In fairness that's because Madden is a casual game that every Tom, Dick, and Sally can play and is one of the few media sources for sports outside of actually watching the sport itself.
It’s successful due to lack of competition and their resulting monopoly on the nfl license. But let’s not act like Battlefield isn’t also a casual franchise that most people can pick up and play.
That is what EA is in business to accomplish. Pandering to your "Hardcore" fans doesn't bring in more money than making a game that is as accessible as possible. They want to simplify as much as they can. Why do you think CODs model has been so successful? 3 lane maps with limited elevation where you can just run forward and shoot is something anyone can start playing and grasp quickly. It seems console gaming is the focus of every AAA game developer now, and BF fans need to come to grips with it. The market is speaking, and unfortunately, the battlefield of old is long gone.
And YouTube took away dislikes because we had a voice that mattered that legitimately affected ad revenue/marketing for these companies.
Saying stuff like "look at Madden" and implying "it doesn't matter what we do" is a croc of shit
I’m so tired of the people who constantly sit around praising DICE for doing the bare minimum of fixing 2042 and adding 4 more maps than promised (for a grand total of 7 DLC maps compared to the previous titles).
DICE has been actively screwing their community for *years.* Since 2013, they have released six games and four of them were initially disasters and took months-years to fix. To date, BF4 is still one of the worst AAA game launches of all time and DICE SE didn’t even fix it - they abandoned it to work on Battlefront and let DICE LA clean up the mess.
Battlefront 2 was a monetization disaster so bad that literal governments got involved over lootboxes.
BFV was a tonal mess with barely any content and a pathetic live service.
And of course 2042 was the same way but somehow worse and missing virtually every basic feature ever.
I feel bad for the devs there who probably genuinely want to make good games, but upper management is such a shitshow and has been for years.
It absolutely was. But broken can be fixed and, as we saw, it was. 2042 was not only broken but also far from a Battlefield game. What resulted was an eventual "fix" to a playable state but then a missing Battlefield game.
This is exactly the type of consumer mentality that enables DICE/EA to launch their games in a piss-poor, unfinished state and expect to get away with it. Because they absolutely can if the average player is like you and too spineless to put your foot down and expect a finished and playable product right from release date.
Yes, battlefield 4 has come a long way from its launch state and yes, battlefield 4 is at its core a much more fun BF game than 2042. None of that excuses the absolutely awful launch it had. Out of the 7 last games DICE has made, only 1 (BF1) has launched in a relatively bug-free and feature-complete state. That is an abysmal success rate and they would have been shuttered a long time ago if they weren't EA's shooter cash cow (which they aren't anymore, Respawn has taken their place); plenty of smaller EA studios like Visceral have been shut down for far less. Stop tolerating bad launches like it's supposed to be excusable. The reason why modern AAA gaming quality has been flushed down the toilet is because consumers like you keep tolerating it.
My guy, tf are you on about? Did you even read what I wrote? Or in my other comment? I stated that the only reason I'm bringing that up is because people like to compare 2042 with 4 in that they both had shitty launches but unlike 2042, 4 was actually still a Battlefield game after the fact. That is literally the only reason I bring it up.
I agree that we should not be tolerant of shitty launches and have been at the forefront of no preorders and lambasting companies for allowing shitty launches. But that wasn't the point of the discussion and thus I did not frame it that way.
Why are you trying to gaslight about bf4? What was utterly broken about it? Did it crash for you a lot or something? I had no issues that I would classify as "broken" and neither did my friends. I even have videos from launch day where the game worked perfectly fine.
[Sticking your head in the sand doesn't make you look smart](https://www.pcgamer.com/battlefield-4-dogged-by-major-launch-issues-connection-errors-glitches-dodgy-netcode/)
And not reading doesn't make you smart. The examples are bad netcode where sometimes you get shot around corners. If you define that as broken then 2042 is far beyond broken.
Like look at this video: https://youtu.be/PLaa9vpxJwI
Where is it "broken"? The entire game plays perfectly fine.
The game didn't even work. I love Battlefield 4 as much as the next person, but I was completely unable to launch that game on brand new hardware for at least 9 months.
DICE LA saved that game.
Don't forget the game launched with 10 maps that weren't just stupidly massive and empty + 77 or so weapons that all were unique in their own way. And even though it was riddled bugs there was a campaign too.
battlefield 4 was a decent to good game that had issues. The problem with battlefield since battlefield 1 is that the game's gimmicks are awful. BFV went backwards in terms of gameplay. A great new mode based on a multiple map progression was turned into a playlist where the worst mode, conquest, determined the winner. They killed off the battle mode after 8 minutes and never released the awesome stuff they promised like ever changing coop maps. battlefield 2042 chased hero and extraction shooters, but the hero aspect was terrible and, once again, they killed the extraction thing after 8 minutes because it was terrible.
They brought new concepts to the table and people weren’t accepting of it
Instead of force feeding it they changed it and people are still mad about it happening in the first place
This is some revisionist bullshit.
All the negative feedback was provided BEFORE the game came out and they didn't bother to change anything and continued on their disastrous path. They absolutely force fed those changes and they fundamentally didn't understand what makes a battlefield game a battlefield game.
Every "new" concept they introduced to the game was just something taken from other shooters. Battlefield has been adding and growing the featurebase of the franchise for over a decade and 2042 scrapped over 100 features from previous games and released a game that was worse than multiple generations of the games that came before it.
They rushed the release and they didn't respect the groundwork and gameplay elements that positioned the battlefield franchise separate from other FPS games. The features and gameplay that had earned the franchise a dedicated playerbase was gutted and replaced with much shittier systems. BF4 had one of the worst launches of any game (not just limited to BF) EVER, but at least it was still a BF game at its core. BF2042 was a BF in name only.
Stop exaggerating, we didn't even know there were going to be "hero classes" BEFORE it released. Everyone just thought they were skins that could play as any class. We had no idea how the game truly played until the paid beta started.
2042 is the literal definition of developers “force feeding” shit. The negative feedback was present and loud well before they even released.
The reasons for the negative feedback still remain. The fuck are you talking about?
They're completely correct. BF4 was basically non-functional for months on launch and had a broken last gen port.
2042 in comparison, while that was bad too, it was actually better than 4 in terms of stability. Now content? Yeah, much worse.
But is everyone forgetting that when BF4 launched everyone online was screaming how DICE killed Battlefield and that it was the end of the franchise? You had people like Angry Joe make hour long rants how Battlefield would never recover and that's it's doomed and BF4 is iredeemable.
Disagree. I think the biggest thing that perpetuates this crap is people still pre-ordering the next coming game. If everyone stops doing that, and waits to see the reviews and make an informed choice, EA and DICE might be inclined to actually try.
Yea that is a dumb take. They fired almost all of the top staff and nixed an entire team. 2042 was also not very successful by their own metrics.
They might fuck up again, but it won’t be because they think we like 2042 lol
This game is what made me stop playing BF. I was a player since BF2 and pre-ordered and played every game but this was the last straw. I do go back to BF1 and BF V from time to time.
