Support NeoGAF

[Filben]

I never understood the need for new iterations so fast. I've played CoD1 even when CoD3 game out. Only CoD4 managed to offer enough for me to stop playing part one mostly. Even then I went back in from time to time.

The same could be said about BF. People could still play the solid and highly enjoyable BF1 but they rather play something new and shiny no matter how borked it is. Even BF5 is lot of fun with the Pacific maps.

As long as servers are online you can always go back to the last game you'd enjoyed. You could even play BF4 again. Or Bad Company 2 if I'm not mistaken.

But of course with today's mentalitiy where people think a game's dead as soon they aren't any patches anymore – instead of thinking it's finally finished and in its best state – they move on and leave perfectly good games behind.

 

[ChoosableOne]

Where exactly is this performance increase. I couldn't run it on a 2060 at launch. Now i have a 3070 and it's still garbage performance after all the so called fixes.

It's a Cpu heavy game. Can you post your cpu and ram info?

 

[Slicker than your average]

It's a Cpu heavy game. Can you post your cpu and ram info?

Ryzsn x5800 32gb ram

 

[ChoosableOne]

Ryzsn x5800 32gb ram

I have 3060 ti and 9700k(base clocks) with 3000mhz 16gb ram. I usually get 100-120 fps(at 1440p, high settings, dlss on-quality, ray tracing off). I used to see these values only on 64-player maps or portal mode, now 128-player maps are also plays very well. I don't understand what causes your problem. Your processor and graphics card are better than mine. I have a 144hz Gsync compatible monitor, do you have one of those? It really helps a lot.

Or, are you one of those sensitive pc players who say "this game's optimization is sh*t" every time the fps drops below 144?

 

[Shut0wen]

I've been a huge BF fan since BF2,probably have 10k+ hours in all games. BF2042 is total shit, game feels like some chinese copy of Battlefield from wish.


Only game that is somehow comparable to Battlefield is Squad. Its a great game but maps are huge, without a good team its not very good experience and game is much slower more like sim type(although not too hardcore as Arma).

Sometimes i wish that BF1 was the last game they made for last-gen hardware.After that if they started to work on new Battlefield for next gen set to release in 2020/21 i bet they could have done an amazing job(if lot of devs didn't leave though).

Battlefield with 64 players made for Ryzen CPU, SSD, 16gb ram it could have been incredible,destruction,sound,graphics..

I really don't know whats my point,i guess everytime i try to play BF2042 i get disappointed and sad again..

Considering mr battlefield left the company absolutely not, i feel like dice has been going down hill ever since they made battlefront and the last good bf game was either 1 but i much prefer 4, Problem with the newest bf is like you said way to many players and not enough cover, plus the game doesnt really reward you or even push you to work as a team

 

[Shut0wen]

Battlefield 2042, after numerous patches and level redesigns, has turned into a decent game. I hate the “heroes” and other annoyances that make it feel like a non-battlefield game, but it has turned out decent after a few extra years of development. It was a disaster at launch. Some of the launch maps still suck, but the redesigned ones are better and the new maps are actually pretty good.

If anyone hasn’t played it in a while, it might be a good time to try it. Is it on gamepass now?

I still have hope that the next Battlefield will be a return to the more classic formula of Battlefield 3 and 4. Battlefield V is my least favorite one.

My main fear is that the new head, who used to run Call of Duty, will make it more like Call of Duty than classic Battlefield.

Bf3 sucks though, 2042 is literally the 3rd game with bigger maps and player count

 

[BlueLena]

I think part of the problem is that every entry after BC2 seems to have divided the player base in regard to what makes a BF game "good", which is pretty much reflected in this thread, and looking at the changes they made to BF2042 I don't think DICE really understand what BF is or should be anymore.

Whichever way they go they need to release a game thats complete and functional next time - I don't think the community would tolerate another buggy, laggy, content-sparse launch which is starting to become a feature of the series.

 

[Games of Today]

I've been a huge BF fan since BF2,probably have 10k+ hours in all games. BF2042 is total shit, game feels like some chinese copy of Battlefield from wish.


