I agree with the general premise of the discussion points. I think there was a gigantic gulf between what players were expecting/hoping for and what the designers/management/devs/etc released/thought the players wanted. But maybe I'm just too old (nearing 40) and have enjoyed [mostly] all of the games in the series since I started playing when 1942 was released.
As @Lady_One stated, multiple of those items have been resolved or at least made better since launch. I don't agree with all of Lady_one's points, I think that the game is still too close to a hero-shooter [with the abilities, ults, etc]. The zipline in Hardline and in BF2: Special Forces was deployable and usable by your teammates/squadmates, not used just for your own lone-wolf purposes. I think that led many people to dislike the game where it turned into a big army-of-one situation (especially at launch, where you could have any loadout). It was very obvious that the game had to pivot late in terms of development+design from a Battle Royale to 'uh oh, this isn't working, let's make it closer to a battlefield game thing' [but we don't need to rehash this topic that has been discussed ad-nauseam here, reddit, everywhere].
The move to make this game a "live service" that was put on life-support shortly after launch because of the reaction and precipitous drop in player counts didn't help things either. The mostly obvious division of the season 1 (delayed for months) content into 4 seasons of content was infuriating. Getting a single map and "specialist" each season which lasted for months was frustrating, not even including the lack of dedicated servers (or at least a good way to have map rotations that wasn't sequestered to the largely-unused Portal mode where XP/Mastery/etc would stop working with some minor setting changes.
I think the game did have some interesting ideas, but they weren't thought through or fleshed-out and led us to be 3 years later with regrets as to how the final product was received and supported through its life.
