Battlefield 2042 already on SALE after ONE month - Player count drops 80%, soon to be lower than Battlefield V currently

[ravenshrike]

8 hours ago, Quackers101 said:

portal mode and "milsim" servers seems kind of fun.

but maybe still buggy.

 

They have added or trying to add 64 player servers? instead of 128. To inrease performance and maybe improve some of the gameplay, to less vehicle unbalance the last BF titles has.

They've added 64 player servers and while they are a bit smoother, emphasis on a bit, the maps are still largely trash. Honestly one of its biggest weaknesses is the map design. Manifest and Breakaway are good and can be broken down pretty well, but the rest are just outright poorly designed.

[maartendc]

2 hours ago, ravenshrike said:

You do realize that all the wild and wacky original cosmetics planned were stripped from the game prior to launch and that's why there was a dearth of content on launch right? 

I don't see how stripping cosmetics from the game has anything to do with content. Cosmetics are not content.

 

By lack of content I mean: lack of sufficient map variety mostly. Lack of certain game modes that were promised but not ready (Firestorm). Etc.

 

If anything, if they stopped designing wacky cosmetics, that should have freed up development time to focus on other things, turning out MORE content, not less.

[maartendc]

2 hours ago, ravenshrike said:

They've added 64 player servers and while they are a bit smoother, emphasis on a bit, the maps are still largely trash. Honestly one of its biggest weaknesses is the map design. Manifest and Breakaway are good and can be broken down pretty well, but the rest are just outright poorly designed.

Are they shrinking the map sizes for 64 players? Because the maps were already too empty and big for even 128 players in my opinion.

 

It is kind of a paradox. It seems like more players + bigger maps did not just lead to a scaled up Battlefield experience. It seems all 128 players converge on a few points on the map. Those points end up being super chaotic, not fun. The rest of the map is just empty space to traverse to those points, also not fun.

 

Talking about the map design, you are totally correct. It has been reported that the game actually started out as a Battle Royale style game with the specialists. That explains a lot about the maps. Those maps feel like BR maps to me, not well-designed Battlefield maps. 

 

That also explains why the game is still unfinished, even though they spent an extra year on it. They switched from BR to more 'traditional' Battlefield game in April of 2020(!)

 

https://www.vg247.com/battlefield-2042-battle-royale-start-short-development-dice-troubles-report

[suicidalfranco]

Never buy games from ea, save your money for studios that actually care about what they're working on

[GreatnessRD]

10 minutes ago, suicidalfranco said:

Never buy games from ea, save your money for studios that actually care about what they're working on

At this point in the gaming industry, I have zero idea who that might be.

[Dreckssackblase]

14 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

the game should've been delayed 

It should not have been delayed. They should have just canceled it in the design phase after realising that it is just a dumb idea to make a Battlefiled branded Warzone competitor instead of an actual Battlefield game.

[maartendc]

9 minutes ago, Dreckssackblase said:

It should not have been delayed. They should have just canceled it in the design phase after realising that it is just a dumb idea to make a Battlefiled branded Warzone competitor instead of an actual Battlefield game.

LOL. You might be on to something.

 

According to this report, the game was first designed as a Battle Royale in 2018. They then switched around to be more like Warzone in 2020. They then had like a year to properly develop the whole thing. No wonder it is a mess.

 

Goes to show EA is stupid. They just chase whatever is the latest hype money-making machine.

 

https://www.vg247.com/battlefield-2042-battle-royale-start-short-development-dice-troubles-report

[RejZoR]

To no one's surprise... The game is so broken and messed up it almost makes Cyberpunk 2077 look good. And it's not just bugs and glitches, but literal game breaking balance issues. Like single enty points in maps being covered by hovercrafts. And the single entry being an elevator on top of a skyscraper as well as just spamming of vehicles everywhere.

[Quackers101]

certain COD games > BF.

To people saying that BF 5 or BF 1 having "good gameplay mechanics"? not really, some of them can be fun but also a mess. So many times a team gets stuck in spawn, due to how these BF games work, or maps just becoming a camping or sniping match. However when you get things moving, it can be a lot more fun. Also an issue with cheaters. Vehicles can be OP in both or camped (although most BF games kind of have this). Bad gameplay UI compared to some older titles.

[Stahlmann]

Man i really hoped this would happen. That's the only way we can show the devs and publishers what a shitshow "AAA" titles are nowadays. Just don't play them. I hate it when people brainlessly buy all the latest games just for the sake of "playing the latest games".

[ravenshrike]

5 hours ago, maartendc said:

I don't see how stripping cosmetics from the game has anything to do with content. Cosmetics are not content.