Only game that is somehow comparable to Battlefield is Squad. Its a great game but maps are huge, without a good team its not very good experience and game is much slower more like sim type(although not too hardcore as Arma).

Sometimes i wish that BF1 was the last game they made for last-gen hardware.After that if they started to work on new Battlefield for next gen set to release in 2020/21 i bet they could have done an amazing job(if lot of devs didn't leave though).

Battlefield with 64 players made for Ryzen CPU, SSD, 16gb ram it could have been incredible,destruction,sound,graphics..

I really don't know whats my point,i guess everytime i try to play BF2042 i get disappointed and sad again..

If you haven't already, play Hell Let Loose. It's pacing is in between Battlefield 4 and Squad.

Dice wishes they could make a game that good.

 

[Portugeezer]

Is BF 2042 fixed yet?

 

[STARSBarry]

Bad Company 2 was really cool on consoles. Smaller, well designed maps, tons of vehicles, fun. Everything modern battlefield is lacking.

Bad Company 2 was great on PC to, I played it for years, larger player numbers per match too 16 v 16 instead of 12 v 12.

The trick was it perfected what I call the "assualt" gametype which games like Unreal Tournament, Wolfenstien: Enemy Territory & Team Fortress Classic started with its "Rush" game mode.

It's tighter objective based game mode made it the best for this style of gameplay, in a class of its own. BF3 and BF4 failed comperatively because they designed the maps around CP and then tried to force rush onto it. This worked for some maps and not others, but Bad Company has maps designed from the ground up for Rush and it showed in the consistant quality of it.

I see the argument that having all the buildings leveled at the end of a round sucked, because there was no cover, but this made it naturally harder for defenders as they had no where to hide from the attackers vehicles and naturally made it so the attackers gained an advantage as the map went on. This was lost in later entries and feel is overlooked in how the game played, it felt balanced because you had to evolve you attack and defence depending on how the map was destroyed, rather than holding the same choke points the entire round.

I would love a Bad Company 3 with a focus on these smaller objective maps again.

 

[EDMIX]

The fact that the responses are so mixed shows fans will always have their favorite BFs.

I'm sure Zampella will do right by the IP and go back to basics. The updates on 2042 are already miles better then what launch was, so I can only imagine how a BF from the ground up made under his direction might be. I like the series having so many different entries, even if it means a few are a miss.

I'd rather have that then some same, copy and paste type thing.

 

[Evolved1]

Battlefield was my main game for years. 2042 made it so I will never spend another dollar on a BF game. I literally don't fucking care what they do with the franchise at this point. It's no longer on my radar.

 

[Philfrag]

Maybe, but I'm pessimistic. I was a huge Battlefield fanboy but even I could see just how much Dice had an inferiority complex in regards to COD. Every since Battlefield 3 they have wanted COD's market share, it was evident in their marketing back then. The types of people who play Battlefield are looking for a specific experience, when you look at 2042 its almost like they forgot they had a USP in the first place, Its pathetic to watch. In the beginning some of this inferiority complex was good for them. Battlefield 3 and 4 sped up the pace of play, trying to appeal to a more casual market whilst also adhering to the values of a battlefield game. I loved BF1, a lot of people had issues with it but I thought it was awesome that they were trying something new. It seemed like there were fresh ideas knocking about at Dice. Then BFV came out and it just felt like an after thought, almost like there was issues in the company that disturbed their line of progress. Now with 2042 and the stories that came with it, its very obvious what happened. The old guard left, talks about stagnation at the company etc and suddenly 2042 looks just that much closer to COD but without any of the quality. Shoddy performance, animations, bare bones maps. Dice didn't have the minds to create something new and innovative and instead settled on watering down the BF experience until it looked like mass appeal to them. They didn't even have the quality of management to see just how wrong they were.

