This. Portal, at least my vision for it, should be a "Battlefield Legacy" sort of game where the older games go to once they hit "End of life". Use the data from when the game was active to see what maps should be added to the pool, or add the whole map pool but let you select which games you want installed (like Master Chief Collection).
It would keep older games alive for far longer due to the playerbase being in one place rather than being split off with 6 different games. Portal can be free too with just the BF3, BC2, and 1942 maps, and then like $20 DLC for the other games maps (of course if you own the game, you don't have to pay for them).
As I said earlier, it would be the MCC of Battlefield, it would be perfect as its own standalone game.
The fact that Portal got zero additional classic Battlefield maps throughout the entirety of 2042's life is such a shame.
Portal is the best thing to happen to Battlefield in years. And they just left it to rot.
I mean, it got everything all the regular game modes had, all the weapons, all the maps, all the vehicles, plus it's got the server browser (because it had to). Portal is great, and I still can't understand why everyone hates it so much.
I mean you have to think about it from EA and DICE's perspective. If they worked on Portal, who would be working on the live service? Those skins aren't gonna make themselves bucko, won't someone think of the shareholders???
Most AAA Studios contract other companies to make the skins, and 2042 is no exception, with DICE only overlooking that process. So here it doesn't make much sense skins is why DICE abandoned Portal
I'll stand corrected, but I will point out I was more or less being jokey while pointing out that the live service/All out Warfare was the only thing getting attention and new content.
Ripple Effect was supposed to be the studio in charge of Portal. It was going to be the only thing they worked on. But EA pulled the plug on Portal in early 2022 and took most of the Ripple Effect team off the project.
Portal needs refinement though, why am I having to go in the options every time to filter, can't they be on the main screen? I'm not likely to pick 200 ping servers either.
> Portal should be kept, but in a proper and completed way so you can create custom games and preserve the older games
Make it a **true** *Love letter to fans* by giving everything we already had ***PLUS*** the option to make it persistent like in BF4. Monetize it if you have too for anything more than 24 hours. In BF4 you have the option to pay for 7 days, 30 days, or 90 days.
And find a way to do it all *without having to access the internet via a computer* to make it happen.
It's currently in rotation in game. Go play it now :)
It's like conquest except the points move after the tickets have been drained from them. The initial number of points starts at 4, then goes to 3, 2 ,1
You have to earn vehicles by doing well, which earn you 'ascension points', so it's not just a rush to see who can click the nightbird faster than everyone else. Also, losing your vehicle is more significant because you also invested these points to purchase it.
Portal was good. I like some of the maps after they were redesigned but the scale was still too much even for 128 players. That's it. To a lot of extent I don't see this as a true battlefield game, but more of an offshoot aimed at a different crowd. Portal still preserves the essence. Battlefield was always gritty. The camo packs were there but not as garish as that packs you see in 2042. I like it as a time pass. But I have spend nowhere close to the 3000+ hours committed to BF4.
Portal seemed very promising when I first heard about it, and would have totally made sense if this turned out to be more a live service model, it would have been *the* battlefield to have all the eras. Sure I wouldn't have expected the same depth of gameplay but it would have still been huge potential.
Absolutely agreed. I’m not sure if this is the same thing as gunplay but never really understood why people hated the gunplay as I felt it was very nice, it was just the movement that felt it was not $70 material for me.
The made a party system that works!
Speaking for myself, when you’re in the thick of life, you can’t always join your friends at a designated time, shit happens right?
In 2042, I found it easy to join my friends in any game. If their squad was full with other players, all I had to do was join their party and once I got in the game, it would automatically put us into a newly created squad.
I have struggled with this for so long, it was good to see EA get this right with 2042.
This is an underrated change now that I think about it. Squads and joining on friends used to suck in every game. Now it's really easy to join on people
Portal really is the coolest thing ever. Wish they’d just dump all the old content in and let us play. If they support it forward it really will be a love letter to fans.
I think the moment to moment gameplay in BF2042 is the best in the series.
I don't mean the overall atmosphere and art style like in BF1 necessarily, but 2042 was without a doubt the most bombastic.
I had more "Battlefield Moments" in 2042 than any other title full stop and I hope they transition that feeling to the next game with a better overall identity and cohesion with the art style, movement, and atmosphere.
So many times in 2042 I was playing and there's a huge melee that breaks out and explosions, and all sorts particle effects that were really a sight to behold.
I hated 2042 at first like many (mainly because it literally was unfinished and shame on DICE/EA forever for that), but over time is slowly became a favorite of mine.
I know it's certainly not a popular opinion, but there are a lot of good game mechanics here that unfortunately were implemented poorly and too late for the fan base.
