Forum Discussion
/Atic
- FlibberMeister4 years agoSeasoned Ace
I think that for 128 player games to get gud, and honestly I think they could(I’d wager even 256 could be amazing) . it requires more than just better map designs.
Take one aspect of what a god map can do. Say tunnelling players through intuitive routes into a capture point.
Say that was perfect. You still have to then coordinate multiple squads, to take those approaches. And with more players you get more squads which requires more coordination and communication.
So you now need in game coms. Which we don’t have.
BF has always also in someways supported self organisation. Be it swapping/ creating squads, supporting large player platoons and the ability of large friend groups to play together. As well as simple UI stuff like being able to see the destinations of other squads.All of that missing stuff is what makes 128 so chaotic, because all the team orientated functionality has been replaced with individualistic elements.
The matchmaking- for individuals. The end game round, for individuals. Hell even specialists is a subtle driver to be an individual rather than team player. (Ok ok, I did say it was subtle).
How on earth can a group of squads become organised enough and practiced enough to make good on 128 player severs when even an individual can’t get organised to work in a single squad?
just not going to happen. So even 64 player servers without coms and decent squad mechanics are still going to pale into comparison to all prior BF games.
This is why I find the whole, let’s fix maps a priority so obscure. Without putting this focus(maps) into context with all the other issues, Dice really are making a rod for there own backs.
It makes me think that either fixing coms and all the team play elements is going to take at least 4-6 months or they aren’t going to fix it at all.
- 4 years ago
its 64 player all day maps have little to no cover on 128 maps
About Battlefield 2042 General Discussion
Recent Discussions
- 2 days ago
- 2 days ago
- 3 days ago