Re: So who is the BF2042 target demographic?
So who is the BF2042 target demographic?
People who do not like Battlefield.
Forum Discussion
9 Replies
The target demographic is "everyone"
By "everyone" I mean that they try so hard to appeal just a little bit to several fps types, that they satisfy nobody
It is a bit like serving a cup of cocoa that is both sweet, salty and spicy at the same time
@UP_Hawxxeye wrote:The target demographic is "everyone"
By "everyone" I mean that they try so hard to appeal just a little bit to several fps types, that they satisfy nobody
It is a bit like serving a cup of cocoa that is both sweet, salty and spicy at the same time
And the forums are full of people who wanted different things based on their favourite previous release.
- @UP_Hawxxeye I agree. Trying to sell this game to the people who were lining up to buy it was not enough for EA.
@Tank2042Man wrote:
@UP_Hawxxeye wrote:The target demographic is "everyone"
By "everyone" I mean that they try so hard to appeal just a little bit to several fps types, that they satisfy nobody
It is a bit like serving a cup of cocoa that is both sweet, salty and spicy at the same time
And the forums are full of people who wanted different things based on their favourite previous release.
This is the fundamental problem here, even the 'old school community' can't decide what a Battlefield game should be.
Every change is blamed on CoD or BR and to many times, changes seem to be made to placate the tryhard run and gunners who ironically want Battlefield to play more like CoD!
DICE have tried many new things with this game to try and fit what everyone wants, some have worked, some have not and some are down right bizarre.
That said, the game is now in a reasonable state but still has issues to iron out.
The biggest for me is the ripping apart of the social aspect of the game and limiting friends to only 4!
- @Trokey66 I agree the 'community' are not really united in their opinions about what a BF-game must be.
But 2042 was (is) a joke and is not what anybody in the community wanted. 2042 is Apex legends using BF game mechanics and the core feeling of BF was totally missing at launch.
The game has improved a lot, but is still not a good BF-game by any means. The specialists still don't really work in this setting and are not really meant for team-play on a larger scale. Perhaps putting the specialists in classes will change things, but I don't really think so, some will still rule by far (MacKay).
128 players "netcode" (even with smaller playercounts) are a heavy price that we will probably never get rid of. - @cso7777 I think calling it 'a joke' is too strong although some aspects of it could certainly be considered a joke!
Let's be honest, classes had/have their faults, some of them having a major detrimental affect on the game (BFV's Action Man class anyone?).
I am more no full on fan of Specialists but their general implementation is no worse than classes in my opinion. The premise that Specialists have destroyed teamwork is simply Gentleman's dangly bits, the only thing that affects teamwork are the players and if they don't want to teamwork, points or a scoreboard won't change that. The specialists introduces a lot of uncontrollable mechanics that make some classes too powerful in too many situations. Things like wing-suits and grappling hooks are a joke in a BF setting, they only increases the chaos and unpredictability of the game (of which there is enough without them) and makes intelligent map design a must (which has failed monumentally).
Furthermore some of the specialists are now nerfed to uselessness (they had to be) because creating 'special abilities' becomes a problem - especially when they are just a copy of Apex-legends characters.
Finally implementation of passive offensive gadgets, like turrets and dogs, is another very bad decision from Dice, which again is perhaps working in Apex-legends but really has no place in BF.
The action-man class in BFV was mostly because of weapons more than "gadgets" (best weapons and had a lot of explosives), the biggest issue was the weapon balance in BFV which was a total joke (medic was almost unplayable on some maps and recon more or less always had to camp somewhere).
The free weapon selection in 2042 is a thing I personally think should stay in the game, Dice struggled with weapon balance (class-specific weapons) for some time and this model is probably the best. Now all players can choose the AEK-971 if they want to...
And I agree, teamwork was bad before 2042, I think the specialists makes the problem worse, but it was still bad in previous titles.
- @cso7777 I guess the wingsuit and the grappling hook would have been less impactful if they had kept the claymore mines in the gadget pool, and hadn't nerfed Boris' passive aggressive turret into oblivion.
The specialist issue is a multi level problem, gadget selection is only one part of it. Locked looks of the specialists and the resulting workarounds to make it viable in a team based conflict are another one.
The Battlefield community blames the BF2042 has too many design ideas coming from Call of Duty and APEX Legends, so I still don't understand how Vince is the choice to fix BF2042. @kregoraI don't like claymores, they are often just abused for stupid game-play and I think they will be more annoying that useful.
I agree on your other points, having faction-specific outfits would help the game a lot. Unfortunately the days of BF1 are long gone and now everything is about monetization.
We have to see what the future brings, I'm very concerned about the talk of a 'BF narrative'. For me BF should not be a 'universe', but an idea of a certain game-style. We don't need a continuation of 2042 for sure, that is almost certain to fail once more, which would be the third time in a row...