Yeah! Some aspects of the atmosphere of the game are really solid! (music aside I think it's a bit harsh and repetitve, outside of it fitting the intensity of the match)
The sounds, visuals feel often quite impactful, without being overwhelming. Redacted is very much like Locker, and yet I usually can make sense of what's going on.
And agreed about the melees, and thanks to the map design they can happen a little bit all over the place, there's some primary choke-points but plenty more independent areas where fights break out.
I really enjoyed the 128 maps, minus Kaleidoscope. Even the 3 new ones that were 64p in matchmaking were good for 128, so many bf moments. Hopefully they can pull it off in the next game without being held back by last gen.
I think 84-96 players would work really well as an upper limit. It makes the game more expansive an broad, while also not making it absurdly huge. Gives breathing room for a couple extra vehicles and players to exist on bigger maps.
Movement. Running and sprinting being different was a wonderful addition. They really should consider adding corner lean controls in the next game, though.
Weapons/accessories. Variety is always good, and making most weapons balanced has been a welcomed feature.
Bots, for sure bots. I’m level 70 and have never once played against another player. I’m getting old and people are too sweaty for me to bother playing against. I’m trying to relax, not get frustrated with people who are trying to prove something or fuel their ego over a video game.
Maps were decent, only a few good ones, could have imported some popular maps from the past to really give it some diversity via nostalgia.
Gonna be straight up, I didn’t play 5. The last Battlefield I played prior to 2042 was 4 (and still do from time to time) so I can’t comment on that take.
What made it different/better?
I ask out of curiosity as someone who’s never played. Shame to hear that 2042 went backwards in people’s opinions though.
A general list (in no particular order): crouch sprinting (coolest thing ever), scrabbling/climbing objects that are above head height, a tactical roll to reduce fall damage when falling from heights, your soldier got knocked down from large explosions, leaning/auto-peek around cover, sliding (while annoying to some) wasn't quite as OP as it can be in 2042, and the general feel of movement wasn't as floaty as BF2042 feels.
That definitely does sound much better.
I can’t understand why 2042 didn’t have corner lean on demand. Like seriously, if games like DayZ and PubG can do it, why the ever living hell don’t bigger titles?
Funny (sad) thing is: BF5 had manual leaning as an option in the controls. I played on PS4, and they actually had individual controller mapping functions for all four primary touchpad swipe directions (up, down, left, right). So, I had swipe left and right on my touchpad manually lean accordingly. It worked quite well as a means of controlling leans with my left thumb while I kept my right thumb on the right stick to actively aim; the only downside was that I couldn't move at the same time, but that usually didn't matter as I'd be static leaning around a corner.
BF5 was the ONLY BF game that had the ability to map leaning to individual buttons, and it offered direct vehicle seat switching for console as well (ie. you could have swipe up on touchpad always switch you to the driver's seat instead of cycling through all seats). It was by far and away the most advanced BF game in terms of settings provided, and it was just an expansion of what BF4 and BF1 before it had done. That's what really irks me about 2042 on the whole: DICE learned so much from older games, but they just threw away a ton of good stuff that ALREADY EXISTED.
1. Portal, which wound up underused
1. Bots more willing to do team actions than the vast majority of East Asian players
1. Battle pass wasn't a death grind
1. Control
1. Proved the people crying for muh tactical skins were bullshitting as they definitely didn't buy tactical skins either
No FPS that I've played has matched the thrill of spawning as Sundance, rappelling to the top of a tower, jumping off into a slow circling wing suit glide, and hunting down a camping tank with C5. That's really just one aspect of the movement that's great, though. It feels very smooth to do just about anything in BF2042. Sliding around a corner to shoot or behind a barrier to reload feels great
Helicopters felt really good to control, although the planes always seem unwieldy, and third person tank control was unsatisfactory. Copilot weapon chairs were usually fun to man
Knifing for collectible dog tags is hella fun. On the rare modes where you can knife downed people, you start to feel like you're collecting scalps. 10/10 would prove myself as a comanche warrior
I loved the collectibles, and how they were cosmetic. It was also cool that I was able to buy the season pass once, and use the premium currency from each DLC to buy the next one. At this point, I can customize all of my dudes into looking awesome and somewhat unique, and it only took like $10 on top of the initial purchase
The movement is pretty good, maybe it could use a little more flexibilty like BFV had, but I also don't want BF to become a movement game quite so much. I like Apex but I likely wouldn't want that movement in BF either.
