The end of BF Series
Just like so many others, I think it’s now the end of the real BF. I’m an older gamer, BF3, BF4 we’re the best. My friends won’t play 2042 and I think I may be done too. I don’t care what y’all think...
Forum Discussion
@dbasshooker Its fine, DICE shouldnt target their games to people afraid of change, I am having fun with the new direction and if anything I hope the game to keep changing and offering new experiences. This isnt COD, where we expect the same game for decades.
@TTV_VA-Quad849 It has nothing to do with change! I like the new maps even the x-pat idea but there is no campaign to sell you on a idea why are you fighting! They are going away from things that made battlefield well battlefield! Change what ever you want but take into consideration the people who are playing it! Give people what they want and build on it it. Don’t shovel crap and expect people to like it! Activision and ea need to hire the CEO from best.com I think all big developers are suffering from group think or the great ones are too shy to speak up! They need smaller teams with a monocle point of view and add flavor after they have gotten the basics down!
- @ironbeast74 I would rather prefer smaller maps and balanced enough for 64 players. The lack of destruction is not a problem for me. The graphics is simply downgraded on maps for 128 players, I'm not talking about texture resolution.
The gameplay solutions are simply odd for me. Huge distances between flags, complete lack of cover, hard to squad up with friends and the list goes on. No TDM, SQTDM, Domination in rotation in core 2042. BF2 from 2005 has had more weapons at launch with 3 factions.
I may survive the specialists but the implementation is as cringy as the one liners at the end of the round.
Campaign was actually good in BFBC2. No campaign... fine for me. So how about lower price or more online content instead like maps, weapons, game modes - 2042... no, ohh perhaps santa skins and other content behind paywall.
But the main reason why people simply drop from the game after the release is poor optimisation on PC. The portal service tend to restart in the middle of the round. The amount of game breaking bugs is huge in numbers. Everything is served for even 110 bucks with a promise of further development.
Instead of innovating the company choose the easy path of copying solutions from other games and there is a sudden surprise at the release date. Higher player count doesn't automatically mean better gameplay solutions.
To me it's bright as a day that a person having final say in 2042 has never ever played previous BF titles and listened too much to research data specialists, instead of creating a trend by themselves.
I will play BF2042 someday, but for 12 bucks.
The sad thing is that Dice Stockholm takes also a credit for this mess and probably shouldn't.
@ironbeast74 wrote:
@TTV_VA-Quad849 there is no campaign to sell you on a idea why are you fighting! They are going away from things that made battlefield well battlefield!You mean, like 1942, and BF2 also didn't have, either? Gee, it seems that the game series didn't originate with that. It's not a single player game. It didn't originate that way, and it shouldn't continue that, as well. It's extremely ironic that people want to pretend like it's become CoD, but don't realize it's missing the one thing CoD was originally based around. Seems like they just want it to be CoD. Seems they're making Battlefield what actually made it Battlefield. Not just what you remember when you started gaming 5 years ago.
