What is the fascination with classes?
why are people so wrapped around the axle on not allowing the flexibility that we have now and insisting on restricting the playstyle of others? people can set their loadout however they like so the...
Forum Discussion
@skullcracker2378 wrote:
@PsubondThose who don’t like the specialist are those frail weirdos who want to fantasize they’re some bad * soldier on a battlefield,that’s why you hear most of them talking about remake bf3/4. DICE adding in specialist has destroyed that fantasy for them.
I keep saying that and nothing will convince me otherwise.
That's the ONLY reason specialists are hated so much.
Its also not hard to work out why the end of round quips are also hated.
@Tank2042Man wrote:
@skullcracker2378 wrote:
@PsubondThose who don’t like the specialist are those frail weirdos who want to fantasize they’re some bad * soldier on a battlefield,that’s why you hear most of them talking about remake bf3/4. DICE adding in specialist has destroyed that fantasy for them.I keep saying that and nothing will convince me otherwise.
That's the ONLY reason specialists are hated so much.
Its also not hard to work out why the end of round quips are also hated.
Yep exactly.
I have the feeling that the specialists vs classes topic could be endlessly discussed without any kind of consensus emerging.
Because one of the main root causes of the controversy around BF 2042 is different groups of players, with different - and quite opposite - views and expectations regarding how the game plays and flows.BF 2042 was obviously designed to extend its natural player base and appeal not only to Apex / Fortnite fans, but also to "regular gamers". Resulting in choices such as big maps, more players, more freedom + self-sufficiency in terms of loadouts, lots of easy-to-use vehicles on short respawn timers, fast-paced movement, "heroes" with specific talents / traits, etc. Simple, accessible and potentially instantly gratifying.
All this flagged as a BF game, based on the franchise's "legacy framework" in terms of game modes.
In a nutshell, what we have here are the perfect ingredients for a huge "all out warfare" team deathmatch with a BR flavor, using the BF franchise DNA (based on objectives to capture / defend) as a pretext to cluster people to shoot at.This gives an utter chaos that you will love or hate depending on what you see as fun, with a constant flow of nightbirds and boltes, loads of turrets and robot dogs, no real frontline (hello Sundance and to a lesser extent, MacKay) and a balance all over the place ...
Is BF 2042 a Battlefield game or not? I honestly can't say... But what I am certain of is that the "identity crisis" that many have reffered to since BF 2042's launch is the problem EA and the studios in charge have to tackle, beyond bug fixes and performance optimization. They have to make radical, consistent choices in terms of target audience and gameplay: rewind or fast-forward, no alternative!
- @Hug_Me_Softly The player base will determine the future. I only pray for the ex-DICE devs to come up with the BFs spin-off idea someday. I have not much hope for the series in the possibly wrong hands. BF2042 is fun on its own but the game lost too many "good traits" known for the past two decades in the process.
A loaded gun in unauthorized hands does not improve the safety of both of You. Wing-suit and the all-inclusive grappling hook do not encourage teamplay. Classes have been present for the past 20 years to improve the game flow and resemble the actual Battlefield. At least in Vehicular Conquest. Also, anyone may try to question battle roles in the modern military with Rifleman, Automatic Rifleman, Marksman, Grenadier, Medic, and the list goes on. Good luck with facing the brutal reality. Putting into question the Class System is equivalent to questioning the whole point of Conquest game mode or even the Battlefield as a game, or at least how I tend to see things.For me it was about a simpler type of play.
classes have less permutations/combinations than specialists. So to some extent it’s marginally easier to adapt to the various scenarios that play out.
so subjectively speaking, I prefer classes because of the fact it’s easier to pick a class to counter a certain scenario that’s playing out.
For example, say your taking on a flag and having difficulty. After a couple of deaths, you can pick up on what the enemy are made up with ad adjust accordingly.
I will often switch out classes this way, and it’s pretty quick an easy to do in. Not much thinking required.
with classes it’s just straight up a lot harder to play in that way. The combinations, and the predicting what enemies are here’s up with is just a lot harder.
Also the scenarios that play out are just vastly greater than with the classes. What with all the gadgets etc and the fact what you look like doesn’t necessarily reflect your kit.
Now subjectivity speaking again, both have a place I think. some players like the simpler role play. Some will want the extra complexity.
Neither will promote team play. Neither is necessarily better or worse than the other as it’s down to personal preference of wht kind of game you want to play.
are classes more Battlefield. Sure, by merit of the fact they have been in every game till now.
should we shun classes or change? No, we can benefit from trying out new things. But that said, we should be considerate of what bf is at its core and not loose that in the long run.
Should the wingsuit be consigned to the bin of stupid. Yes yes yes. Lol.
i might add, if they make it easier for me to select specialist and loadout UI wise, I’d not personally have much of an issue with specialists.