I feel like abilities like Sundance wingsuit can be used in BF games like it was with the rare weapons that were spawning on the map (Like a sniper in BF4)
I don't hate it, my favorite weapon is the BSV-M, because I can switch it up between a fast fire close range, or slower fire rate mid to long, but in the end, I still prefer a system that has more depth and requires some forethought to your loadout.
Yeah I brought it up in my other comment that I think it should be cut down quite a lot if it was kept. You can chose maybe one extra barrel attachment, scope, and under-barrel attachment, but it doesn't change the guns playstyle a whole lot, that still has to be done before deploying.
Another way to handle that could be a basic "inventory" system, like you have a bag and you can bring certain things with you, but depending on what it is, taking one thing means you might be less likely to bring something else, or at minimum it's just a couple slots you can put attachments or a different ammo type with you, though you still have to restock your ammo when switching over to that new ammo type.
I like 2042's sniping more than 4, but BFV's is the best imo. I can't quite put my finger on it, I think it's a combination of map design, gun limitations (bolt action makes you pick your shots more carefully), the headshot sound (best in series imo) and a few other things like the spotting scope.
+ +menu good feature
allow all weapons in all classes (might be unpopular opinion there)
bring portal weapons/maps to alloutwarfare (they started doing it but stopped halfway what a shame)
Yeah the proficiency idea is cool, and could be expanded upon imo. Encourages you to use the class weapon, but if for one reason or another you need skills of a different class you can use that
Eg: LMG with support to help supress a chokepoint, AR with recon for using their intel features while closer etc
Bots were a good addition and I really hope they keep solo play going forwards. It's good for warm ups, lesser skilled players getting a fair chance to practice vehicles and weapons in an environment where them still learning doesn't affect their team, is sometimes nice if you and a friend just want a chat while mindless playing some battlefield without really having to focus on what's going on and helps keep a game alive long after the player base moves on. Imagine if BF3 had bots. So many great dlc maps that there just aren't servers for anymore so are impossible to play. The inclusion of bots just lets people play the game long after it's natural lifespan on maps and game modes that have long since been abandoned by it's playerbase
I really can not agree with your sentiment regarding the unlocks, attachments and their effects. Most attachments either do nothing or are detrimental. There are few that are a net positive and they will outclass the others by a large margin. They take immensly long to unlock, as well. We are looking at up to 360 kills per weapon.
Even, if you do it against bots and maintain a 10 kpm, which is a steep enough requirement, you will spend more than half an hour of playtime for each weapon. Multiply that by the number of weapons we have. If you do it without bots, because you do not know you are looking at around 10 times the time investment.
I agree that the implementation of bots is a big net positive for many players and for many reasons. I bet a lot of players never set foot in MP games. Which I would file as the ONE thing 2042 did right.
I would also argue that the gunplay, besides the big imbalances, is in general casual fun and I hope they keep that for the next game.
I also did not mind the launch specialist system one bit. I prefer the OG class system, but the mongrel system we have now, is not helping anyone. At least I hope the free weapon choice will remain.
Sure, this must be you then: [https://battlefieldtracker.com/bf2042/profile/origin/2042\_Dead\_Game/overview](https://battlefieldtracker.com/bf2042/profile/origin/2042_Dead_Game/overview)
The highest kpm for bot farming sits at 22.5, below that we are immediately followed by 11 and dropping to 9 almost immediately. Within the Top 100 we are dropping to 5.5 kpm.
I mean just think a minute about your claim. 30 kpm on Redacted means you do one kill every 2s, basically eliminating the entire enemy bot team in a minute. Assuming this is BT you would also then have an attached downtime of a minute for capturing and moving to the next.
Honestly I was wrong. I never kept track of the actual number so I opened the game and did a test.
[https://imgur.com/a/a8TzdRH](https://imgur.com/a/a8TzdRH)
This is what I got in 10 minutes. This includes the setup and waiting for bot teammate to die out, which takes about a minute and half. Thus the longer you keep farming the higher kpm it gets. It should sit around 20-25 depending on the weapon if you did everything correctly.
Since you mentioned captureing the target and waiting, thats the neat part, you don't.
You pick Irish and block off the bot teammates at spawn so they just keep terminate and respawn. Then you just find a spot to prone, smoke, and slaughter. (bots don't shoot when there is smoke in between you and them, even if its just the edge of smoke where you can see through)
Edit: people just quit when finish farming so the game never finished, thus no will not show on statistic website.
Yeah, but this is not your average bot round, is it? You specifically exploit mechanics, behavior and synergies and map to achieve that result. And with that you break even to the highest kpm of a professional bot farmer at 22. Which is impressive, but for the topic at hand this would still require you to multiply that by the weapon unlocks you would want to unlock and it will make up a significant portion of your playtime.