What really surprised me was just how much the new COD pulled me in. I feel they need to just update their engine to accommodate large scale battles and COD would have finally put the BF franchise in the dirt. The future of Battlefield is not dependent on Dice its dependent on Infinity Ward. Its always been that way. I've never had second hand embarrassment for a dev before. 2042 changed that

 

[EDMIX]

Battlefield was my main game for years. 2042 made it so I will never spend another dollar on a BF game. I literally don't fucking care what they do with the franchise at this point. It's no longer on my radar.

lol...BF still my main MP title.

I'm cycling between BF4 and 2042. The update helped things out a lot and I'm hype for the new season coming.

 

[Sybrix]

Why does it play at the speed of light?

You can sprint at 30 MPH...... it's idiotic.

 

[Emedan]

Nah, the team left.

 

[Mephisto40]

Have you tried Ground War in the latest call or duty? that's the closest thing you'll get to the old battlefield games atm

 

[Games of Today]

Next one will likely be good, as Vince Zampella is in charge of BF now, and they've brought back a few former devs from the older BF games. Sure, there is still the EA factor to consider, but I'm pretty confident this disaster will serve as a vital lesson for everyone involved moving forward. At the very least, the next game will be of higher quality than 2042, I think that is a safe bet.

I do have some hope with Vince Zampella at the helm. I don't think EA would just waste his talents by putting him on the Battlefield franchise just to create another mediocre entry to the series.

However, the game does need to be updated and re-imagined. Conquest needs to matter if it's going to remain the main game mode. It needs to evolve and become something closer to Titan Mode or Carrier Assault.

But instead of making it about attacking carriers, both teams should have a massive military facility as their home base and over the course of the map, missiles launched from each flag objective could cripple the facility's infrastructure eventually leaving it vulnerable to attack.

They also need to make the next game feel even more immersive and like a full scale war. The commander role was great but they don't necessarily need it. Abilities should be tied to the squad level similar to BFV, only give squad leaders something like 15 or 20 different options of vehicles, airstrikes, UAV assets, etc., to call in once their squad has gained enough points.

Imagine NPC carpet bomb airstrikes or A10 strafing runs that can kill a camping tank, along side player controlled aircraft. Multiply these airstrike across multiple squads and you give the illusion of a 200+ player battle without crashing the servers.

To top it all off, bring in a Titanfall style fluid and immersive animation system. It would be incredible.

 

[Shadowstar39]

Last good battlefield game is BF4.

EA went woke. In doing so it not only destroyed themes and plots, but also destroyed competency. This filtered through all their properties at around the same time.

Battlefield 4 had some server issues hit was great none the less. It felt like traditional battlefield. Bf3 was amazing too outside of the shit website business. Bad company 2 was amazing in ps360 Era and you will not find a game like that from EA.. 4 gruff men joking around fighting a war. Woke culture won't allow it, hence no sequel to a multi million selling series.

Bf1, me Andromeda, all came out had issues. Next anthem, and hell even nfs and sports titles get hit with the woke/crap/mtx stick.

Great battlefield games:
Bf1942 og
Bf Vietnam (my first bf)
Bf 2 (amazing pc game)
Bfbc1 - fun, funny console game with destruction, small scale squad based

Bfbc2 - amazing console bf squad game. Top tier for single player fps and mp was amazing too. Destruction rocked. Had impact.

Bf3 - amazing on pc/ps3 but was plagues with web match interface if memory serves.

Bf4 - last solid hyped bf game before woke culture and mtx hit ea proper.

----—----------—----------
Bf1 was OK but had some campaign wokeness if remember right (although I could be thinking of bf5

Bf5 could of been great if they Bf4 staff.


We won't get a good bf game, because EA is agenda and mtx over good game.

