Re: Make new battlefield great again by those easy steps.
In other words, remaster BF4?
Forum Discussion
15 Replies
- @TAW_Rinko Of course, this is not feasible.
Why not ?
- @alucardgr they aren't going to do it because they sold 4 more specialists. you can't get rid of them. you are asking for a battlefield 4 remastered and it took them months to make a scoreboard, they would have to completely remake this game into that and they are not going to put the resources required to make it happen into this game
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.
Ok, my question now... Why don't you play BF4 then, if it has everything you desire? Is it the 5% BF2, you are missing?
Or is it the nostalgia, why everybody wants this game as the next Battlefield? Is it just the better graphics? Maybe I am wrong and you are still playing BF4, but if this opinion should stand for the majority of players, why are they not playing BF4 anymore?
For me, I would not be pleased to just see a Remake of this game. I want progress. Not necessary in form of player count or map size.
Maybe I am not the target group, otherwise games like Fifa XX or Call of Duty XX would not sell so well...
Good post!
- @UP_Hawxxeye EXACTLY
@Captain_Tachi wrote: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.
Agreed.
I also don't want re-skinned titles.
Dice tried something new with every game apart from 4 which at launch was criticised for being a lazy BF3 re-skin and its sales suffered as a result compared to BF3.
1, V and 2042 have all tried to keep things fresh and innovate.
Ok 2042 went too far with the whole childish specialist vibe, but I give them credit for providing another battlefield game that is unique within the series.
Some things works, some don't, such is life when you take risks.
If you want the same game every release just stick with COD.
- @Tank2042Man If you want something new then you should play another game !!! and leave the Battlefield as it should be
What s luck, that you can speak for all Battlefield players...
Look, Battlefield is something different for every person. For one person, it is the old times of Battlefield 3, for the other one the Battlefield 1... And for other players, they think it should be more like CoD. Nobody is right, nobody wrong.
For me, Counterstrike Global Offensive was never as good as Counter Strike 1.6... but the player count is telling something different. And the same goes for CoD, for me it was never an option, BF was always superior to it.
So you should accept, that it is not your Battlefield game. Everybody has the right, to wish changes, as everybody has the right to just want a BF4 remake.
As I said, as long as the gameplay and fun are the top priority, the game can be different to every other game, as it wants to be. I was very sceptical to BF1, because I didn't like the setting and to my surprise DICE put out a great game, so different to BF4. And even BF5 was great, despite the huge critique it got at release. It felt good, it was fun and had some good mechanics (movement, destruction, fortification).
But that is just my opinion, I would never say, that anybody in this thread is wrong about their imagination for the next Battlefield.
I wasn’t looking for a remastered Bf4, although that kind sounds cool. I was hoping for a new battlefield in a modern setting, that had a combination of features from 4/1/5
instead they removed all the features of 4/1/5, which for me made for a pretty borring experience in 2042.
I personally still play 4. But would have switched to 2042 if it had the same appeal with the better graphics and new maps. But for me it just didn’t cut it.
@FlibberMeister wrote:I wasn’t looking for a remastered Bf4, although that kind sounds cool. I was hoping for a new battlefield in a modern setting, that had a combination of features from 4/1/5
instead they removed all the features of 4/1/5, which for me made for a pretty borring experience in 2042.
I personally still play 4. But would have switched to 2042 if it had the same appeal with the better graphics and new maps. But for me it just didn’t cut it.
100% this. 👍