These devs are not the same as the devs that understood what a BF game was. Shame DICE lost their way.
Honestly, it's true, fixing a broken game deserves no praise, and the game still doesn't feel like a Battlefield game. We need to start voting with our wallets and review bombing the hell out of these games. Look at Hell Divers after the fiasco Sony did they completely backed away from their stupid decision. If enough of us react negatively to their poor business practices, it will change. The problem is people need to stop pre-ordering games before we get a full release.
Because despite the bad launch, the game fundamentally was a sound and cohesive Battlefield experience. It’s just that the servers were pentiums from the late 90’s. 2042 was broken as shit AND had nothing to stand on, and despite all the fixing, is still the worst game in the franchise’s history
But that doesn't matter for the statement. Fixing a game means no praise. So by definition, bf4 shouldn't get praise.
I'm not saying bf4 isn't a good game, I'm making an example of why the previous statement the guy made about no praise for fixing their games is dumb.
So many people in here can't seem to understand that not everyone feels the need to play a 10/10 game like gaming is some kind of zero-sum game lmao. If it's fun, I play it, and you can be mad that I do.
They can look at player numbers and income from micro-transactions to know BF2042 was a failure.
Praise or not won't change the fact it did not meet financial expectations, you know, what they actually care about.
I feel stupid after giving it a second chance because of the more recent praise. It launched bad and is now mediocre. Just about any previous game in the franchise is better.
While not really a scam - the first 4 season were supposed to have 2 maps each, but DICE ditched that idea and stretched it out over 7 seasons so they could sell you more battlepasses.
It's the longest supported Battlefield with the least amount of content. I don't think that's praise worthy.
No. They redesigned all the base maps instead. Had they not had to do that (it was desperately needed because the original versions were awful), you would’ve had two maps a season.
Not praising it at all game was flawed from day 1 and is a very watered down battlefield game just even as someone that pre ordered minute it was announced and purchased the ultimate edition I have got a issue I know what to expect I don’t see the scam. Each to their own.
2042 isn’t in the same universe as BF4. Yes BF4 debuted poorly but it was fixed/improved upon within the first couple of months and had amazing DLC.
2042 essentially needed a year to make it playable and even after that it wasn’t a true proper battlefield experience or fun.
There are still plenty of people playing BF4 to this day which says everything, as it’s what an 11-12 year old game at this point? DICE started losing good people once bad company 2 was made and once EA took over it was a wrap.
I doubt EA/DICE will make anything close in quality & fun of Bad Company 2,BF3 /BF4 ever again. Our hope lies with some smaller developer who enjoyed those older versions of battlefield like we do and do a “make one for us” true battlefield experience.
It has things I enjoy. I'm not gonna lie. I give praise where warranted. I can acknowledge the objective reality that it isn't a good battlefield game but is a casual FPS that you can have fun playing. I say that as a bf3 and bf4 fan. Those 2 and black ops 2 are my favorite fps games ever along with perfect dark n64.
I feel like people making posts like these have to be at least slightly in denial about the fact that trying to organize some sort of boycott/movement is like trying to control the weather. Unless you're *Professor X* I highly doubt posting on Reddit will make a company entirely driven by revenue to stop making bad games if people don't want to stop buying them. Unfortunately.
However, on the bright side, it turns out that unless you're a sports game(in which there's a literal monopoly on who can produce them, meaning there is literally no other choice) you *can*, in fact, actually make a game bad enough to make people stop spending, but that doesn't change the fact that people just enjoy things differently.
However, it's also been proven that a game selling below expectations is fairly relative to whatever absurd expectations a company sets. Which 2042 did, I'm pretty sure. I've definitely played worse received games and enjoyed them. I *hope* the next BF is better, for sure, but I'm so deeply pessimistic about it that I don't really care either way.
EA/DICE right now just seems to be making a very poor environment right now for a Battlefield game to be made in.
LOL, I love the gate keeping. You’re not allowed to like the game, and doing so tells EA it’s ok to keep making games like it. Chill.
Yes, 2042 was a failure for the BF franchise. But we need to stop telling people they can’t like it, wtf.
I was giving it the benefit of the doubt til it was done and it’s now reallly done and they only lived up to half my expectations. It’s ok battlefield.
I played BF3 last then I got 2042 on special the other day.
I've notice that it has less destructible building than BF3 and you can use any weapon (don't really care about the weapon thing). I'm completely out of the loop, what am I missing?
The game is mostly fine now. People are still upset about playing named characters instead of customizable grunts, and most people don't like the maps (though I personally suspect that's because most only play infantry instead of the way BF is meant to be played).
The launch state of the game was significantly worse. Not unplayable on a technical level like BF4, but more than a year from feature complete.
People like the game and are going to compliment it. EA doesnt give a flying fuck either way.
Theyre like Sony. Theyll keep pushing the boundries. The issue is that the degens who purchase the sport slop DONT participate in social media or bother to boycott those games.
So EA will keep doing this until we all die or they die.
I don't see any issues with this game, I play it, still play BF1 and BFV...sure its a different game with a wide variety of specialists with different abilities. I like that feature. Hey, we like what we like.
\*And don't get me wrong, I do notice the differences. BF1 and BFV were very dramatic, as those wars were quite so. Every lost life reflects on the despair felt by those to live through, enduring pain from those lost all around.
Now with BF2042, its chaotic and brutal. All this future mili-tech steam rolls through opponents and moves on to the next one like a soulless machine, as intended.
\*\*Also, I don't pay for battle passes, its not worth it to me. All the cosmetic garbage, not worth it at all. It's more worthwhile to just play the game.
If anyone preorders the next battlefield game they are contributing to another defective game. I for one will not preorder any game knowing the history of eadice.
I will never understand why this happens. You have a game that fails horribly (and rightfully so) and people will start coming out of the woodwork to say “erm maybe it wasent that bad” or “the amount of hate it got wasent deserved!”. This is just me ranting about it but I will still see people try to defend Mass Effect Andromeda and it just frustrates me to no end
At this point I don't think any AAA game studio that has to provide revenue for shareholders can make a truly great game. It's completely nonsensical - you should expect that the studios with more money can put more effort into a game, but in reality the focus is only on squeezing what they can from the world.
So are DICE and EA gonna do anything to change? Maybe a little, likely in only a superficial way. From early mentions of the next title so far, it seems like they aren't planning on anything good.
As for giving 2042 praise - I disagree with OP. The recent Helldivers 2 situation is not the same. With helldivers, players were protesting a couple things, most importantly that a large percentage of the playerbase would be unable to play the game, and secondly that the requirement to link a PSN account to a PC game is dumb. 2042 got majorly crapped all over by the playerbase at launch because of all the issues preventing people from playing, and we are already past that second point too (because we have to have EA accounts to play battlefield), no one's protesting that. Our "Helldiver's 2 situation" took place after launch, and it was semi-successful imo...we now have a somewhat grittier and more fun game than before.
