Why Battlefield 2042 Represents the Collapse of a Triple-A Gaming Company

I agree with everything posted, if the next Battlefield goes this way it will end badly.

Everything you have both written and made reference to is astounding, I applaud you for your time and thoughtfulness in this article.

It just goes to show the level of contempt these gaming franchises have for the player base now. Loyalty is gone, in fact, they probably think loyalty is some form of fast food from Uber.

But what this does show is the sheer level of arrogance displayed by these organisations with an attitude of "Pump it out whatever state it is in, they will swallow it up, never mind finishing it and "don't worry about the lack of content" and oh, keep pushing the sale of shiny trinkets and pathetic skins, again they will swallow it all"

It does question the thinking of companies, and especially in these economic climates we are in. If they release something as bad as this in the next game then they are done forever I feel, and yet we all know the shareholders will push for a release as fast as possible no matter what the consequences are. The game will fail, and they will all scratch their heads and wonder why, and we will be blaming both the game developers and producers equally.

Shares will take a slight hit, profits will be down, but they will still have our money so will not care in the slightest. Useful idiots are what we have become, or if you prefer, Cash Cows, nothing more.

A huge shame that companies destroyed such a once huge and respected platform and industry leading franchise. I suppose it just goes to show the short-sighted backwards looking times we are in now.

When the next title comes out, I will wait for lots of reviews, and watch "actual game play", not cinematic trailers, which are usually NOTHING whatsoever like what you will actually see when playing it, before deciding what to do with my money.

Anyone that Pre-Orders the next BF game is just plain silly after this terrible game.

I don't expect my thread to stay here for long, the people that moderate these forums are very touchy about anything relating to the truth, however, they also state that they do feed-back things to the developers, well, how about feeding this thread back to them because everything written in this thread is both Truthful and Factual.

Thanks for posting! Recently, it looks like EA and Co. seem to be aware of their past this time around! We will see the new game within the next 6 months and then we buckle up, it is going to be an interesting ride through Early Access!

@l_Darkjedi_lA large chunk of what you mention is issues at launch and does not apply anymore, nevermind things that were never true even at launch.

Class-based and hero shooter are not mutually exclusive. 2042's gadget balance issues (which existed mainly at launch, and have not been a thing for a long time) were not due to it being a hero shooter. Overwatch is THE "hero shooter", even though I'll still consider it a worse version of TF2. It has 3 classes of heroes, with extremely specific roles. Somewhat like what 2042 has now. Rather, no one cares about these waaaaacky personalities, especially when they start mouthing off cringe at the end of the round (which is not a thing anymore), and that they're a transparent vessel for more monetization. If you want to talk about the confused identity, this is it - matches open with "we're all gonna starve" and horror-esque music and used to end with "I'm just better than everyone else".

2042 did not show you how much damage you dealt to vehicles and what parts you disabled. With it being difficult to judge exact numbers off a bar mid-combat that is only sometimes visible, people assumed there was no directional damage. There has been directional damage since launch. The damage you deal is shown now (though floating point and particularly <1.0 damage is broken). Specific part disabling however is still not communicated. AFAIK only part damage has been somewhat simplified in what triggers it (I'm still not exactly sure on what does trigger it outside of EMPs or hacking).

Hitreg was bad at launch. Hitreg is fine-ish now. Dusting happens, dusting happened before in previous BF games as well. The hitreg was nowhere near as bad as BF4 at launch.

The reddit post you reference is meaningless. Read the DICE reply about it. https://www.reddit.com/r/battlefield2042/comments/r8a744/comment/hn833jf/
There WERE mouse issues back then. This reddit post does not demonstrate that. Things have been improved now.

Your "gameplay issues" are mostly nonsensical. Pretty much only the helicopter one is valid. Tank drivers don't need to know where their gunner is aiming, it's irrelevant; at launch, gunner shots would veer off whenever the vehicle moves (probably inheriting vehicle momentum more than they should), this has been fixed. Is this what you're referring to?

There is only one AA vehicle, the wildcat. It has no 20mm flak. The 20mm flak on jeeps was added most likely with the sole purpose of being a counter to nightbirds a while ago. It is pretty much ineffective against attack helicopters, which are the current flavor of overpowered helicopter, or transports. It was not intended to be your team's main AA option, hence why its range was nerfed to only 200m. It's still good to take out overly aggressive nightbirds.
If we are talking about launch, back then the 20mm flak did not exist, 60mm flak pods could farm infantry with massive splash through walls and the wildcat had the 57mm which was pretty damn overpowered and could wreck any air and ground vehicles. Right now, I'd say the 30mm is underpowered only because attack helicopters are overpowered and have too much health given their mobility. They used to be incredibly slow and have low health, DICE decided to buff both of these aspects at once.

The "some other AA" in BF4 was the Igla, a launcher that required you to hold the lock, NOT fire and forget like 2042's FXM, and for that rewarded you with a faster rocket and longer range than the fire and forget Stinger, which had the same lockon distance like in 2042, 400m.

Back at launch, having only the M5 was pretty bad, however playing the overpowered combo of it and Angel being able to fully resupply yourself and give yourself armor kinda made up for it. Now, you get a launcher that deals 35 damage to tanks to the turret and side, and 44 to the rear, and a good amount of ammo. No shallow angle mechanic, always 35. This is WAY stronger than what was ever in BF4, and that's not even factoring in AP UGLs or the AT grenades or whatever else which also was not in BF4.

Ziplines were already a thing in Battlefield, they were in Hardline long before Titanfall would get desecrated and you could even create one wherever you pleased rather than having them only in preset spots.

This reminds me, I wish people would stop conveniently forgetting how bad BF4's launch was just because BF4 is good now. What happened to everyone posting threads on Battlelog saying they'd never preorder a Battlefield game ever again? People forgot that, and after they were officially told by EA to not buy Battlefield games? (Not quite exactly but close enough)

There are tons of things to complain about with 2042, in the past, less so in the present, but a good chunk of your reasons are untrue, nonsensical or misrepresent things. If you want another legitimate reason - 2042 would cause Xboxes to instantly shut down. AFAIK this only happened to very few people, but I think that's pretty pretty bad.

If we accept mediocre games, then mediocre games are all we'll ever get. 

@Billy_bSLAYERAh interesting, you'd think they wouldn't make people literally do extensive in-depth deep dive into the damage to figure it out.

Also, that chart points out that the AA damage from and Anti-AIR Tank to an Air Unit is absolutely awful. holy cow.

(re-post remove to read easier)