@DingoKillr No, it isn't a myth that Bf4 has had more players than Bf1 for the past few years. Until maybe a couple of years ago, the player stats for both games were directly comparable, and they showed since the first-half of 2019, more people were online in Bf4 than Bf1. And if you log into both games right now, you can see that there are more populated servers and players in servers in Bf4 than are in Bf1.
Detailed player stats for both games stopped being publicly available in October 2019.
In October 2019, there were 28,236 people still playing Bf4.
In October 2019, there were 23,816 people still playing Bf1.
No, every Bf game doesn't have the same graph trend. As I already said, Bf4's player-base continued to increase until the release of Bf1. And Bf4 also had a huge surge in players for the 5 months before Bf1's release. Bf1's player-base dropped like a rock in the early days after its launch and never recovered - a player trend not seen in any other Battlefield game before that. And Bf1 had a short-lived modest spike in players for only 1 month before the release of Bf5.
Can we please not make things up and misrepresent history in the course of trying to defend a game?
>> "Are your seriously saying people left BF2 because BF3 was more inline with other online games of the day."
I can't answer that because I don't know what that means.
>> "When did BF1 promise to delivery on BF roots? It never did."
Actually, retuning to the series' roots was a recurring marketing slogan for Bf1.
https://www.polygon.com/2016/8/11/12443234/battlefield-1-new-gameplay-vehicles-tanks-planes-dice-ea
https://techreport.com/news/30093/the-battlefield-franchise-goes-back-to-its-roots-in-battlefield-1/
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/2016-s-battlefield-will-return-to-military-style-r/1100-6423674/
Again, can we please not make things up and misrepresent history in the course of trying to defend a game?
>> "As for being BF1 shallow that is your opinion not fact while stating BF4 was more detailed that much more funnier. The majority of BF players today do not want a remake of BF2 including me."
Actually, it's a quantifiable fact that Bf1 has a much simpler design than Bf4, with less variables to the experience. So... I have to suspect that you didn't play Bf4. And if you did, you either don't remember it, or are presenting it in a dishonest manner.
You don't speak for the majority of gamers, and I'm quite sure that you've never played Bf2. You've expressed in another thread that you barely want a game at all, but just want a heavily-managed experience where there are no surprises or challenges, and where you get to do whatever you want in any moment without interference from other players or the systems in the game. You more want an interactive environment than you do a game.
I've been loving battlefield since the xbox bf2:mc dropped, and Ive owned every console title since then, BC2 was good for a couple thousand hours of game play, didn't play much bf3 because the auto spot and hand holding was ridiculous, so I played BC2 instead. After BF4 and the rocky release, things got smoothed out and I've played almost 1200 hours of BF4, still play about ten hours a week if the weather sucks outside, it's a solid game. BF1, I could only stomach 152 hours of that garbage, I gave it more than a fair chance, and it was total * the entire time. So yes, BF4 is loads better than BF1, and BF:V is BF1s sickly cousin. I'm hoping 6 goes back the the BF4 formula.