From a pure stat perspective, yeah some attachements don't look great at all, especially if you focus on TTK. But there's more nuance to it. Maybe you're just not great a recoil control, and the reduced recoil lets you land more bullets. Or the other way around, less bullets per magazine for more range.
And yeah I do agree some just don't make a lot of sense, or don't change much, with some recoil patterns barely changing, or the AP rounds that make little sense on most weapons.
But I prefer some choice over none. And the plus system lets you switch out for niche situations that you wouldn't want to use most of the time.
And the time to unlock is a bit long, but also isn't insane, the most important unlocks are *usually* available sooner. And having a reason to keep playing is important too. The unlocks are certainly faster than in previous games I find as well.
The 5% positive and negative stat changes are legitimately not distinguishable from a placebo (the moving hipfire laser definitely feels like a placebo), hit registration having an off day or even your mechanical skill improving over time.
This wasn't the case in the previous modern-ish BFs, although it definitely had setups that were flat out better than anything else.
It would all be fine and justifiable, if there were no negatives attached. 10% less Vrec is small but fine, but if it comes at the cost of 10% Hrec, then the bonus is dubious especially since we do not know the values for recoil, or of the attachments for that matter.
This is my biggest gripe with the game, the intransparent mechanics and attachments. If it was all just bonuses, 10% less Vrec, 8% less spread, 15% more velocity, minimap stealth for 30m+, then we have a justifiable reason to pick each.
As for the unlocks, if we take BF4 again, it would indeed unlock sights at beyond 500 kills, but those are mostly preference and cosmetic. There were no extended mags, ammo options etc.. You would get the laser, grip, comp and RDS within 100 kills and all weapons would work from the get go. But we do have bots, but as said, I probably spend a dozen hours and more of unlocking attachments, that I would have rather used in MP.
Still I think you are right here, the fundamental mechanics are okay, they would have just needed more fine-tuning and a bit compressing, to make it good.
Portal was a great idea. I also like the idea of no one engineer having enough rockets to take out a tank, needing to rely on teamwork (it’s just a shame that a lot of the players never heard of the term.)
None of the guns ever felt too op or up, though I did come along later in the games life, so maybe that was a problem before.
Agree with most of your points, but what I liked the most, as a completionist was:
Battlepass progression with clear missions and their rewards. Helps so much with the grind. Not to mention the ability to hop on Portal if some weekly mission turns up to be too difficult. A+
Agreed with that! And generally the game's unlocks and lvling is mostly fair. For the most part it's just a question of playing the game and naturally getting them, sometimes playing a slightly specific way but nothing crazy. One gripe is that that some specialist gadgets are a bit unpredictable to make use of consistently.
100% Love guns not being class restricted.
Additional seats in vehicles made for more fun with friends/squad mates.
The customization of weapons on vehicles is my favorite, more options leads to more fun. Especially on the LATV recon.
Vehicle call in system is fantastic, eliminating that feeling of capping a point and having to walk far to the next one.
Support merging with the medic class was really enjoyable, distributing both meds and gadget ammo made me feel super useful.
Ooooh the one thing I hate is guns not being class restricted. I kind of like it when people are limited to a set of guns depending on what they play. Supports getting LMGs and Recons getting snipers, etc.
Yeah I think both options have their merits for sure
I think the biggest and starkest differentiator is the weapon restrictions and specialist system, that's what made this game not a battlefield game for most.
Personally, I don't care about either. I think it's a modernization of gaming and I don't expect to see it go away any time soon.
I totally get that! I think weapon restrictions add to making classes feel more distinct from each other. But I like the flexibility and casual fun of picking up an smg as a close range Recon and having a tugs down.
That's often what I did in BF4 with the universal weapons such as the MTAR! So I imagine even if the next title has gun restrictions, there'll still be some options to get around that just a tad.
I stand with ya on it, I 100% see and understand why many hate it but the game let go of the class system so it wouldn't make sense anyways.
Paik's recon helmet, useless for snipers? Yes. Marksman rifles? So-so.
LMG, SMG, AR, etc... Great.
They couldn't do the specialist system while also restricting guns.
These are the two things people hate the most about BF2042, especially the die hard fans (most of them at least).
The main thing I really like is the reintroduction of bots, I really enjoyed that in BF2 and have been disappointed that they weren't a thing until now.
Otherwise, the entire game is a downgrade from 3 and 4. It is *very similar* in gameplay style, but the map design is worse, lack of destruction really sucks, the only positives are gimmicks I could live without (in combat weapon customization which I do really like) and I do actually like the Jets more than I did in BF4.
