Hello! I was wondering what the general reception to this game would have been if it wasn't marketed as a Battlefield game. What if it was more of a fun sandbox game that combined different EA game content, such as Battlefield, Battlefront, and Apex Legends? Or even if the content was basically the same, but the game was named something else, what would you have thought?
Thank you for looking at this, and I hope you have a great day!
At best it would be seen as a knockoff BF/CoD hybrid, something DICE would take note not to recreate.
Still a ways to go, but I'm glad they are finally making some progress in fixing things
It would still be rubbish the disconnect from the devs to players is so huge it cannot be fixed.
Devs is all about money they have no respect towards players anymore.
Just a shame none of them are big enough to do a live Q&A on a stream.
Battlefield 2042 needed 3 more months due to the pandemic, and another 3-5 months due to the switch from a "Battle Royale" copycat back to legacy Battlefield. So in total 6-8 months of delay would have made EA tens of millions more profits, they really messed up big on 10% of their entire corporate revenue stream. I'd be surprised if the screw up so badly next version, if they even attempt another...
BF has some real obvious cross overs of APEX specialists (Mackay/Pathfinder for example), but to be honest I don't think there is much Battlefront as I had multiple characters at S900 levels in Battlefront, and there is no way I'll get even one in BF beyond S100, is just gets too boring too quickly as unlike Battlefront and APEX, it does not have enough variety of specialists, game modes, etc to keep me engaged for very long each week. Battlefield specialist are half-baked, and should either have been removed completely to keep the legacy or enhanced way further and simply removed the "Battlefield" title and make this into something else. And when you add in all the coding mistakes, the first six months has done irreparable damage to the player base so best to just move on and make the next version better, which is what I see Dice/EA doing currently...
It would have sold FAR less copies.
This garbage sold off the back of BF.
As a stand alone FULL priced game, no way it sells.
@Haiku79 wrote:
Hello! I was wondering what the general reception to this game would have been if it wasn't marketed as a Battlefield game. What if it was more of a fun sandbox game that combined different EA game content, such as Battlefield, Battlefront, and Apex Legends? Or even if the content was basically the same, but the game was named something else, what would you have thought?
Thank you for looking at this, and I hope you have a great day!
It isn't except for in name only IMO but if 2042 wasn't marketed as a Battlefield game it might've had a far different reception like Apex did since it wasn't failing at almost every metric that dictates what proper Battlefield game is.
It was the same thing for Hardline, if it didn't have 2 decades (around 15 years at the time) of what makes a proper Battlefield game a Battlefield game to live up to Hardline could have found its niche and could've had the creative freedom it needed to succeed instead of ram-rodding a cops and robbers game into the mold of Battlefield game's shoes.
That being said finance people at large companies don't like the uncertainty associated with new IPs so it's preferable in their eyes to slap an established game title's name on it and they'll have a pre-made audience that will automatically buy it even if they'll hate it after playing it.