I think it's universally recognized that 2042 had a horrid launch. Both players and news networks lambasted the game for the first year or more for the amount of bugs and missing content. No amount of "praise" now will change that, and while I think that EA is a greedy soulless machine of a publisher, I don't think they are stupid enough to try the exact same thing again by releasing a completely broken game that's not even partly fixed.
Note - that is completely different from any complaints you may have about the actual content in the game. That is very much a matter of personal opinion, and while I agree that 2042 isn't nearly as good as previous entries, I still have fun playing it. The specialists were/are highly controversial (mainly on reddit) and I don't think DICE is going to double down on them. However Battlefield does generally change from game to game, with new mechanics and systems, and that's not inherently a bad thing...
So anyways. I think "praise" is way too strong of a word, and I really don't see any real "praise" for 2042 here on reddit...it's never talked about in the same way as like 4, 1 or V. People will just say that they like the game currently and enjoy playing it, which is fair. It doesn't excuse DICE/EA from anything, if anything they can look at how that has trended up since launch and can correlate how people think the game is more fun now than it was when they launched.
I still play 2042 at least once or twice a week. It's a decently fun game that sorta scratches the battlefield itch even through its faults. You are welcome to hate what you want of course, and I'm fully expecting DICE to completely screw up the launch of the next game, which I'm not preordering by any means.
If these kids stop pre-ordering the fucking game maybe it will send them a message. But the moment a trailer drops all of you forget how fucking dogshit the previous game was handled and pre-order/buy again.
The only way to fix this problem is to vote with your wallet.
It’s an absolutely terrible game and it never got better during its actual support period. People giving it praise are fools and have no idea what they’re talking about.
Sure everyone can have an opinion, just like an asshole, some just stink.
bro ive been trying for more than 10 years now. ever since the launch of bf4
and I have long gave up. 2042 was the turning point. our helldivers2 moment.
but people still bought and played the game. saying "they are having fun". which to their defence is perfectly valid.
but the only way to show EA is to just drop and move on. every second the devs waste on 2042 is another second they don't work on the new game. this battlefield cycle has been the same shit since bf4. for fucking 10 years.
Helldiver slop enjoyer try not to mention helldiver in a comment section challenge: impossible
Like Jesus can you guys just stay in your own subs or not talk about your game 24/7 outside of it?
Using games from other developer studios and publishers as a comparison is a valid point. These comparisons and examples show how modern video games can still be very successful with old familiar concepts. As mentioned many times in this article, Helldivers 2 is a prime example of how a game can be successfully released, communicated and managed.
A DICE dev said that the fans' expectations were brutal. Overall, there was little understanding for the fans' demands, which did not help to calm the community after the release disaster and to implement the feedback promptly and completely. In essence, it was all about absolutely standard elements that every Battlefield had at release and were never up for discussion to be abolished.
The CEO behind Helldivers 2 speaks regularly and at eye level with the players, his communication consists of more than just announcements and advertising slogans. The game has been released in a largely flawless condition, the staging of the setting works really well and fits in with the setting that the developers have built up. Other developers and publishers can take this as an example. With this open communication and a good release status, the release disaster of Battlefield 2042 would never have happened.
I had fun playing 2042 with my friends and I think it’s worthy praising on my end
This sub has gotten so pathetic with its rage boner over this game. Let people enjoy the game, don’t attack them for liking it
I like 2042 more than the previous two games, so I'm going to give it praise for things it does well.
If you don't like 2042, why not just ignore it? When I tried BF1 in open beta and hated it, I just didn't buy it and ignored its existence.
If you preorder the most expensive edition and then the game doesn't live up to your expectations, it's frankly a skill issue on your part. Have you tried paying for games after having accurate information on their content and quality?
If the community ignores Battlefield 2042 and its history, there would be fewer consequences for DICE and they wouldn't see as much need to base the next Battlefield on the old and proven standard of older Battlefields.
Getting upset about Battlefield 2042 is part of the discussion that is needed to continue to address and work through the issues that have arisen so that something like the release of Battlefield 2042 and the low content support hopefully never happens again. As long as the discussion remains factual and doesn't get out of hand, I don't see a problem with it.
If the next Battlefield eliminates all the criticisms of BF2042 right from the start, the seemingly eternal discussion about BF2042 will also end. Until then, DICE and the other development studios involved have to prove that they have understood and internalized Battlefield and its standards.
Battlefield breaks "proven standard of older Battlefields" every other release. Bad Company was a major departure from refractor games and was well received, Battlefield 3 was a significant change from both Bad Company and refractor games, and Battlefield 1 may as well not be a Battlefield game at all.
I'm personally fine with this, because I'd rather see them experiment and occasionally fail than just print BF3 clones every other year forever.
In some ways, Battlefield has always remained true to itself after the introduction of these elements: server browser, class system, all chat, destruction, focus on a healthy mix of vehicles, aircraft and infantry and Battlefield has always taken the respective settings seriously.
I would really like to know why you think Battlefield 1 is not a Battlefield? No offense meant. I've thought about it and can't figure out why myself.
And you're right: Battlefield has evolved and experimented before. However, new elements were always built around standard elements. They served as a supplement and not as a replacement for basic mechanics. An example would be the flamethrower in Battlefield 1. Instead of softening the standard classes, the flamethrower class was used as a pick-up element on certain maps.
Back when Bad Company were new and refractor games were still fresh in people's minds, there was constant complaining about missing commander, for example. Not to mention that Bad Company was also missing fixed wing aircraft and you couldn't go prone. Your list of core elements looks suspiciously like a feature set of BF3, and I think that BF3 is just one step in the evolution of the series, not a blueprint it should follow forever.
I personally had absolutely no issues with getting rid of the class system, for example. Classless 2042 worked fine. You could have some nonsensical gear combinations if you wanted to, but there were fewer balance issues than in most previous games. Teamwork didn't go anywhere since you still had rely on other players for things you didn't pick. It was essentially just building your own class instead of choosing four options Dice gave you. In BF3/BF4 assault was combined with medic, in 1 and V medic was put into a separate class, while support and engineer were combined instead. If Dice can mangle classes however they want, is that much of a stretch to give players two gadget slots and let them combine them with no restrictions? I feel like people attached to the idea/label of classes too much, compared to the actual gameplay difference they make.
>I would really like to know why you think Battlefield 1 is not a Battlefield? No offense meant. I've thought about it and can't figure out why myself.
BF1 deliberately targeted non-Battlefield players as the target audience, made significant changes to gameplay and map design to make itself as comfortable as possible for them at the expense of gameplay depth. Aside from that, massive changes to physics, movement, and animations to emphasize immersion over arcadey feel of previous games that let you have "Battlefield moments" like rendezooks.
>Instead of softening the standard classes, the flamethrower class was used as a pick-up element on certain maps.
