Thoughts on the 'Feedback Loop'
I don't want the risk of being called 'toxic', so I will refrain from saying that I consider this current 'feedback loop' to be a joke. Well, maybe it's not even that. So I rather say that I am very ...
Forum Discussion
Straatford87
DICE Team
DICE TeamThere are a few questions and comments on the Feedback Loop that I can definitely clarify.
Why aren't we hosting more feedback topics at the same time?
From our end we believe that a focused discussion is a better discussion. However, that doesn't mean that we suddenly stop reading feedback on other topics , or that we've ignored those previously. We've received plenty of feedback from the community from before, throughout and post launch. My team has been consistently collecting and reviewing that feedback and providing it to our teams in a digestible format. We will continue doing that. But we also want to have the open discussion that you see now with the Feedback Loop. In this case, for Maps.
The work on other areas of the game does not stop while we are having this focused discussion. It's an ongoing process, and development takes time.
How much time will this Feedback Loop take?
We're not just reading comments here on these forums, but also on other Social Media spaces such as Reddit, Discord, and Twitter. There are thousands of comments out there right now. It will take some time for us to read, format, deliver and then reflect on what we've learned in a follow-up post for you. That means it won't be a matter of a few days.
Hello Staatford87. To my knowledge two separate surveys were sent out which asked for feedback on several areas. Namely maps, movement, teamplay, and especially specialists.
At the end of the beta the DICE team doubled down on specialists after what I perceived to be a largely negative response to such a foreign system in Battlefield
This response was again observed in the next survey that was sent out
I'm confused as to why such such a largely negative response to ideas such as specialists, map design, and missing features that are somewhat mockingly called "legacy features" are being asked in surveys so close to launch and also after launch when these things should have been analyzed, discussed, and polled well before this product was in the hands of the public
Why does it take basic multiplayer fps features such as a scoreboard and voip not only not included at launch but being delayed months after launch? Surely those things were not forgotten about, right?
We know that the team has seen the large list of missing features after being spammed by it on several platforms. The response from the team has seem to be insultingly called "legacy features". Do you consider the absence of features that benefited previous games to have been an oversight? I'm just confused why previous games offered much more than 2042 does
Do you think that having so few weapons (22) at launch was an ideal decision? For example, if somebody such as I liked using LMGs in previous installments, I only have the option of two LMGs when in previous games I had the option to choose one out of many weapons