 

[Games of Today]

Maybe, but I'm pessimistic. I was a huge Battlefield fanboy but even I could see just how much Dice had an inferiority complex in regards to COD. Every since Battlefield 3 they have wanted COD's market share, it was evident in their marketing back then. The types of people who play Battlefield are looking for a specific experience, when you look at 2042 its almost like they forgot they had a USP in the first place, Its pathetic to watch. In the beginning some of this inferiority complex was good for them. Battlefield 3 and 4 sped up the pace of play, trying to appeal to a more casual market whilst also adhering to the values of a battlefield game. I loved BF1, a lot of people had issues with it but I thought it was awesome that they were trying something new. It seemed like there were fresh ideas knocking about at Dice. Then BFV came out and it just felt like an after thought, almost like there was issues in the company that disturbed their line of progress. Now with 2042 and the stories that came with it, its very obvious what happened. The old guard left, talks about stagnation at the company etc and suddenly 2042 looks just that much closer to COD but without any of the quality. Shoddy performance, animations, bare bones maps. Dice didn't have the minds to create something new and innovative and instead settled on watering down the BF experience until it looked like mass appeal to them. They didn't even have the quality of management to see just how wrong they were.

What really surprised me was just how much the new COD pulled me in. I feel they need to just update their engine to accommodate large scale battles and COD would have finally put the BF franchise in the dirt. The future of Battlefield is not dependent on Dice its dependent on Infinity Ward. Its always been that way. I've never had second hand embarrassment for a dev before. 2042 changed that

It's not simply dependent on Infinity Ward. It's dependent on how immersive the next BF is. That's the one thing that BF has over CoD that they need to lean into a lot heavier than they currently are.

CoD campaigns are very immersive and Battlefield's multiplayer can create moments that feel like a CoD Campaign.

Even though BFV failed on the authenticity aspect of immersion (something that BF1 absolutely excelled at) it makes up for it in many aspects when it comes to vehicle combat and especially airplane crashes. What I don' understand is why things like these are scrapped and re-done with each entry.

 

[Philfrag]

It's not simply dependent on Infinity Ward. It's dependent on how immersive the next BF is. That's the one thing that BF has over CoD that they need to lean into a lot heavier than they currently are.

CoD campaigns are very immersive and Battlefield's multiplayer can create moments that feel like a CoD Campaign.

Even though BFV failed on the authenticity aspect of immersion (something that BF1 absolutely excelled at) it makes up for it in many aspects when it comes to vehicle combat and especially airplane crashes. What I don' understand is why things like these are scrapped and re-done with each entry.

My point is that COD only has to do a few things to surpass BF in the eyes of BF fans right now. If adding more immersive elements is one of those things then I think they can do it very easily. For BF to excel it needs an identity, something BF has struggled with and continues to struggle with. That’s what I meant by the inferiority complex. BF1 was a high point for DICE because it showed that it didn’t need to chase anyone else. It found success on its own terms. To see it’s insecurities laid bare in 2042 is sad.

 

[coffinbirth]

They won't make Bad Company 3, so fuck 'em.

 

[Foilz]

I much prefer battlefield to COD. Everything about battlefield has always felt like being on the battlefield. The environments were always top notch, visually everything was great and the games are usually fun. Except for the 2145 or whatever it was

BF1942 - B
BF1943 - B
BF2 - S
BF3 - S
BF4 - A
BF1 - A
BFV - B
BFBC2 - S

 

[Games of Today]

My point is that COD only has to do a few things to surpass BF in the eyes of BF fans right now. If adding more immersive elements is one of those things then I think they can do it very easily. For BF to excel it needs an identity, something BF has struggled with and continues to struggle with. That’s what I meant by the inferiority complex. BF1 was a high point for DICE because it showed that it didn’t need to chase anyone else. It found success on its own terms. To see it’s insecurities laid bare in 2042 is sad.

Exactly, I agree. Hopefully Zampella can give it it's own strong identity similar to how Titanfall 1 and 2 feel compared to other FPS games.

 

[Starbuck2907]

Bf3 sucks though, 2042 is literally the 3rd game with bigger maps and player count

I feel like smaller player counts have advantages sometimes. It’s a different style of playing and a different kind of fun vs the huge maps. Battlefield 3 on Xbox 360 is still the most fun I’ve had with any battlefield game.

 

[Slicker than your average]

It's a Cpu heavy game. Can you post your cpu and ram info?