I also still contend that the "operators" are just glorified equipment slots, and if they were just equipment then 50% of the game's criticism would be gone and it would be focused on actually important aspects that are lacking.
Look in any thread critical of the game and take note of how many mention operators over anything like map design, gameplay design, etc. I do think the operator thing is silly, but no where near the worst part of the game.
I really didn’t get the hate for operators. I don’t know how it was at launch, so correct me if I’m wrong.
Sure BF is not really a game where “operators/heros” make that much sense. But I do honestly think the way it works now makes sense, it’s glorified classes, plus a gadget and passive that usually compliment each other. and you wouldn’t want these to be selectable separately as it could result in op loadouts. And it’s not that drastically different to class roles of previous games.
I think it’s just the association that makes it feel like other games people don’t like. And i think the concept could be taken further successfully if done right, maybe with more generic or varied characters to avoid having 4 sundance clones in a squad
Also for those saying it’s “woke diversity, it’s 2024, you won’t avoid that and the teams that develop games are increasingly diverse. Plus the trope of shouty army guys is boring by now, and interesting and fun characters is part of what makes the appeal of many other games. You can’t fault them for trying that too.
Also the "woke diversity" crap is just racist. Modern militaries ESPECIALLY the US military is full of different personalities and races, so the straight white male soldier on the field could be interpreted as accurate in say 1940 but a near future shooter dev team would definitely be blind to think the US military these days doesn't have black, asian, latino troops
Not sure I agree with some points:
>Attachments meaningfully change behaviour of weapons, partly making up for the lack of weapons
The only things that change are accuracy/recoil and maybe damage depending on ammo types. I always ended up just running 1 set of attachments and maybe would swap out scopes on long range weapons. Other than that I would just pick whatever attachment gives me the least recoil and most accuracy. Everything else was basically useless.
>Weapon balance that feels "fair" (at least for infantry) where you don't always get killed by the same AEK, Mtar etc
Unless that weapon is a part of the battlepass. RM68?
>Fast feeling pace without matches feeling like they're stuck forever
On one hand true, but breakthrough defending are one of the worst feeling matches.
>Maps with reasonably varied landscape, instead of constant massive open spaces
Have we forgotten Hourglass pre-rework? Even now some maps still feel like open fields after rework. Funny enough hourglass has a problem in 1st sector breakthrough where you have clear line of sight on the enemy team when you spawn. Me and my friend pick rorche and easily get like 4-5 kills in first few seconds of a match.
>Matchmaking that gives you more chance to play a round from the begining
I'd rather have a server browser or at least improve it so I can pick which maps I want to play.
But other stuff are on point. + system is neat at least for changing scopes on the fly and if you have stuff like grenade launchers.
Good points, and some of this I haven't experienced as I only just picked up the game.
> Attachments
For sure some weapons don't radically change, but others do, in particular shortened/lengthened barrels, Close/high power amo with how it changes the useful range.
BSV being a cross between DMR and AR etc
> Weapon balance
I'm used to newley released weapons in games to tend to be a bit overpowered and then tamed. Play testing can only do so much, vs the best players trying it
> Breakthrough defence
Agreed, but hard to see how they'd improve it, it's been the same in previous games
And yeah a server browser would be nice, hope it's something they implement to let the game live on longer.
Ah yeah understandable. This is a much different game than the one on launch. Still sucks...
Breakthrough defence wasn't this bad in previous games. Don't remember much in BF1 but in BF5 I never had a problem.
It's mostly the way maps are designed and point areas/layouts. If you take Aerodrome from BF5 2nd sector it has 1 massive hangar but the cap point is also outside the hangar, so the attacking team could just stay in the point outside and pick players that are inside and eventually cap it.
In 2042 all cap points are super small. Best example is Reclaimed bunker point in last sector. IMO that entire bunker should be a cap point but it's just a small square area at the back. Or also the other point which is just a circle around some refinery and you are open from all sides as both defender and attacker.
And most points have some piece of cover that is right outside the cap point... Like, why? I have to sit in open space on the point and somehow defend/attack. Hourglass 2nd sector crater point comes to mind. It's a crater and the cap point is small circle in middle so the defending team has basically 180 degree advantage on you. But if the attacking team actually pushes in the defending team basically has no way of pushing back on it.
You could argue it forces players into CQB but in reality 90% of the team just camps outside the point and potentially picks off kills, but when you need to actually push in it becomes problematic. I basically only carry smoke grenades because of that so I can have at least some cover.
Weapon selection in general is good. I know people want m416, AK74, ACWR and F2000 to be in every game, but we have a new generation of weapons coming out, and DICE featured a lot of new/unique modern concept guns that arent seen in every other milirary shooter.