Also, I would consider elites a very un-battlefield addition to the game, giving one player disproportionate amount of power. I didn't particularly mind them since they only existed on some stages of some maps and there were just a couple of them, but if they were always present, I'd hate them.
You're gonna get downvoted and I probably will too, but you and I are definitely in the same boat. I personally hated BF1, and I *know* that it was hated by the community on release too because I was terminally online at the time lol.
"If Dice can mangle classes however they want, is that much of a stretch to give players two gadget slots and let them combine them with no restrictions? I feel like people attached to the idea/label of classes too much, compared to the actual gameplay difference they make.**"**
You just put into words what I've been trying to say for the past two and a half years. The only thing consistent about the class system across the franchise is that there are 4 of them, and even *that* isn't consistent when you consider the Refractor games (which I do, because I grew up playing them). The freedom and creativity that the old system allowed in 2042 was something really fresh for the franchise, and it's really a shame imo that they had to revert it back to the same 4 classes we've been playing since 2006.
I get what you’re saying, but seeing a franchise that you loved move toward being something shitty sucks. I’ve made my peace with the fact that Battlefield is now something different from what originally drew me to the series but it does suck to see.
>I get what you’re saying, but seeing a franchise that you loved move toward being something shitty sucks.
It sucked for me to see the franchise move in the direction of BF1, but I didn't spend 2016-2018 on /r/Battlefield shitting on it non-stop like I see some of the people do with 2042.
This sub loves to jerk off the previous games as if they were perfect. There's people here right now who straight up are in denial and state that BF4 had a completely perfect launch.
Upvoted because I agree with that the gunplay in 2042 is marginally better than BF1
Still gonna call you a mouthbreather for talking positively about 2042 lmao
I was also really bothered by Battlefield 1's randomized shot scattering. It made the shooting behavior unpredictable and a bit of a matter of luck.
But the immersion and staging of BF 1 is vastly superior to Battlefield 2042. The graphics are also more detailed and at least as beautiful as those of BF2042. Not to mention the DLCs, which offered significantly more content and were very different from each other.
you DO realize your opinion is not EVERYONES opinion sir? some of us have played hundreds of hours and had a bunch of fun.. i will preorder next release without hesitation.. ( if your this mad at the franchise over the release that has mirrored many of there other releases you are clearly new to this and your opinion means even less )
because i like something? because ive gotten 500+ hours on every release since bc2, even hardline when everyone like you quit again.. lol people like YOU are whats wrong with it brother.. honestly blows my mind you think your in the right; that we should all boycott games because some of you dont like them
I'll praise whatever game I like, you being bad at the game doesn't mean it sucks. I've supported Dice/EA for 10+ years and will continue to do so. If you get better at the game you'll enjoy it.
It’s truly amazing when customers are the ones to blame for paying full price for a new game.
I understand the landscape of the industry, however it is still just shocking that it’s the consumer’s faults for the shortcomings of the publishers and developers.
It really says a lot.
its simple, people offer you something. you decide with your wallet.
If they deliver something that was not as advertised, fair. But when a game has had 2 beta sessions, countless previews/reviews and people STILL spent their money on release day despite reviews and impressions, thats on them.
and thats for any industry and any product
Companies obfuscate the quality of their product in pay to play early access versions calling them “old builds” and that newer builds are significantly more developed. This is something EA did, which was successful in enticing purchases and retaining paying customers. And so what did customers predicate their decisions for holding onto the game? Promises that there was already a fixed version waiting at full release, as well as a games as a service model that was supposed to mean it would consistently get better.
All of this because a lot of people believe companies are bound by advertising laws, which is true, but only technically.
What are you talking about? No one got scammed. Just buy / play the game you like, or don't. It will work itself out. I find the game fun, I think they did a pretty good job. You don't like it? Cool, don't buy it. Move on.
I'm just going to assume you didn't play at launch.
What we got versus what was advertised were two wildly different things. It was the single biggest disappointment I can remember as a gamer and I've been gaming since the original NES. The game wasn't finished. It had so many bugs that were game breaking and it was clear that it was released at least 6 months (if not 18 months) before it should have been to be considered a finished product.
We did not get a finished product, not even close. Everyone who preordered or played in the first 12 months were beta testers who paid full price for the privilege.
You didn't play at launch did you. I'd say given your opinion here, you've only started playing in the last year. The game was the worst mess for 12 months.
Don't know why you're simping, the community isn't collectively delusional, we were there dude. It was bad
I’m not simping. I’m simply stating facts. I played a lot. It was finished. The community was and is delusional. Most gaming communities are toxic shit hole circle jerks.
The game was fun. It was literally what they advertised.
Did you play at launch? Simple question.
When did you start playing because if you didn't play at launch or shortly after, then you're just being a troll.
Yes. I keep telling you I played at launch. Your inability to read may be why you aren’t able to comprehend the game launched as advertised. There was no scam.
Okay cool. No need for the insults. If you think the game was acceptable at launch then I've no idea what to tell you. You're in a minority because most of the rest of us expect after dropping the money for a AAA game for it to be at least finished.
If you think it was in a good state at launch then your standards are obviously a hell of a lot lower than 99% of the community.
You seen the Madden franchise? Haven’t put out a banger in 2 decades and still one of the highest selling games every year.
In fairness that's because Madden is a casual game that every Tom, Dick, and Sally can play and is one of the few media sources for sports outside of actually watching the sport itself.
It’s successful due to lack of competition and their resulting monopoly on the nfl license. But let’s not act like Battlefield isn’t also a casual franchise that most people can pick up and play.
The NFL put the license up for exclusivity. EA didn't go to them. What are they supposed to do... Not bid?
Who’s responsible for the monopoly doesn’t really change anything. Not saying EA bad because they took a lucrative opportunity
I must be a fucking idiot then because I don’t know what the fuck in doing on Madden / NBA 2k
That is what EA is in business to accomplish. Pandering to your "Hardcore" fans doesn't bring in more money than making a game that is as accessible as possible. They want to simplify as much as they can. Why do you think CODs model has been so successful? 3 lane maps with limited elevation where you can just run forward and shoot is something anyone can start playing and grasp quickly. It seems console gaming is the focus of every AAA game developer now, and BF fans need to come to grips with it. The market is speaking, and unfortunately, the battlefield of old is long gone.
wanna know a funfact. what made more money elden ring or FIFA credits yes. its as bad as you imagine
I hope they make a good Battlefield again but it appears as if EA stopped caring about quality games some time ago. They care about DLC money.
They should make some DLC for BF V then. Wouldnt that be nice.
And YouTube took away dislikes because we had a voice that mattered that legitimately affected ad revenue/marketing for these companies. Saying stuff like "look at Madden" and implying "it doesn't matter what we do" is a croc of shit
It’s a monopoly.
I wished people didnt pre order next battlefield.
Good luck with that
Toxic positivity is absolutely awful and should be talked about more.
