@RayD_O1 wrote:
@sk1lld wrote:For me and I apologize if this seems long.
Dedicated servers are a must have in Multiplayer fps's I've been playing since BF1942 released, it had huge maps like we have now "Running simulator" open sand box with clear objectives. What was different to me was the dedicated servers. It built a community where we would get together and make friends, compete and have a good time.
We would get together on Team Speak laugh and cry so hard. Compete on Team Warfare League.
The soul of the latest games is missing "Last 3 anyway IMHO", replaced with MM and phony dedicated servers and no way for a group of players to play together in a group.
It has no life.
Just and old guys opinion.
You have described the situation perfectly, and judging by the current player stats you are not alone in feeling that way.
Killing dedicated servers "What made Battlefield" and also being able to log on as a group, drove a wedge in the community.
JMHO
Killing dedicated servers "What made Battlefield" and also being able to log on as a group, drove a wedge in the community.
JMHO
I think that Dice did some market research a while back, found that drop in and out players in groups smaller than four constituted the larger portion of the player base, so decided that they didn't need those of us who've been playing organized BF since 1942.
What that shallow piece of research failed to point out is that its the organized players that create the living community for the drop in and out players to exist in and enjoy.
With 2042, it appears they went out of their way to make sure their game was a problem for groups larger than four. As someone who tries to organize matches in BF, I feel they've actively tried to drive us away. Legacy players, indeed.
This strategy, taken to the furthest expression yet with 2042, has created the precipitous drop in player count that Dice seem yet to acknowledge.
Dice, when making 2042, spent a lot of time making skin for the body of this game, but they actively drove away the bones, and are now wondering why its a jellified blob on the floor.
@TAW_Rinko wrote:Killing dedicated servers "What made Battlefield" and also being able to log on as a group, drove a wedge in the community.
JMHO
I think that Dice did some market research a while back, found that drop in and out players in groups smaller than four constituted the larger portion of the player base, so decided that they didn't need those of us who've been playing organized BF since 1942.
What that shallow piece of research failed to point out is that its the organized players that create the living community for the drop in and out players to exist in and enjoy.
With 2042, it appears they went out of their way to make sure their game was a problem for groups larger than four. As someone who tries to organize matches in BF, I feel they've actively tried to drive us away. Legacy players, indeed.
This strategy, taken to the furthest expression yet with 2042, has created the precipitous drop in player count that Dice seem yet to acknowledge.
Dice, when making 2042, spent a lot of time making skin for the body of this game, but they actively drove away the bones, and are now wondering why its a jellified blob on the floor.
It was the word of mouth "Based on the community" that built this player base to the size it is today. Dedicated servers and listening to payers feedback helped forge and strengthen the community. Dividing the community like they are doing now "With MM and inability to form proper groups/sides", will disperse the player base and damage sales in all future Battlefield titles.
I don't know if EA/DICE reads these forums but hope they see this and think it over real hard.