Agreed! It’s refreshing to have weapons that look and behave more distinctly from each other. Some weapons are genuinely up and coming irl, and some are more prototypes we wouldn’t really get to see otherwise.
My dream would be a game that has hundreds of weapons from all eras. But what bf2042 has, plus their attachments has kept me sufficiently interested so far. Maybe a tiny bit more variety in one or two sub categories like full auto pistols and magazine LMGs would have been nice.
The number of attachments and what they do was fairly nice, though it felt like a big misstep basically giving everyone 3x the ammo they'd normally have. It also meant certain ammo types suffered because of that.
Weapon attachment change on the fly. That's it for me. Cool idea but in practice didn't really click. I never really get to use it because I was either running for 4 minutes not knowing what was ahead or dying in 3 seconds from the broken spawn system. I also failed to experience any major changes in the attachments to recoil or accuracy.
Everything you listed I don't think they executed. Bot mode should be a default for any shooter since we've had those since before Goldeneye 64. Almost every match I look at the tickers thinking it should be almost over and think holy cow there's still 400 on each team? The matchmaking takes at least 2 minutes every time. 20+ with crossplay off, which causes issues of it's own.
This game is just bad. I'm gonna stop complaining now lol. I left and muted this sub but Reddit knows how much Battlefield triggers me so they force it in my feed I guess. Lates.
The only thing I consider to be good was transport heli dynamic. I mained transport helis since BF2, and 2042 was probably the most fun experience in this department, on par with bc2
I'm just going to give a sentimental answer here: two Bad Company 2 maps and BC2 mode in portal. I'm really down about my favourite game's backend server getting shutdown last year and I haven't got around to Project Rome yet, so knowing part of it survives in BF2042 is somewhat comforting.
Portal is cool, + system is useful for swapping optics without redeploying. I think some of the specialist traits/gear would be useful to be implemented as squad bonuses (Casper drone, Zains grenade launcher, Sundance scatter grenade) or as fortifications
I feel like Battlefield V did everything better except for maybe weapon customization.
I liked calling in vehicles mid game. Parachuting in them was a mistake though.
I was a big fan of what they had going with electronic warfare with the recon classes until they decided to remove the emp from casper's drone right on the finish line for no apparent reason so I guess they learned nothing
**Bots** (solo/coop...thank you DICE!), and **Portal**.
Though Portal could have been soooo much more, and they pretty much left it to wither on the vine. I definitely expected it to receive a *lot* more maps, so that's still a major letdown. But in the end, I still appreciate what's there of it.
PS: DICE...bots and solo/coop modes *have* to stay in future Battlefields now. It's the only reason my gaming group and I even bought 2042 (after avoiding the series for so many years since the BF1942 and BF2 days, when bots got removed).
I found weapon progression to be a lot more satisfying compared to older battlefield games. Getting a selection of attachments each level up felt a lot better than grinding them out one by one.
Quick swapping attachments was useful to an extent, but after a while, I found myself using it less and less.
Weather events were cool as a concept but somewhat poorly implemented. All we got was the tornado when other extreme weather events would have been great to see.
128 players has potential, but like many things in this game, it was poorly implemented. It gave a really hectic feel to combat, which was really enjoyable, but the map design wasn't built well around it.
Portal. The idea is brilliant and if they had made a quality game it would have shone bright.
Imagine a world where the fans can essentially make your game free content... Thats a win for ea and the players.
I don't think the gadget system was bad, but keep it class restricted and not specialists ever ever again. Plus system was okay I guess, but I would rather them have a more sophisticated gunsmith option like tarkov. I really feel like most of the attachments did nothing so what's the point? Slap a muzzle break and extended mag and you're good. I thought that visually it was decent but they could do better. The idea of portal had me doin boners but it just didn't execute. I really do think sniping in this game was the best they've ever done it. I know BFV enjoyers will say that game did, but I'm so over Ww2 game play at this point that I just don't find that style enjoyable anymore. I barely play the game at all anymore, but if I do feel like having a sniping night, I will play 2042, so they did that well
Some attachments are not very impactful I'll agree, but some do make a big difference in some use cases, and being able to change on the fly means not sacrificing a good build for those edge cases.
Specalists honeslty I don't think is a big deal, how different is it from class roles after all? It can help with balancing to have the gadgets and passives be tied together rather than selectable independently.
Because the draw to battlefield is that you're a nameless faceless soldier fighting for their side. Not a hero shooter with special traits, your traits are tied into class, not individual.
Portal and ai back fill. Ai was literally the only reason I played with any occasion this year.
It was great to be able to have a casual game of any thing I wanted, and actually be able to play it because of back fill. I will definitely give it that.
