Back then, sure, especially since it was more technically taxing on the hardware nearly a decade ago vs. what we have now. But I like 128 player breakthrough, so y'all trying to kill one of the big reasons I bought BF2042 - 128 player matches being available - is pretty freakin lame. Leave the options for 64/128 in, if DICE can't figure it out or thinks it's too hard then they should have changed the match sizes before selling 128 players to the public.
@edgecrusherO0 wrote:Back then, sure, especially since it was more technically taxing on the hardware nearly a decade ago vs. what we have now. But I like 128 player breakthrough, so y'all trying to kill one of the big reasons I bought BF2042 - 128 player matches being available - is pretty freakin lame. Leave the options for 64/128 in, if DICE can't figure it out or thinks it's too hard then they should have changed the match sizes before selling 128 players to the public.
Easy there little fella we're just having a discussion here, if you like/want 128 players good for you some see issues with it.
To each their own, your personal opinion isn't any more valid than anyone else's.
And for the record I wasn't advocating for removing 128 players I was merely adding my opinion (which isn't any more valid than anyone else's to be clear) to a topic relating to what the OP started.
@edgecrusherO0 wrote:
@Ironhead841My frustration is more than DICE seems to be hinting that they may abandon 128 players because they don't have the talent to make a decent game and were far, far, far too arrogant in what they thought they were capable of pre-launch, apparently.
Fair enough, I'm hoping they are gonna turn it around but to be honest it's getting harder to see a scenario where that happens.
@Ironhead841 wrote:
@edgecrusherO0 wrote:
@Ironhead841My frustration is more than DICE seems to be hinting that they may abandon 128 players because they don't have the talent to make a decent game and were far, far, far too arrogant in what they thought they were capable of pre-launch, apparently.Fair enough, I'm hoping they are gonna turn it around but to be honest it's getting harder to see a scenario where that happens.
I hope they turn it round too I really do but if I am being totally honest it's getting harder every day to remain optimistic regarding this games future.
The problem is the game lacks communication methods and other features that would make 128 appealing like VOIP, Commander Mode, better squad management, platoons, and map design (choke points, key terrain).
DICE crams the same numbers of vehicles from
128 player Conquest match into a 64 player Conquest. It’s like they never played a previous Battlefield game.
If you’re going to halve the number to total infantry, shouldn’t you also halve the number of total vehicles?
We should see 1 condor and 1 hind for all 64 player game modes. Add more pure transports. Import the light jeeps and Blackhawk helicopters from BF3 portal. Also add a quad runner to every objective and allow us to call in the light jeeps and quad runners.
Also 30mm, 40mm and 50mm cannons have no place in game being mounted on any transport. That’s for both air and land transports. These weapons are low skill bar, splash damage weapons that easily farm infantry from all ranges. Miniguns or .50 cal machine guns only for all transports!
