EA/DICE Patrick Soderlund said this regarding 128 players back when Battlefield 3 was announced:
After playing 2042 do you agree?
(granted, the terrible poor and all open flat gmod template maps we have in BF2042 does not make it better...)
128 players is the way to go it's a war chaos is apart of that however better map design and voice chat are essential to the success. Map design that drives a balance between troop and vehicle movements. Something that would go a long way to balance the air superiority that often takes place is AA Vehicles should be their own category with a limit of 2 or 3 minimum for large player games . And a class system would also help the balance for larger games as specialists as they are drive a lone wolf player approach which doesn't work for battlefield .
@VRACinque wrote:Don't agree.
Hell let loose go up to 100 and it's good. Because the overall gameplay design and especially map design was made using a brain.
Which isn't the case for 2042 which could give the impression that 128 can't work, well it could, they just showed they don't have the skill to do proper 128 game design
I like Hell Let Loose, but it is a fundamentally different style of gameplay than Battlefield so it's kind of hard to compare the two.
128 player games in BF2042 just feels too chaotic and random although that could change as other aspects of the game are changed, I suppose.
Any player count can be fun to play if the game is designed for them.
The problem is that the current Battlefield gameplay format is based on Bad Company from 2008. The current Battlefield gameplay format was designed for 12 v 12 and was never developed or adapted for larger player counts like 32 v 32 and certainly not for 64 v 64. Dice Sweden literally just took game design for 12 v 12, shoved 128 players on top of it and called it a day.
@Ironhead841 wrote:
@VRACinque wrote:Don't agree.
Hell let loose go up to 100 and it's good. Because the overall gameplay design and especially map design was made using a brain.
Which isn't the case for 2042 which could give the impression that 128 can't work, well it could, they just showed they don't have the skill to do proper 128 game design
I like Hell Let Loose, but it is a fundamentally different style of gameplay than Battlefield so it's kind of hard to compare the two.
128 player games in BF2042 just feels too chaotic and random although that could change as other aspects of the game are changed, I suppose.
I agree with you the maps are certainly chaotic at times.
I often see 3 helicopters over the one flag and yesterday I actually saw three condors on the small B1 flag area on Manifest map.
128 players may work on a map designed to allow better protection for infantry and bigger flag areas.
The design of the current AOW maps, coupled with small flag areas and the large amount of vehicles in BF2042, it does get a bit hectic at times. !
Exactly, I wasn't saying 128 players couldn't work I was just saying right now it's just kinda wonky.
Feels like whack-a-mole 😬
@Ironhead841 wrote:Exactly, I wasn't saying 128 players couldn't work I was just saying right now it's just kinda wonky.
Feels like whack-a-mole 😬
Yep I understand, whack_a_mole sums it up, is that why you have such a big helmet to soften the blows. ? I only have my beret. 😬
The problem isn't the player count, i think that is great. The problem is the hit registration, player model movement (its crap, needs to be more like BF5), the ping, the FPS, the amount of vehicles and the fact they regen health on their own and to hard to kill. I personally like infantry only maps that were about skill and tactic not a vehicle driving through a horde of people and killing 20 before it is destroyed. How about drop hazard zone, it isn't fun, give us a real BR mode that is more lined with PubG not COD, no vehicles with weapons just transports. Fix the items listed above....THEN work on maps, you fix the maps and have the issues listed above no one will play the game. Also fix the guns, they are crap (i hate WW2 games, but BF5 and 4 had the best hit registration in the BF lineup) This game is bad for hit registration, and character movements are terrible.
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.