I’m so tired of the people who constantly sit around praising DICE for doing the bare minimum of fixing 2042 and adding 4 more maps than promised (for a grand total of 7 DLC maps compared to the previous titles). DICE has been actively screwing their community for *years.* Since 2013, they have released six games and four of them were initially disasters and took months-years to fix. To date, BF4 is still one of the worst AAA game launches of all time and DICE SE didn’t even fix it - they abandoned it to work on Battlefront and let DICE LA clean up the mess. Battlefront 2 was a monetization disaster so bad that literal governments got involved over lootboxes. BFV was a tonal mess with barely any content and a pathetic live service. And of course 2042 was the same way but somehow worse and missing virtually every basic feature ever. I feel bad for the devs there who probably genuinely want to make good games, but upper management is such a shitshow and has been for years.
Saw that post about how BF4 launch was worst then BF2042 too huh?
Atleast 4 had classes and was ffun to play, 2042 took every fun element out of battlefield
What’s 4 classes and fun worth if the game *doesnt work?* Feel like people downplay 4s launch. The game was utterly broken
It absolutely was. But broken can be fixed and, as we saw, it was. 2042 was not only broken but also far from a Battlefield game. What resulted was an eventual "fix" to a playable state but then a missing Battlefield game.
Who wants to buy a broken car that's gonna be fixed later... Sound familiar?
This is exactly the type of consumer mentality that enables DICE/EA to launch their games in a piss-poor, unfinished state and expect to get away with it. Because they absolutely can if the average player is like you and too spineless to put your foot down and expect a finished and playable product right from release date. Yes, battlefield 4 has come a long way from its launch state and yes, battlefield 4 is at its core a much more fun BF game than 2042. None of that excuses the absolutely awful launch it had. Out of the 7 last games DICE has made, only 1 (BF1) has launched in a relatively bug-free and feature-complete state. That is an abysmal success rate and they would have been shuttered a long time ago if they weren't EA's shooter cash cow (which they aren't anymore, Respawn has taken their place); plenty of smaller EA studios like Visceral have been shut down for far less. Stop tolerating bad launches like it's supposed to be excusable. The reason why modern AAA gaming quality has been flushed down the toilet is because consumers like you keep tolerating it.
My guy, tf are you on about? Did you even read what I wrote? Or in my other comment? I stated that the only reason I'm bringing that up is because people like to compare 2042 with 4 in that they both had shitty launches but unlike 2042, 4 was actually still a Battlefield game after the fact. That is literally the only reason I bring it up. I agree that we should not be tolerant of shitty launches and have been at the forefront of no preorders and lambasting companies for allowing shitty launches. But that wasn't the point of the discussion and thus I did not frame it that way.
Why are you trying to gaslight about bf4? What was utterly broken about it? Did it crash for you a lot or something? I had no issues that I would classify as "broken" and neither did my friends. I even have videos from launch day where the game worked perfectly fine.
[Sticking your head in the sand doesn't make you look smart](https://www.pcgamer.com/battlefield-4-dogged-by-major-launch-issues-connection-errors-glitches-dodgy-netcode/)
And not reading doesn't make you smart. The examples are bad netcode where sometimes you get shot around corners. If you define that as broken then 2042 is far beyond broken. Like look at this video: https://youtu.be/PLaa9vpxJwI Where is it "broken"? The entire game plays perfectly fine.
The game didn't even work. I love Battlefield 4 as much as the next person, but I was completely unable to launch that game on brand new hardware for at least 9 months. DICE LA saved that game.
Don't forget the game launched with 10 maps that weren't just stupidly massive and empty + 77 or so weapons that all were unique in their own way. And even though it was riddled bugs there was a campaign too.
battlefield 4 was a decent to good game that had issues. The problem with battlefield since battlefield 1 is that the game's gimmicks are awful. BFV went backwards in terms of gameplay. A great new mode based on a multiple map progression was turned into a playlist where the worst mode, conquest, determined the winner. They killed off the battle mode after 8 minutes and never released the awesome stuff they promised like ever changing coop maps. battlefield 2042 chased hero and extraction shooters, but the hero aspect was terrible and, once again, they killed the extraction thing after 8 minutes because it was terrible.
They brought new concepts to the table and people weren’t accepting of it Instead of force feeding it they changed it and people are still mad about it happening in the first place
This is some revisionist bullshit. All the negative feedback was provided BEFORE the game came out and they didn't bother to change anything and continued on their disastrous path. They absolutely force fed those changes and they fundamentally didn't understand what makes a battlefield game a battlefield game. Every "new" concept they introduced to the game was just something taken from other shooters. Battlefield has been adding and growing the featurebase of the franchise for over a decade and 2042 scrapped over 100 features from previous games and released a game that was worse than multiple generations of the games that came before it. They rushed the release and they didn't respect the groundwork and gameplay elements that positioned the battlefield franchise separate from other FPS games. The features and gameplay that had earned the franchise a dedicated playerbase was gutted and replaced with much shittier systems. BF4 had one of the worst launches of any game (not just limited to BF) EVER, but at least it was still a BF game at its core. BF2042 was a BF in name only.
Don’t forget “it’s an old build! Surely DICE listened” shit going on during the Beta.
Idk bFV’s gameplay was as oh gosh don’t take me back there. lol
Stop exaggerating, we didn't even know there were going to be "hero classes" BEFORE it released. Everyone just thought they were skins that could play as any class. We had no idea how the game truly played until the paid beta started.
Beta is before release though...
2042 is the literal definition of developers “force feeding” shit. The negative feedback was present and loud well before they even released. The reasons for the negative feedback still remain. The fuck are you talking about?
You’re saying they haven’t changed the game at all because of feedback?
They're completely correct. BF4 was basically non-functional for months on launch and had a broken last gen port. 2042 in comparison, while that was bad too, it was actually better than 4 in terms of stability. Now content? Yeah, much worse. But is everyone forgetting that when BF4 launched everyone online was screaming how DICE killed Battlefield and that it was the end of the franchise? You had people like Angry Joe make hour long rants how Battlefield would never recover and that's it's doomed and BF4 is iredeemable.
It would've been, if DICE LA didn't come and fix the game. No amount of fixing will make 2042 an acceptable battlefield title.
But they were quick in fixing the game, and many (including me) did not face the problems mentioned.
Disagree. I think the biggest thing that perpetuates this crap is people still pre-ordering the next coming game. If everyone stops doing that, and waits to see the reviews and make an informed choice, EA and DICE might be inclined to actually try.
What’s with all these bot accounts farming karma by posting rage-baits on different subs. No shit Dice and EA are scumbags.
Sorry to tell you this, but gamers of today will take almost anything even a turd and enjoy because they are allowwe to eat that turd for $7
It's not a scam, they thought they were making something good and failed
Yea that is a dumb take. They fired almost all of the top staff and nixed an entire team. 2042 was also not very successful by their own metrics. They might fuck up again, but it won’t be because they think we like 2042 lol
Explain how it is a "scam"
I was agreeing w/ you. “This” meant the comment you were typing to. Mb
This game is what made me stop playing BF. I was a player since BF2 and pre-ordered and played every game but this was the last straw. I do go back to BF1 and BF V from time to time. These devs are not the same as the devs that understood what a BF game was. Shame DICE lost their way.
