Kronark
Member
I just felt 2042 was too massive. Bring it back down to 64 players.
Ha literally had this thought and edited it in as you wrote that.
I just felt 2042 was too massive. Bring it back down to 64 players.
There should be an open beta before release (hopefully?)Free demo, please?
Yeah, I was surprised how directly they ripped the Civil War opening scene.Well, they did say they were taking inspiration from the movie Civil War (which starts exactly like the trailer).
I got to play briefly on PS5 through Battlefield Labs and liked what I saw. I don't play BF on consoles so I didn't really enjoy it but I liked it enough to give it a chance on launch.
The last campaign I played was BF1 and thought it was OK. It was one of the first games with HDR I got to play and I kind of rememeber it was one of the first games with Atmos. I skipped V and 2042 didn't have any so I hope I can get a few hours out of this one like I did with 3 and 4 but the meat is in the MP. Can't wait to go back with my squad.
Warsaw theme... once it kicks in I get goosebumps... hope it means they understand we need to get back to BF3 and BF4 to get good again.Purrup Pum Pum Pum Puuum
Hold firm lads. If the game is missing any of these crucial elements, it's our duty to trash it. No matter how hungry we are for a new AAA military shooter.
1. Server rental with full customization. Lost since BF4. We got nothing in exchange for this feature that was once considered a barebones standard expectation. 24/7 METRO | 15K TICKETS
2. Classes without any shred of hero characters
3. Four person squads
4. Unscripted environmental destruction. BFBC2 style. Levelution was a huge downgrade. I want to pop the top on sniper nests with a noob tube.
5. The two-round burst AN-94. Also known as the greatest battle rifle ever simulated in a military shooter.
6. FULL IN GAME VOICE CHAT. Again, this was also a barebones, standard expectation in even the lowest budget game.
Their free to play take on Warzone I believe.They have 2 whole separate studios working on the campaign. Criterion and Motive are on the single player, Dice is on the Multiplayer, and Ripple Effect is doing something else for the MP as well I think.
I could not give a fuck if that happened for real.
Ah, so it's just fool's gold. I'm not that desperate. WWIII was a proof of concept that we can get this type of game from the indie realm. It didn't deliver, but hopefully the next one will.1) We will never get this again. Game companies do not want you to have any control over multiplayer experiences. They like skewing matchmaking in favour of player retention instead of fair play and don't want to deal with the occasional bad racist admin / server making them look bad.
2) This might happen. It sounds like they're split 50 / 50 on this atm with that announcement about locked loadouts and the beta.
3) Might happen. I would like the series to go back to spawning only on the squad leader though. Spawning on anyone is shitty for conquest mode.
4) This seems very likely. The dam explosion in the trailer is a heavy hint.
5) Please no meta must picks. Variety of useful options would be nice.
6) This could possibly happen in squads? If it is in it's very likely going to be opt in though which means no one will ever use it and friends will just use discord. It is very unlikely that voice chat will be default and enabled / forced.
Wait a minute, maybe I wanted to...Please don't Fortnite cod us...
I have zero fucking desire to be a ninja turtle dressed as Nicki Minaj
The US jingoism alone under the current real administration left me ice cold (read: indifferent). I feel absolutely nothing, seeing a fictitious Brooklyn Bridge being attacked. I could not give a fuck if that happened for real.
Anyway, hopefully multiplayer is good.
No.Loved the whole concept of the trailer. A battle in Brooklyn? That gets me hyped up.
I also say bring it back to BF4 size.
Having 12 letters of the alphabet on the map is too much for me
We just need flags A B C
this one really stuck in my craw and I want to address it again. When has this ever happened? I can't think of a single highly publicized dust up of this elusive racist server admin harming the reputation of the company. The company who rents the servers did a good enough job filtering this, plus informed game journalists only need to report on it truthfully. The publisher has no control over who rents the servers. It's just the way this business/hobby works. The amazing thing about dedicated servers, if you don't like an admin, you never ever have to play on his server.1) We will never get this again. Game companies do not want you to have any control over multiplayer experiences. They like skewing matchmaking in favour of player retention instead of fair play and don't want to deal with the occasional bad racist admin / server making them look bad.
I swear it always the same, people still havent learned that a trailer doesnt even remotely represent a finished quality game.
Rememeber this one, yeah? People pre ordering left and right and then you got an unfinished broken game for over a year. Whoever pre orders BF6 is a moron:
![]()
Yes, the standard Atlanticist reaction. We all used to be one.
I swear it always the same, people still havent learned that a trailer doesnt even remotely represent a finished quality game.
Rememeber this one, yeah? People pre ordering left and right and then you got an unfinished broken game for over a year. Whoever pre orders BF6 is a moron:
![]()
I wish I could be as edgy as you bro, please teach me your waysYes, the standard Atlanticist reaction. We all used to be one.