What will EA have to do to earn your trust back?

SpoolaZ wrote:

Don't get your hopes up too high on the publishers because it looks exactly the same across all major games.
With today's AC technology it will continue to look like this, as hackers and programmers are of the same level of knowledge, where the hacker leads and the programmer follows.

Don't tell me these abstract stories. The cheat for BF2042 is the same cheat as for BF4, apparently. With minimal changes. That is, it has existed for a very long time and no one does anything because no one cares. After all, you could tell your story. In reality, even network traffic is not encrypted in BF. The cheat works on the analysis and modification of traffic. Even normal traffic encryption would nullify this ancient cheat. I'm not even mentioning the use of AI to analyze shooting and hit statistics. No? But nothing is being done, except for the rejection of the poorly functioning anti-cheat and the introduction of a fake anti-cheat. Perhaps those who lobbied for the introduction of the fake anti-cheat are the ones selling cheats themselves.

Nah, a working anti-cheat is impossible for them.
Give us player owned servers, I've been making cheaters nonexistent for 5 years in BF1 and there's no way in hell I'm playing some **bleep** bare bones construction of a game with none of that functionality, and suffering to the same hacker like bf2042 was every day.

Honestly just scrap the new game right now, spend the next months making new maps for Battlefield 1, sell it as dlc. Outstanding game, would thrive so massively with some new close quater maps.
Edit: Wild, a fecies-related word is censored here. What are they, PG4+?

PG0.5+ With some of the censored expressions lmao.

I picked up Arma Reforger. The next BF game better be good, or a lot of money will be walking away from it.

I highly doubt they'll listen to my ideas posted about commander role, class roles and squad roles in general section. So I highly doubt that I'll buying next game on launch, if at all anymore. Bit bored of FPS games which lacks originality and tradition. >⁠.⁠<

I just mean that the gaming industry is done when it comes to cheating. These programmers are specialists in their field and will adapt to every change the developers make, and the result of that once they have managed to get around it, a non-functioning AC simply.
That's why I don't even believe in an AI solution today for the most advanced cheats, because the only thing that will happen is that they adapt their cheats to it too and the developers are back to square one.

Playing on public or other open servers is just like at home, if you don't lock the door, you have to deal with the problems that come with it.
That's why private servers, where you only invite those you trust, are the only thing that is effective against cheaters and other vermin.

I can agree that they could do more about obvious cheaters and is an area AI would be of great help. Why they don't do it, only the developers can answer, since already in the BF3 era there were plugins that looked at statistics and banned if it was abnormal.

And you, the developer or the company don't need to sell cheats, because cheaters are driven by their desire to boost their egos or some other repressed sadistic desire, so they just buy the game again after a ban and they also do everything they can to get around hardware bans and other restrictions they are subjected to, when they get a new account. What can a developer do about it, more than they already do.

One solution would be to ban the use of VPNs.

I would love to have the opportunity to host a private server for friends only. Build a private database with statistics as I have since BF2. Dodge the vermin that could spoil the fun. Upload some plugins, and update gameplay modifiers on the server side. 

Lobby and custom games are boring as hell in reality. The gaming industry went down to toilet. Players will host their matches thanks to private permanent servers. Nowadays, BF is missing a lot of opportunities in that sector. 

For the true love of God, can we have a standard spotting wheel under the Q button? I do not see that often players spot the enemy with the current system. I prefer a classic solution that suits the genre better and is very intuitive. 

If this next BF fails the expectations (which are pretty much copy/paste and redo/upgrade from previous titles in the series) then God help us! 

Make good maps.

Look at every 2042 original map, those are all bad. No soul. The only good maps in 2042 are those from older games.

I would recommend picking a certain region on our planet and build the game/story from there. (2010 medal of honor did this amazing) Make maps realistic according to towns/cities, fauna&flora found in this region. It will give the game an identity, a more realistic and coherent feel and this way you have room to create something unique with every installment.

Now we get an ice map, a jungle map, a desert map, a city map,... It's not coherent, its all over the place, it has no backbone. And what are we going to do next game? The exact same thing? 