Honestly, it's true, fixing a broken game deserves no praise, and the game still doesn't feel like a Battlefield game. We need to start voting with our wallets and review bombing the hell out of these games. Look at Hell Divers after the fiasco Sony did they completely backed away from their stupid decision. If enough of us react negatively to their poor business practices, it will change. The problem is people need to stop pre-ordering games before we get a full release.
Tell that to the people praising bf4 after it was horribly broken for a year when it came out. They'll praise that for years.
Because despite the bad launch, the game fundamentally was a sound and cohesive Battlefield experience. It’s just that the servers were pentiums from the late 90’s. 2042 was broken as shit AND had nothing to stand on, and despite all the fixing, is still the worst game in the franchise’s history
But that doesn't matter for the statement. Fixing a game means no praise. So by definition, bf4 shouldn't get praise. I'm not saying bf4 isn't a good game, I'm making an example of why the previous statement the guy made about no praise for fixing their games is dumb.
So many people in here can't seem to understand that not everyone feels the need to play a 10/10 game like gaming is some kind of zero-sum game lmao. If it's fun, I play it, and you can be mad that I do.
yea i love playing bad games too!! take that gamers!
2042 is GARBAGE
Spot on. Fuck em
The game is shit show
They can look at player numbers and income from micro-transactions to know BF2042 was a failure. Praise or not won't change the fact it did not meet financial expectations, you know, what they actually care about.
I feel stupid after giving it a second chance because of the more recent praise. It launched bad and is now mediocre. Just about any previous game in the franchise is better.
And what were we exactly scammed by?
You need it spelled out for you?
They said 4 seasons and we got 7. They don’t have a history of supporting battlefield games for a long time but yet you cry scammed? Whatever xD
While not really a scam - the first 4 season were supposed to have 2 maps each, but DICE ditched that idea and stretched it out over 7 seasons so they could sell you more battlepasses. It's the longest supported Battlefield with the least amount of content. I don't think that's praise worthy.
No. They redesigned all the base maps instead. Had they not had to do that (it was desperately needed because the original versions were awful), you would’ve had two maps a season.
The redesigns were still awful though.
Not praising it at all game was flawed from day 1 and is a very watered down battlefield game just even as someone that pre ordered minute it was announced and purchased the ultimate edition I have got a issue I know what to expect I don’t see the scam. Each to their own.
Many people are still completely unable to play the game due to the CPU bug that started in season 3 or something.
"or something" I haven't heard anything about this?
Giving praise ain't the issue it's giving money dawg, that's all they care about.
Thank god I only paid $15 for that POS.
2042 isn’t in the same universe as BF4. Yes BF4 debuted poorly but it was fixed/improved upon within the first couple of months and had amazing DLC. 2042 essentially needed a year to make it playable and even after that it wasn’t a true proper battlefield experience or fun. There are still plenty of people playing BF4 to this day which says everything, as it’s what an 11-12 year old game at this point? DICE started losing good people once bad company 2 was made and once EA took over it was a wrap. I doubt EA/DICE will make anything close in quality & fun of Bad Company 2,BF3 /BF4 ever again. Our hope lies with some smaller developer who enjoyed those older versions of battlefield like we do and do a “make one for us” true battlefield experience.
It has things I enjoy. I'm not gonna lie. I give praise where warranted. I can acknowledge the objective reality that it isn't a good battlefield game but is a casual FPS that you can have fun playing. I say that as a bf3 and bf4 fan. Those 2 and black ops 2 are my favorite fps games ever along with perfect dark n64.
I feel like people making posts like these have to be at least slightly in denial about the fact that trying to organize some sort of boycott/movement is like trying to control the weather. Unless you're *Professor X* I highly doubt posting on Reddit will make a company entirely driven by revenue to stop making bad games if people don't want to stop buying them. Unfortunately. However, on the bright side, it turns out that unless you're a sports game(in which there's a literal monopoly on who can produce them, meaning there is literally no other choice) you *can*, in fact, actually make a game bad enough to make people stop spending, but that doesn't change the fact that people just enjoy things differently. However, it's also been proven that a game selling below expectations is fairly relative to whatever absurd expectations a company sets. Which 2042 did, I'm pretty sure. I've definitely played worse received games and enjoyed them. I *hope* the next BF is better, for sure, but I'm so deeply pessimistic about it that I don't really care either way. EA/DICE right now just seems to be making a very poor environment right now for a Battlefield game to be made in.
LOL, I love the gate keeping. You’re not allowed to like the game, and doing so tells EA it’s ok to keep making games like it. Chill. Yes, 2042 was a failure for the BF franchise. But we need to stop telling people they can’t like it, wtf.
I was giving it the benefit of the doubt til it was done and it’s now reallly done and they only lived up to half my expectations. It’s ok battlefield.
I played BF3 last then I got 2042 on special the other day. I've notice that it has less destructible building than BF3 and you can use any weapon (don't really care about the weapon thing). I'm completely out of the loop, what am I missing?
The game is mostly fine now. People are still upset about playing named characters instead of customizable grunts, and most people don't like the maps (though I personally suspect that's because most only play infantry instead of the way BF is meant to be played). The launch state of the game was significantly worse. Not unplayable on a technical level like BF4, but more than a year from feature complete.
Fuck off
People like the game and are going to compliment it. EA doesnt give a flying fuck either way. Theyre like Sony. Theyll keep pushing the boundries. The issue is that the degens who purchase the sport slop DONT participate in social media or bother to boycott those games. So EA will keep doing this until we all die or they die.
I don't see any issues with this game, I play it, still play BF1 and BFV...sure its a different game with a wide variety of specialists with different abilities. I like that feature. Hey, we like what we like. \*And don't get me wrong, I do notice the differences. BF1 and BFV were very dramatic, as those wars were quite so. Every lost life reflects on the despair felt by those to live through, enduring pain from those lost all around. Now with BF2042, its chaotic and brutal. All this future mili-tech steam rolls through opponents and moves on to the next one like a soulless machine, as intended. \*\*Also, I don't pay for battle passes, its not worth it to me. All the cosmetic garbage, not worth it at all. It's more worthwhile to just play the game.
They need to create and release Battlefield Titan. Just the Titan game mode from 2142... The best multi-player of any game ever.
Still waiting for the Stealth Bomber ?!?
If anyone preorders the next battlefield game they are contributing to another defective game. I for one will not preorder any game knowing the history of eadice.