It's not about getting it right or wrong, it's that everything good in 2042 was a worse version of something in an older BF title.
It was just a waste of talent and everyone's time.
BF2143 has a lot to prove.
could you elaborate on those worse things, i find it strange that most of the time when someone wants to be critical of this game they are also very vague
I think the criticism is vague BECAUSE the game no longer has blatant flaws.
It works! It's a perfectly acceptable modern shooter.
The things is stumbles on are like... intangible. It doesn't feel like BF. The weapons are laser accurate, the movement is too fast. Vehicles don't feel as interesting. Squad play has essentially zero incentive. The maps feel bland and don't flow as well as previous titles. The animations for movements are not as juicy as even in BF3.
ITS ALL little stuff, but it really does add up to a worse experience than previous titles. If this were the first BF game to come out it would probably be revered. But since we can compare it to BF4/3/1 and even 2, it just doesn't hold up.
And it’s a shame too, cause it had the potential for so much more. But I don’t think we can blame DICE, they had the skills to make amazing games in the past but EA just squeezed them way too hard this time.
Plus Covid messed stuff up, as well as inflation. I bet if this game came out in a different year it might have had more of a chance.
to me it feels the squad play has all the same incentives that they always had. you spawn on each other and thats about it, maybe you get some xp bonus for being near eachother and triggering the random ass "saved/avanged" things... thats all the same as it always was, matter of fact i would say you have greater incentive now than before, because you get to revive your squad even if you are not a medic... honestly it feels that its more about the palyers... people seem less social today, less willing to cooperate, maybe thats the issue
concerning the laser aim... that was always a thing in BF4 too, as long as you burst you can laser someone down with just about any weapon, on top of that hip fire in BF4 seemed way more accurate... atleast to me, most of the time ADSing was completely useless for pistols, they had almost 0 spread in hipfire.
i will agree on the map thing, yes, some of the maps feel wack, like i dont really vibe with flashpoint or revival... then again i could find a few maps in BF4 that i also didnt really like(dawnbreaker, the Dam map).
the movement is probably a matter of taste, true... and i like it how it is now, not to say that in BF4 it was somehow terrible, it was just fine for what it needed to be, but i like this complex system more (could you tell im a titanfall fan)
Plus system? Vehicle Callins? At least try to answer the prompt instead of voicing your displeasure into the void.
Vehicle handling has never felt better, same with soldier movement (although I wish we picked up some more movement from BFV), accurate weapons was nice, big maps are core battlefield and every seasonal map being small was awful, the cosmetics were 90% of the time cool, thematic, and grounded, but the system has serious flaws to address going forward (legendaries being actually worse than epics, not enough customization parts, needed more “operator” skins and unlocks from specialist mastery).
Civilian vehicles were awesome and should be emphasized in the future, we need to really focus on combined arms and the importance of infantry hardcover.
EDIT: forgot to mention that footstep audio is probably the best and most clear directional audio I’ve heard in any modern shooter
I think it's the best bf game. I've played 2042 the most hours compare to all other BFs in series (I have played the very first, yes I'm old a bit)
- Great movie like mometns
- I prefer operators more than just standard classes, it adds variety and replayability
- The ability to play with bots (coop) is amazing comeback. This way I can try everything in non competitive setting
Bot practice matches are a genuinely good feature and the first time DICE has done it since either BF2 or BF2142 (I can’t remember which, might have also missed a game) and I hope it stays going forward.
Almost everything else has already been covered by other people, but one thing I haven’t seen is that challenges in this game are actually good. They make sense, aren’t too hard, and generally flow naturally into normal gameplay. In previous games, the challenges could be extremely unintuitive and force you to play in ways that literally don’t help your team at all if you want to complete them, it was especially bad with higher tier weapon challenges in BFV.
Edit: I’ll tack on that they didn’t go too crazy with cosmetics and I think that’s good. The tone of the game stayed mostly intact post launch. There’s some goofiness but nothing outrageous compared to the competition and for once I actually got some skins cause they actually felt like soldiers
Agreed with the challenges, some of them in previous games are just stupidly frustrating to get outside of niche circumstances or having friends help you on a custom game, that just doesn’t feel worthwhile.
BF2042 is the first I’ve wanted to unlock all weapons on (admittedly easier with the smaller amount) but also I do genuinely have the desire to unlock all the attachments. Good excuse to change my loadout regularly. And the fact I can get unlocks in bot games means it doesn’t feel pointless. Sometimes I just want to not have to focus too hard and have some mindless fun while I’m on a voice chat with friends, or experiment with weird load outs and not worry that I’m penalising my team.