 

By lack of content I mean: lack of sufficient map variety mostly. Lack of certain game modes that were promised but not ready (Firestorm). Etc.

 

If anything, if they stopped designing wacky cosmetics, that should have freed up development time to focus on other things, turning out MORE content, not less.

The stripped the cosmetics at developmentally speaking the last minute because the BF player base rightly hated them. Moreover, at least some cosmetics had to be replaced quickly so their money printing machine had some sort of ink at the start of the game. However their response to that disgust was to quite literally say publicly "If you don't like it don't buy it". That was pretty much EXACTLY the wrong thing to say. So the initial sales were lackluster to say the least. The game ALSO needed at least another 6 months to finish up the single player and get Firestorm ready, but those things were not the actual cause of its very rough start.

[Doobeedoo]

Played some beta to fool around and check it out like I do with these games, but yeah rather meh though. Still surprised how CoD even continues, people are morons.

[Brooksie359]

10 hours ago, GreatnessRD said:

At this point in the gaming industry, I have zero idea who that might be.

Honestly at this point I can only think of from software. While they aren't a perfect studio I would say that basically all of their games that they have released were worth the money you paid for them if you like their style of games. I am looking forward to elden ring to come out and hopefully they can keep up their quality work. The beta of the game looked super good so I am hopeful. 

[Blademaster91]

12 hours ago, Dreckssackblase said:

It should not have been delayed. They should have just canceled it in the design phase after realising that it is just a dumb idea to make a Battlefiled branded Warzone competitor instead of an actual Battlefield game.

I agree the game should've been cancelled because of the design decisions EA made, and they still didn't get the hint that most people didn't want a battle royale mode after the firestorm mode in BFV wasn't very popular.  I've heard that a lot of developers left after BFV, and there were plans for regular soldier designs with Battlefield 2042 but EA pushed for specialist characters instead. And DICE wanted to make Battlefront 3 or Bad Company 3, but EA said no and wanted a game that they could sell cosmetics and paid DLC season passes with.

I think the game might be decent if specialists are optional, and change some of the map design because most of them are terrible, and if 64 players is the default because game performance is bad with 128 players. Even some basic features an FPS game should have like a server browser or being able to see your stats but EA doesn't seem to care enough to add them.

[Monkey Dust]

13 hours ago, GreatnessRD said:

At this point in the gaming industry, I have zero idea who that might be.

So sad, and also so true.

 

EA does have more practice at releasing crap than most, though. EA Games was the gold standard of shittiness long before releasing half-finished, broken games, became cool.

[Quackers101]

7 hours ago, Doobeedoo said:

Still surprised how CoD even continues, people are morons.

While I do agree when on is buying an seasonal game that is more or less the same game.

But just to like either of these titles? People that just want to have fun with their games, also you got SP, MP and additional content. Although some of the BF titles and COD titles are wasted money or not worth the starting price or grind.

 

Both series have some issues with grinding or balance.

[MultiGamerClub]

On 12/16/2021 at 11:09 PM, Giganthrax said:

It's a buggy piece of trash without a singleplayer campaign. It's no wonder people tried it for half an hour or so and refunded.

NO SP? Oh dear, that breaks my dream to buy this game.

 

Back to battlefield 2 or bad company.

[Brooksie359]

58 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

I agree the game should've been cancelled because of the design decisions EA made, and they still didn't get the hint that most people didn't want a battle royale mode after the firestorm mode in BFV wasn't very popular.  I've heard that a lot of developers left after BFV, and there were plans for regular soldier designs with Battlefield 2042 but EA pushed for specialist characters instead. And DICE wanted to make Battlefront 3 or Bad Company 3, but EA said no and wanted a game that they could sell cosmetics and paid DLC season passes with.

I think the game might be decent if specialists are optional, and change some of the map design because most of them are terrible, and if 64 players is the default because game performance is bad with 128 players. Even some basic features an FPS game should have like a server browser or being able to see your stats but EA doesn't seem to care enough to add them.

Tbh the game could be a good game if they made some changes that aren't huge. The biggest change they would need to do was make the maps better and have more maps. As it is there are too few maps. Also there are way less weapons than basically any other battlefield game. I think the specialist wasn't a bad idea but I think they should have kept classes. Also the game is so buggy it's crazy and honestly idk how they would fix that but I am really confused how they managed to have a beta that ran basically fine then on release it was an utter mess. And yeah server browser and all the other features that they had in basically all of their previous games would go a long way to make the game better. Idk how they decided to remove so many features that were in previous games. 