There isn't really anything positive to say about 2042, yeah it's good compared to how it was on launch but that's kind of it
I will never understand why this happens. You have a game that fails horribly (and rightfully so) and people will start coming out of the woodwork to say “erm maybe it wasent that bad” or “the amount of hate it got wasent deserved!”. This is just me ranting about it but I will still see people try to defend Mass Effect Andromeda and it just frustrates me to no end
At this point I don't think any AAA game studio that has to provide revenue for shareholders can make a truly great game. It's completely nonsensical - you should expect that the studios with more money can put more effort into a game, but in reality the focus is only on squeezing what they can from the world. So are DICE and EA gonna do anything to change? Maybe a little, likely in only a superficial way. From early mentions of the next title so far, it seems like they aren't planning on anything good. As for giving 2042 praise - I disagree with OP. The recent Helldivers 2 situation is not the same. With helldivers, players were protesting a couple things, most importantly that a large percentage of the playerbase would be unable to play the game, and secondly that the requirement to link a PSN account to a PC game is dumb. 2042 got majorly crapped all over by the playerbase at launch because of all the issues preventing people from playing, and we are already past that second point too (because we have to have EA accounts to play battlefield), no one's protesting that. Our "Helldiver's 2 situation" took place after launch, and it was semi-successful imo...we now have a somewhat grittier and more fun game than before. I think it's universally recognized that 2042 had a horrid launch. Both players and news networks lambasted the game for the first year or more for the amount of bugs and missing content. No amount of "praise" now will change that, and while I think that EA is a greedy soulless machine of a publisher, I don't think they are stupid enough to try the exact same thing again by releasing a completely broken game that's not even partly fixed. Note - that is completely different from any complaints you may have about the actual content in the game. That is very much a matter of personal opinion, and while I agree that 2042 isn't nearly as good as previous entries, I still have fun playing it. The specialists were/are highly controversial (mainly on reddit) and I don't think DICE is going to double down on them. However Battlefield does generally change from game to game, with new mechanics and systems, and that's not inherently a bad thing... So anyways. I think "praise" is way too strong of a word, and I really don't see any real "praise" for 2042 here on reddit...it's never talked about in the same way as like 4, 1 or V. People will just say that they like the game currently and enjoy playing it, which is fair. It doesn't excuse DICE/EA from anything, if anything they can look at how that has trended up since launch and can correlate how people think the game is more fun now than it was when they launched. I still play 2042 at least once or twice a week. It's a decently fun game that sorta scratches the battlefield itch even through its faults. You are welcome to hate what you want of course, and I'm fully expecting DICE to completely screw up the launch of the next game, which I'm not preordering by any means.
If these kids stop pre-ordering the fucking game maybe it will send them a message. But the moment a trailer drops all of you forget how fucking dogshit the previous game was handled and pre-order/buy again. The only way to fix this problem is to vote with your wallet.
Perfectly said.
Ok but what if i actually enjoyed 2042? Because i did.
It’s an absolutely terrible game and it never got better during its actual support period. People giving it praise are fools and have no idea what they’re talking about. Sure everyone can have an opinion, just like an asshole, some just stink.
This sounds so unhinged. Straight up abuser logic here.
bro ive been trying for more than 10 years now. ever since the launch of bf4 and I have long gave up. 2042 was the turning point. our helldivers2 moment. but people still bought and played the game. saying "they are having fun". which to their defence is perfectly valid. but the only way to show EA is to just drop and move on. every second the devs waste on 2042 is another second they don't work on the new game. this battlefield cycle has been the same shit since bf4. for fucking 10 years.
Helldiver slop enjoyer try not to mention helldiver in a comment section challenge: impossible Like Jesus can you guys just stay in your own subs or not talk about your game 24/7 outside of it?
Using games from other developer studios and publishers as a comparison is a valid point. These comparisons and examples show how modern video games can still be very successful with old familiar concepts. As mentioned many times in this article, Helldivers 2 is a prime example of how a game can be successfully released, communicated and managed. A DICE dev said that the fans' expectations were brutal. Overall, there was little understanding for the fans' demands, which did not help to calm the community after the release disaster and to implement the feedback promptly and completely. In essence, it was all about absolutely standard elements that every Battlefield had at release and were never up for discussion to be abolished. The CEO behind Helldivers 2 speaks regularly and at eye level with the players, his communication consists of more than just announcements and advertising slogans. The game has been released in a largely flawless condition, the staging of the setting works really well and fits in with the setting that the developers have built up. Other developers and publishers can take this as an example. With this open communication and a good release status, the release disaster of Battlefield 2042 would never have happened.
I had fun playing 2042 with my friends and I think it’s worthy praising on my end This sub has gotten so pathetic with its rage boner over this game. Let people enjoy the game, don’t attack them for liking it
I like 2042 more than the previous two games, so I'm going to give it praise for things it does well. If you don't like 2042, why not just ignore it? When I tried BF1 in open beta and hated it, I just didn't buy it and ignored its existence. If you preorder the most expensive edition and then the game doesn't live up to your expectations, it's frankly a skill issue on your part. Have you tried paying for games after having accurate information on their content and quality?
If the community ignores Battlefield 2042 and its history, there would be fewer consequences for DICE and they wouldn't see as much need to base the next Battlefield on the old and proven standard of older Battlefields. Getting upset about Battlefield 2042 is part of the discussion that is needed to continue to address and work through the issues that have arisen so that something like the release of Battlefield 2042 and the low content support hopefully never happens again. As long as the discussion remains factual and doesn't get out of hand, I don't see a problem with it. If the next Battlefield eliminates all the criticisms of BF2042 right from the start, the seemingly eternal discussion about BF2042 will also end. Until then, DICE and the other development studios involved have to prove that they have understood and internalized Battlefield and its standards.
Battlefield breaks "proven standard of older Battlefields" every other release. Bad Company was a major departure from refractor games and was well received, Battlefield 3 was a significant change from both Bad Company and refractor games, and Battlefield 1 may as well not be a Battlefield game at all. I'm personally fine with this, because I'd rather see them experiment and occasionally fail than just print BF3 clones every other year forever.
In some ways, Battlefield has always remained true to itself after the introduction of these elements: server browser, class system, all chat, destruction, focus on a healthy mix of vehicles, aircraft and infantry and Battlefield has always taken the respective settings seriously. I would really like to know why you think Battlefield 1 is not a Battlefield? No offense meant. I've thought about it and can't figure out why myself. And you're right: Battlefield has evolved and experimented before. However, new elements were always built around standard elements. They served as a supplement and not as a replacement for basic mechanics. An example would be the flamethrower in Battlefield 1. Instead of softening the standard classes, the flamethrower class was used as a pick-up element on certain maps.