Also downsize the number of players according to the number of objectives. In a conquest game with 5/6 objectives 32vs32 players is maximum. In a rush game with 2 objectives in each sector, 16vs16 players is maximum. I think bf3 was even 12vs12, and this is considered the best rush gameplay in battlefield history,... something to think about imo. I wouldn't mind going back to 12vs12! This will result in a slower pace and a less chaotic/more realistic feel of the game. Nodody ever asked for breakthrough... It doesn't work.

Also really important when creating a rush map is to make the maps wide enough. Give the attacking team enough room to flank the defending team. Different ways to tackle the objectives will encourage squad play and this is where the fun lies. Come up with a plan, execute, push through. Sure bottlenecks look really cool, but in the long run they get boring.

So to recap, realistic settings (like a real village, a real harbour,... nothing that feels created specially for a video game) natural look, wide enough/enough room to tackle objectives, adjusted number of players, slower pace.

First make the map from a real life location, after that start thinking about where to put the objectives and maybe adjust a little bit. Noshar canals is an awesome map that does this great. It doesn't feel like you are on a video game map, it feels like real location.

Make good maps again.

Look at every 2042 original map, those are all bad. No soul. The only good maps in 2042 are those from older games.

I would recommend picking a certain region on our planet and build the game/story from there. (2010 medal of honor did this amazing) Make maps realistic according to towns/cities, fauna&flora found in this region. It will give the game an identity, a more realistic and coherent feel and give room for each new installment to be something unique.

Now we get an ice map, a jungle map, a desert map, a city map,... It's not coherent, its all over the place, it has no backbone. And what are we going to do next game? The exact same thing? 

Also downsize the number of players according to the number of objectives. In a conquest game with 5/6 objectives 32vs32 players is maximum. In a rush game with 2 objectives in each sector, 16vs16 players is maximum. I think bf3 was even 12vs12, and this is considered the best rush gameplay in battlefield history,... something to think about imo. I wouldn't mind going back to 12vs12 rush. This will result in a slower pace and a less chaotic/more realistic feel of the game. Also the impact a single player has on the outcome of a game is significantly larger. Nobody ever asked for the breakthrough game mode. It doesn't work...

Also really important when creating a rush map is to make the maps wide enough. Give the attacking team enough room to flank the defending team. Different ways to tackle the objectives will encourage squad play and this is where the fun lies.Come up with a plan, execute, push through. Sure bottlenecks look really cool, but in the long run they get boring.

So to recap, realistic settings (like a real village, a real harbour,... nothing that feels created specially for a video game) natural look, wide enough/enough room to tackle objectives, adjusted player count, slower pace.

First make the map from a real life location, after that start thinking about where to put the objectives and maybe adjust a little bit. Noshar canals is an awesome map that does this great. It doesn't feel like you are on a video game map, it feels like real location.

Honestly NazT55 its simple. We all want to go back to the good ol days. Battlefield Bad Company, Battlefield 3 & 4. Those BF are what took this franchise to the next level. No microtransactions, no COD skins and most importantly no specialists. EA NEEDS to back off the ideology of forcing microtransactions. Don't get me wrong I (not speaking for others) will be more than happy to pay for DLC like we did during that age and pay for premium but to add BF points isn't the answer. Give us what we want. A full finished somewhat polished release (bugs here and there are understandable). Not another "Take a year to fix a game" or "beta for a year". Basically take what BF BC,3 and 4 are in right now and implement that into the next BF. Another thing is to remember that a majority of us are simply everyday gamers. Stop making Content Creators the main focus. They shouldnt be the end all be all for any franchise. I feel like they listen to them more than they listen to the main community. That brings up another idea, LISTEN TO THE F'ING COMMUNITY!! KEEP US UPDATED!! They (EA, DICE, etc.) are on thin ice right now and they know it. I honestly believe this Battlefield (6) will be what determines the future of the franchise. It will either be bring the end to the franchise just like Medal Of Honor or this will be perfection and I can see it blossom into what we already appreciate when people talk about BC,3 &4.