[GDRRiley]

On 12/16/2021 at 11:50 AM, IkeaGnome said:

I mean, 2042 has had it rough. This is from both games' release week. Maybe take the hint you're doing something wrong with your franchise.

 

and FS22 didn't exactly have a great launch ether, its got many complants thats is a slightly modded version of 19 in most ways

[IkeaGnome]

26 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

and FS22 didn't exactly have a great launch ether, its got many complants thats is a slightly modded version of 19 in most ways

It is and it isn't. The mod that was added is seasons. You have to plant and harvest in the correct months, weather effects harvest(wet corn doesn't go through a combine well, so you get less yield, hay has to be reflipped and dried etc).

It did add more equipment than they normally do for refreshes of that game.

It added production (sugar beets to sugar, grapes to juice and raisins, raisins and grains to cereal, lumber to planks to furniture etc). Added grapes, olives, and sorghum. The problem is seasons. It did used to be a mod and so it's what everyone is focusing on. A few bad apples ruin the bunch.

 

I'm not going to act like it's a perfect game. It does have it's bugs, but none of them are game breaking. Pallets can get stuck in the ground. You can fix this with terraforming a hole under them, ramming tractors into it to get the forks stuck and then disconnect the forks. The pallet and forks do a dance across your farmyard and separate eventually. You don't die in a unresurrectable spot, crash to desktop, or lose save files. 

Even Pokemon BDSP has more bugs than FS that I've ran into. 

[GDRRiley]

10 minutes ago, IkeaGnome said:

It is and it isn't. The mod that was added is seasons. You have to plant and harvest in the correct months, weather effects harvest(wet corn doesn't go through a combine well, so you get less yield, hay has to be reflipped and dried etc).

It did add more equipment than they normally do for refreshes of that game.

It added production (sugar beets to sugar, grapes to juice and raisins, raisins and grains to cereal, lumber to planks to furniture etc). Added grapes, olives, and sorghum. The problem is seasons. It did used to be a mod and so it's what everyone is focusing on. A few bad apples ruin the bunch.

 

I'm not going to act like it's a perfect game. It does have it's bugs, but none of them are game breaking. Pallets can get stuck in the ground. You can fix this with terraforming a hole under them, ramming tractors into it to get the forks stuck and then disconnect the forks. The pallet and forks do a dance across your farmyard and separate eventually. You don't die in a unresurrectable spot, crash to desktop, or lose save files. 

Even Pokemon BDSP has more bugs than FS that I've ran into. 

I'm saying that as someone who modded 13-19 the game feels like another lacklust jump. I could do everything here modded in 15

graphics didn't get any better (mostly lighting that sucks) and they had another year to work on it.
 

[IkeaGnome]

2 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

I'm saying that as someone who modded 13-19 the game feels like another lacklust jump.

Correct. Don't get me wrong. It's not a perfect game. They could have done a lot better. It's also hard to compare as apples to apples here. FS is the kind of game that thrives off modders. It's almost better to compare to the Sims(I know I'm kind of grasping at straws here). Most people download the game, go straight to the mod section or CC and make the game much better. My big hope is that Realismus got the credit they deserved in cash for seasons. 

 

Yes it should have been a lot better, and it could have, but it's a lot better than a lot of what's been released in the last few years is more of what I'm getting at.

[cj09beira]

19 hours ago, GreatnessRD said:

At this point in the gaming industry, I have zero idea who that might be.

the smaller teams, like the ones behind insurgency, Rising Storm, maybe others can give a few more good ones.

Truly there is no one left at EA that knows how to make a great BF game, or what it even is, had they played their cards right, battlefield today would be a fun more team worked focused game, with a thriving community and esports scene as they already had it in the 00's well before many others.

[Shreyas1]

In all fairness battlefield 4 had a bad launch as well. And I remember battlefield 1 going on sale around the same timeframe. Dice/EA is kinda known at this point for releasing games in a buggy state and patching it later on

 

Haven't given it a shot, and I might do so if its free. Though I fundamentally hate the idea of characters in battlefield, I think it goes against the spirit of being a "no name soldier on a massive battlefield" that I got from previous games. And halo infinite is also free and probably better too

[xAcid9]

On 12/17/2021 at 3:47 AM, maartendc said:

What is suprising is that Battlefield V, which was initially hated by fans over misguided marketing and cosmetics, is actually doing relatively OK. For a 3 year old game to surpass a AAA game that is only a month old is SHOCKING.

They have been on release first fix later schedule since BF3(except BF:H), i remember everyone went back to BF4 when BF1 released and flock BF1 when BF:V launched.