Ryzsn x5800 32gb

I have 3060 ti and 9700k(base clocks) with 3000mhz 16gb ram. I usually get 100-120 fps(at 1440p, high settings, dlss on-quality, ray tracing off). I used to see these values only on 64-player maps or portal mode, now 128-player maps are also plays very well. I don't understand what causes your problem. Your processor and graphics card are better than mine. I have a 144hz Gsync compatible monitor, do you have one of those? It really helps a lot.

Or, are you one of those sensitive pc players who say "this game's optimization is sh*t" every time the fps drops below 144?

Nah I'm.not that type of pc players. My game can't even hold 60fps outdoors at 1440p ray racing off settings on medium and low.

 

[Pfroebbel]

If we get a new Bad Company with 32 Players pvp in smaller Maps like the old bfbc2.

 

[ChoosableOne]

Ryzsn x5800 32gb

Nah I'm.not that type of pc players. My game can't even hold 60fps outdoors at 1440p ray racing off settings on medium and low.

There is something wrong but I can't tell what it is. Maybe a driver issue? Try DLSS Quality option, if you didn't already.

 

[JayK47]

They won't make Bad Company 3, so fuck 'em.

I think Bad Company 2 was the last BF game I really enjoyed, both single and multi player.

 

[Sygma]

BF4 was good
BF1 was good
BFV was good
BF2042 might not be good but I hear it’s improved

Granted most of them were messy at launch.

Battlefield is utter shit at launch since BF 2. it is known to always come back at least one year after

Literally the only playable one at release as of late was BC 2's Vietnam expansion

 

[REDRZA MWS]

BF1 actually ended up being pretty darn good. Not the series highpoint, but a solid entry, nonetheless.

Disagree. Horrific fire dumpster.

 

[ZehDon]

Disagree. Horrific fire dumpster.

Then your hyperbole renders your opinion largely noninteractable. If the game isn't to your taste, then hey - that's totally fair. Drop a 5/10 on it and move on. But, to label BF1 a "horrific fire dumpster" begs the question: what do you label the (at launch) non-functional BF2042? "super epic horrific fire turd dumpster"? What does that even mean in this context? I didn't enjoy Battlefield Hardline, because it's theme and styling is simply not what I want. But, I'd give it a 5/10 and a "really not my cup of tea" badge - I wouldn't label it a "horrible dumpster fire" because it largely worked, was relatively well made, and tried.

 

[Tell’em Keb]

I’ve been playing Hell Let Loose in the PS5 for the past few weeks. I’ve had a pretty great time working in squads, playing specific roles, and capturing zones in a WW2 aesthetic. Having more fun with this than with the last few BF’s combined. If you’re needing that itch scratched, I’d recommend you give this a try.

Bonus: I used to never want play with mics on, but it’s been great opening back up to the other players and communicating. An unexpected joy.

 

[REDRZA MWS]

Then your hyperbole renders your opinion largely noninteractable. If the game isn't to your taste, then hey - that's totally fair. Drop a 5/10 on it and move on. But, to label BF1 a "horrific fire dumpster" begs the question: what do you label the (at launch) non-functional BF2042? "super epic horrific fire turd dumpster"? What does that even mean in this context? I didn't enjoy Battlefield Hardline, because it's theme and styling is simply not what I want. But, I'd give it a 5/10 and a "really not my cup of tea" badge - I wouldn't label it a "horrible dumpster fire" because it largely worked, was relatively well made, and tried.

Yes, 2042 and Hardline were terrible dumpster fires. I was pretty clear, last great BF was 4. DICE is a dumpster fire.

 

[ZehDon]

Yes, 2042 and Hardline were terrible dumpster fires...

If you put Hardline, BF1, and 2042, all in the exact same category, then as I said: your hyperbole renders your opinion noninteractable. There's no point talking with someone which such a worthless opinion.

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

Battlefield V is fantastic. You can't tell me with a straight face that playing Conquest on Wake Island, Iwo Jima, Pacific Storm, Provence, Arras, and Panzerstorm isn't great Battlefield.

 

[delfrickintree]

Last good battlefield game is BF4.

EA went woke. In doing so it not only destroyed themes and plots, but also destroyed competency. This filtered through all their properties at around the same time.

