Are the DEVS listening / reading about this topic or not ?
i hope they are
I have to admit, I don't agree. I don't want a Battlefield 4 remaster. And I don't think DICE wants this either. It is a boring proposal, doing the same over and over... Will just bore the Playerbase and the developers.
I think, the game can change in many aspects, I also don't think that specialists are bad in general. But it was no change, made to improve the gameplay. Or it didn't worked out, as DICE thought it would. Either the motivation for the change was wrong one, or it was not tested enough to seen that it is not beneficial or hasn't reworked to do so.
The design process for such a big project is not just determine something and miracle something good comes out, it has to be tested, reviewed, changed and so on, or canceled if nothing helps.
I am not against 128 players for example, but if I can't get the performance right or the flow on the maps, then I should not implement it.
I think, if the focus lies more on the gameplay and less on making money, or bringing it for the next Christmas... I am fully for more creative changes for the next Battlefield.
What could be an option... A Remake of BF4, with a separate team, so a separate game. Maybe with some improvements but many nostalgia. But I think it would be lazy, to just copy everything from BF4. I have had enough of lazy rip offs on the gaming market (BF2042, World of Warcraft, Overwatch 2, the next Fifa, etc). I want a game, where you feel, that the team wanted to create something great, with passion. BF1 for example has its flaws, but the immersion was exceptional, something I will keep in good memories.
Where I would agree is to look at mechanics, what the players loved, the movement from BF5 for example, the fortification, the destruction and so on. But if for example there is an improvement for these systems possible, I am happy to see them.
@Captain_Tachi
But since after BF4, the Battlefield series became a barrage of titles that DICE/EA throw at the wall to see what sticks (BF1 stuck).
It is not strange to want a franchise to stick to tried and true foundations instead of trying to become an entirely different thing while keeping the brand name.
A lot of people are getting tired of seeing how defining elements of Battlefield get gutted and renamed into "legacy features"
It is a different game entirely but one can just see how the remake/remaster of Age of Empires 2 is more popular than Age of Empires 4 which deviated a lot from what made AoE2 great. Franchises establish themselves in the hearts of the customers based on certain defining characteristics.
A new title is flashy and might get a high initial res ponce but can fail the test of time if it is just new, shiny and different. You cannot sustain a live service title if the interest in it cannot be maintained in the long term
A game that is 95% BF4 and 5% BF2 (BF2 commander mode) would probably hit the spot.
@ the OP
Probably the best thing that we are probably not going to get in 2042 that is important is 3rd party dedicated servers to rent. This is the very thing that is keeping BF3 and BF4 alive.
