corner and shoot guys that walk by. Run around in circles. I'm not hanging it on my wall. I'm playing it.
Hourglass is a city map which has been inundated with sand dunes caused by global climate changes and loss of vegetation in that region.
As such facilities should have a lot more destruction and degradation, including rusted car and truck hulks, which would provide a lot more atmosphere and cover. Tunnels, underground stations etc would also help gameplay and add interest.
It just appears that maps, like other things in 2042, were rushed out the door and lack good game design and attention to detail.
It's about immersion and suspension of disbelief.
Worst maps of any BF. Map designers and anyone who gave the thumbs up to these when completed... should all be fired.
Maps obviously are designed for Battle Royale, they have little or no cover in whole areas so you cant hide from choppers, tanks etc.