Battlefield 4 had some server issues hit was great none the less. It felt like traditional battlefield. Bf3 was amazing too outside of the shit website business. Bad company 2 was amazing in ps360 Era and you will not find a game like that from EA.. 4 gruff men joking around fighting a war. Woke culture won't allow it, hence no sequel to a multi million selling series.

Bf1, me Andromeda, all came out had issues. Next anthem, and hell even nfs and sports titles get hit with the woke/crap/mtx stick.

Great battlefield games:
Bf1942 og
Bf Vietnam (my first bf)
Bf 2 (amazing pc game)
Bfbc1 - fun, funny console game with destruction, small scale squad based

Bfbc2 - amazing console bf squad game. Top tier for single player fps and mp was amazing too. Destruction rocked. Had impact.

Bf3 - amazing on pc/ps3 but was plagues with web match interface if memory serves.

Bf4 - last solid hyped bf game before woke culture and mtx hit ea proper.

----—----------—----------
Bf1 was OK but had some campaign wokeness if remember right (although I could be thinking of bf5

Bf5 could of been great if they Bf4 staff.


We won't get a good bf game, because EA is agenda and mtx over good game.

Couldnt have said it better myself. I still play bf4

I convinced my friend to only buy standard version of 2042 instead of premium preorder because he was obviously overhyping it. I knew better, told him dont spend twice as much in case you don't like it, and you can always upgrade if you do.

Once the game released and we took turns playing, i noticed the gradual disappointment. He still never plays it to this day...

Never trust woke studios. I got anthem few days ago for $1.79. I rapidly skip thru dialogue and just play for the action. Even then, i can tell the game is jam-packed with contrived plot and art styles. Its like avatar x 1000 with focus on eye candy and marketable brown characters.

*flush*

 

[Hero of Spielberg]

 

[diffusionx]

DICE cannot make a good BF game anymore, no. It’s over. They’re not the only ones of course, we are getting into this world where game studios are rapidly losing competence and cannot make games of the quality and scale they used to.

 

[Rawker]

From the start it was a methodical shooter, everything has evolved since then, and I enjoy all the elements and their evolutions.

The core balance of what Battlefield was for me good at 80% infantry combat. I've become less interested in playing since the inclusion of jets and other distractions.

For me Vietnam was my fav with the depth of infantry combat, hanging out with a few traps set was glorious. Second has to be BF2 and it's expansions, night vision, grappling hooks, zip lines. 15+ years ago.

 

[Tams]

BF4 is GREAT
BF1 is not good
BFV is bad
BF2042 was terrible and has been improved enough to almost tolerable status.

FTFY:

BF4 is decent. Just BF3 (which was great) warmed up and the singular butchered.
BF1 is fantastic.
BFV is bad.
BF2042 was terrible and has been improved but is still shit.

 

[REDRZA MWS]

If you put Hardline, BF1, and 2042, all in the exact same category, then as I said: your hyperbole renders your opinion noninteractable. There's no point talking with someone which such a worthless opinion.

You and your non point making schtik are what is “non inter actable”. My point stands. All those games were bad and clearly below the high bar the series has set in past and or other releases.

 

[JayK47]

DICE cannot make a good BF game anymore, no. It’s over. They’re not the only ones of course, we are getting into this world where game studios are rapidly losing competence and cannot make games of the quality and scale they used to.

Pretty sure that any EA developer is nothing more than a hollow shell of what it was when EA bought them. The EA culture has taken over, most of the original people are likely gone, etc. It would also be good for developers to make something different.

 

[GenericUser]

DICE cannot make a good BF game anymore, no. It’s over. They’re not the only ones of course, we are getting into this world where game studios are rapidly losing competence and cannot make games of the quality and scale they used to.

Yeah, I think this is true. It's just the name DICE, but the talent is long gone. It's becomes apparent when you actually play the games, because on paper, battlefield 2042 is a good game. But when you play it, it just dosn't feel good. It starts with the moment to moment gunplay. It's just not satisfying to shot at things. But in my book, that is one of the most important parts of a shooter, having fun firing your weapon.