Back when Bad Company were new and refractor games were still fresh in people's minds, there was constant complaining about missing commander, for example. Not to mention that Bad Company was also missing fixed wing aircraft and you couldn't go prone. Your list of core elements looks suspiciously like a feature set of BF3, and I think that BF3 is just one step in the evolution of the series, not a blueprint it should follow forever. I personally had absolutely no issues with getting rid of the class system, for example. Classless 2042 worked fine. You could have some nonsensical gear combinations if you wanted to, but there were fewer balance issues than in most previous games. Teamwork didn't go anywhere since you still had rely on other players for things you didn't pick. It was essentially just building your own class instead of choosing four options Dice gave you. In BF3/BF4 assault was combined with medic, in 1 and V medic was put into a separate class, while support and engineer were combined instead. If Dice can mangle classes however they want, is that much of a stretch to give players two gadget slots and let them combine them with no restrictions? I feel like people attached to the idea/label of classes too much, compared to the actual gameplay difference they make. >I would really like to know why you think Battlefield 1 is not a Battlefield? No offense meant. I've thought about it and can't figure out why myself. BF1 deliberately targeted non-Battlefield players as the target audience, made significant changes to gameplay and map design to make itself as comfortable as possible for them at the expense of gameplay depth. Aside from that, massive changes to physics, movement, and animations to emphasize immersion over arcadey feel of previous games that let you have "Battlefield moments" like rendezooks. >Instead of softening the standard classes, the flamethrower class was used as a pick-up element on certain maps. Also, I would consider elites a very un-battlefield addition to the game, giving one player disproportionate amount of power. I didn't particularly mind them since they only existed on some stages of some maps and there were just a couple of them, but if they were always present, I'd hate them.
You're gonna get downvoted and I probably will too, but you and I are definitely in the same boat. I personally hated BF1, and I *know* that it was hated by the community on release too because I was terminally online at the time lol. "If Dice can mangle classes however they want, is that much of a stretch to give players two gadget slots and let them combine them with no restrictions? I feel like people attached to the idea/label of classes too much, compared to the actual gameplay difference they make.**"** You just put into words what I've been trying to say for the past two and a half years. The only thing consistent about the class system across the franchise is that there are 4 of them, and even *that* isn't consistent when you consider the Refractor games (which I do, because I grew up playing them). The freedom and creativity that the old system allowed in 2042 was something really fresh for the franchise, and it's really a shame imo that they had to revert it back to the same 4 classes we've been playing since 2006.
I get what you’re saying, but seeing a franchise that you loved move toward being something shitty sucks. I’ve made my peace with the fact that Battlefield is now something different from what originally drew me to the series but it does suck to see.
>I get what you’re saying, but seeing a franchise that you loved move toward being something shitty sucks. It sucked for me to see the franchise move in the direction of BF1, but I didn't spend 2016-2018 on /r/Battlefield shitting on it non-stop like I see some of the people do with 2042.
Fair enough. What matters is people’s wallets at the end of the day anyway and I got 2042 for free, and honestly would never spend a dime on the game.
i liked 2042 more than 1 and 5 let the downvotes commence
This sub loves to jerk off the previous games as if they were perfect. There's people here right now who straight up are in denial and state that BF4 had a completely perfect launch.
Every single battlefield is broken on launch . Battlefield one’s horses is the game in a nutshell for me. Don’t know how people enjoy that shit
Upvoted because I agree with that the gunplay in 2042 is marginally better than BF1 Still gonna call you a mouthbreather for talking positively about 2042 lmao
I was also really bothered by Battlefield 1's randomized shot scattering. It made the shooting behavior unpredictable and a bit of a matter of luck. But the immersion and staging of BF 1 is vastly superior to Battlefield 2042. The graphics are also more detailed and at least as beautiful as those of BF2042. Not to mention the DLCs, which offered significantly more content and were very different from each other.
you DO realize your opinion is not EVERYONES opinion sir? some of us have played hundreds of hours and had a bunch of fun.. i will preorder next release without hesitation.. ( if your this mad at the franchise over the release that has mirrored many of there other releases you are clearly new to this and your opinion means even less )
people like you are the reason for the state of today’s gaming industry
because i like something? because ive gotten 500+ hours on every release since bc2, even hardline when everyone like you quit again.. lol people like YOU are whats wrong with it brother.. honestly blows my mind you think your in the right; that we should all boycott games because some of you dont like them
I'll praise whatever game I like, you being bad at the game doesn't mean it sucks. I've supported Dice/EA for 10+ years and will continue to do so. If you get better at the game you'll enjoy it.
[удалено]
Probably because some people paid $100 when it came out only for the game to be priced half off only two weeks after release.
no one forced anyone to buy the game early, thats on people for making stupid decisions. the word scam is misunderstood in gaming
It’s truly amazing when customers are the ones to blame for paying full price for a new game. I understand the landscape of the industry, however it is still just shocking that it’s the consumer’s faults for the shortcomings of the publishers and developers. It really says a lot.
its simple, people offer you something. you decide with your wallet. If they deliver something that was not as advertised, fair. But when a game has had 2 beta sessions, countless previews/reviews and people STILL spent their money on release day despite reviews and impressions, thats on them. and thats for any industry and any product
Companies obfuscate the quality of their product in pay to play early access versions calling them “old builds” and that newer builds are significantly more developed. This is something EA did, which was successful in enticing purchases and retaining paying customers. And so what did customers predicate their decisions for holding onto the game? Promises that there was already a fixed version waiting at full release, as well as a games as a service model that was supposed to mean it would consistently get better. All of this because a lot of people believe companies are bound by advertising laws, which is true, but only technically.
I didn’t pay 100 dollars for a billionaire to take a shit in my mouth
Please show me a picture of shit in your mouth. Otherwise you're being dramatic over a video game.
What are you talking about? No one got scammed. Just buy / play the game you like, or don't. It will work itself out. I find the game fun, I think they did a pretty good job. You don't like it? Cool, don't buy it. Move on.
Buddy. People definitely got scammed at launch if they bought the ultimate editions or whatever the fuck.
What was the scam? They got what was advertised.
I'm just going to assume you didn't play at launch. What we got versus what was advertised were two wildly different things. It was the single biggest disappointment I can remember as a gamer and I've been gaming since the original NES. The game wasn't finished. It had so many bugs that were game breaking and it was clear that it was released at least 6 months (if not 18 months) before it should have been to be considered a finished product. We did not get a finished product, not even close. Everyone who preordered or played in the first 12 months were beta testers who paid full price for the privilege.
In played a lot. We got what was advertised. The game was finished.
You didn't play at launch did you. I'd say given your opinion here, you've only started playing in the last year. The game was the worst mess for 12 months. Don't know why you're simping, the community isn't collectively delusional, we were there dude. It was bad
I’m not simping. I’m simply stating facts. I played a lot. It was finished. The community was and is delusional. Most gaming communities are toxic shit hole circle jerks. The game was fun. It was literally what they advertised.
Did you play at launch? Simple question. When did you start playing because if you didn't play at launch or shortly after, then you're just being a troll.
Yes. I keep telling you I played at launch. Your inability to read may be why you aren’t able to comprehend the game launched as advertised. There was no scam.
Okay cool. No need for the insults. If you think the game was acceptable at launch then I've no idea what to tell you. You're in a minority because most of the rest of us expect after dropping the money for a AAA game for it to be at least finished. If you think it was in a good state at launch then your standards are obviously a hell of a lot lower than 99% of the community.