 

[Mr Reasonable]

You and your non point making schtik are what is “non inter actable”. My point stands. All those games were bad and clearly below the high bar the series has set in past and or other releases.

If I may, I think what's happening here is that ZehDon is saying "hey, let's have a nuanced conversation, there are many words we can use to describe things and if we look a little deeper into the subject of the conversation, we could have some interesting back and forth, a few laughs and witticisms. We might even become friends. We might even live near one another. You could come over for dinner sometime and we could play some games or go to a movie or a concert. Our partners might become friends too. We could all go on holidays together. It'd be nice. Our children might become friends one day. We might be godparents to each other's kids. Once we've packed them off to college we might take up golf together we'd play every Sunday. We'd both be terrible, but it wouldn't matter, we just wanted to hang out with our best friend.

...But that's being spoilt by your criticism of these games essentially extending to shouting 'shit!' whenever I try and unpick that there are differences in quality between these games, even if they're not all 10/10 must play titles."

That's pretty much what I'm getting anyway, I might be slightly off.

 

[cash_longfellow]

When you hire based on inclusion and not skill set, modern Battlefield is what happens

 

[Games of Today]

Battlefield V is fantastic. You can't tell me with a straight face that playing Conquest on Wake Island, Iwo Jima, Pacific Storm, Provence, Arras, and Panzerstorm isn't great Battlefield.

Yes, people can say what they want but in my opinion BFV on the large conquest maps is so much more fun than BF1 it's not even funny. The game is actually competitive unlike BF1 which is why I constantly see clans playing it on PS5.

The bullets go where you're aiming and you can actually have comeback victories when you're loosing by 150+ tickets unlike BF1. Plus the plane crashes look unbelievable.

I absolutely hate how woke the game was regarding character creation and the elite hero skins but I can't deny that the actual implementation of letting me pick different helmets and uniforms was an amazing addition to the series.

If they just would have condensed and refined these features and put them in a modern game it would have been unbelievable. But unfortunately they stripped everything out of 2042 because of it's rushed Battle Royal development and fiasco.

 

[REDRZA MWS]

If I may, I think what's happening here is that ZehDon is saying "hey, let's have a nuanced conversation, there are many words we can use to describe things and if we look a little deeper into the subject of the conversation, we could have some interesting back and forth, a few laughs and witticisms. We might even become friends. We might even live near one another. You could come over for dinner sometime and we could play some games or go to a movie or a concert. Our partners might become friends too. We could all go on holidays together. It'd be nice. Our children might become friends one day. We might be godparents to each other's kids. Once we've packed them off to college we might take up golf together we'd play every Sunday. We'd both be terrible, but it wouldn't matter, we just wanted to hang out with our best friend.

...But that's being spoilt by your criticism of these games essentially extending to shouting 'shit!' whenever I try and unpick that there are differences in quality between these games, even if they're not all 10/10 must play titles."

That's pretty much what I'm getting anyway, I might be slightly off.

Yeah this is a video game forum and my opinion of the the past few BF games is short and to the point. All that other stuff about becoming friends or living near me sounds like stalker stuff. No thanks.

 

[AmuroChan]

Maybe if they give it to another team to work on.

 

[diffusionx]

Yeah, I think this is true. It's just the name DICE, but the talent is long gone. It's becomes apparent when you actually play the games, because on paper, battlefield 2042 is a good game. But when you play it, it just dosn't feel good. It starts with the moment to moment gunplay. It's just not satisfying to shot at things. But in my book, that is one of the most important parts of a shooter, having fun firing your weapon.

I read an early preview of BF2042, and there was some producer talking about the hero system, and it just was totally clear she had no idea what made this franchise good, why people played it, and why it was unique. I knew BF2042 was going to be horrible just based on that interview, because if you have people making the game who don’t understand it what chance do they have? Now, I know the reality, they did the hero system to get more money but the point is that these companies don’t really care about the games, legacy, fanbase, or whatever. “Battlefield” is just a name to them and they hire people who don’t care. If they don’t care why should I?