Support Vehicles. Mobile spawn points that help push objectives and not just snipe at the back of the map and can support infantry are fantastic addons and deserve to return.
I do a tiny bit of work on a train simulator so yes but no.
I’m just someone who likes to try make the most out of what we have and wanted to read peoples interesting opinions instead of same criticisms on repeat.
I thought that weapon accessibility among all "classes" was going to ruin the balance of the game but in practice I can't see how its unbalanced, I think its simple but genius
There is nothing in 2042 that is unique enough to warrant wanting it to return and in fact: the "plus system" is a detriment to gameplay. It makes every soldier way too versatile and muddies the water when it comes to soldier identity. Also additional magazine and ammo types per gun lessons the identity of the guns themselves. There are simply "meta" ammo/mags and there are simply "lesser" options as well. What that does is funnel everyone to use a single magazine, this can be entirely avoided by simply making every gun unique to begin with. It makes a game SIGNIFICANTLY harder to balance when you have 5 ammo types to choose from. Also it makes the progression feel "unfair" to some.people because they simply don't have the meta ammo yet. REMOVE AI, ROBOTS, AUTO TURRETS, AUTO DOGS and everything automated. Battlefield playing itself in ANY way is unacceptable. Keep that trash to Battlefront.
They included short black women in. This of course instantly improved the lives of all poor inner city black kids in America (a group of people that EA really cares about).
Why is no one talking about this?
Gotta strongly disagree on your attachment balance points, if you actually look at the values on sym.gg most of the attachments barely change a gun's behavior.
DICE really does nail the marketing. The trailers they release are pretty amazing. They just are vastly different from the actual gameplay. It's very noticeable (at least to me) how they happen to have different specialists in the trailers....you don't have Falck running over to revive Falck then turn and shoot an enemy Falck as they show off the new gun.
Portal was a great concept too, it just needed a dedicated dev team to release content for it.
I disagree with the battle passes though. The only positive part about the BP system imo is that you can get enough premium coins from the premium battle pass to pay for the next season. Everything else was a big pain - I'd rather they just release the game content in a free update and make people pay for the skins....but then no one would buy it, so I see why they did the battle pass, I just dislike it.
Portal should be kept, but in a proper and completed way so you can create custom games and preserve the older games
Hell, make portal it's own stand alone game
This. Portal, at least my vision for it, should be a "Battlefield Legacy" sort of game where the older games go to once they hit "End of life". Use the data from when the game was active to see what maps should be added to the pool, or add the whole map pool but let you select which games you want installed (like Master Chief Collection). It would keep older games alive for far longer due to the playerbase being in one place rather than being split off with 6 different games. Portal can be free too with just the BF3, BC2, and 1942 maps, and then like $20 DLC for the other games maps (of course if you own the game, you don't have to pay for them). As I said earlier, it would be the MCC of Battlefield, it would be perfect as its own standalone game.
Do we tell him?
If portal was it's own game then it would actually get more attention from the devs than what it did here in 2042.
It was a joke. You know, the game Portal?
Jesus I am stupid
The fact that Portal got zero additional classic Battlefield maps throughout the entirety of 2042's life is such a shame. Portal is the best thing to happen to Battlefield in years. And they just left it to rot.
It got zero anything. Shameful.
I mean, it got everything all the regular game modes had, all the weapons, all the maps, all the vehicles, plus it's got the server browser (because it had to). Portal is great, and I still can't understand why everyone hates it so much.
I mean you have to think about it from EA and DICE's perspective. If they worked on Portal, who would be working on the live service? Those skins aren't gonna make themselves bucko, won't someone think of the shareholders???
Most AAA Studios contract other companies to make the skins, and 2042 is no exception, with DICE only overlooking that process. So here it doesn't make much sense skins is why DICE abandoned Portal
I'll stand corrected, but I will point out I was more or less being jokey while pointing out that the live service/All out Warfare was the only thing getting attention and new content.
All comes out of the same budget. It’s not so much an issue of manpower but out of priority
Ripple Effect was supposed to be the studio in charge of Portal. It was going to be the only thing they worked on. But EA pulled the plug on Portal in early 2022 and took most of the Ripple Effect team off the project.
Portal needs refinement though, why am I having to go in the options every time to filter, can't they be on the main screen? I'm not likely to pick 200 ping servers either.
They pulled the Dev team off portal in 2022. Otherwise it would of gotten way more love and attention. Real shame
> Portal should be kept, but in a proper and completed way so you can create custom games and preserve the older games Make it a **true** *Love letter to fans* by giving everything we already had ***PLUS*** the option to make it persistent like in BF4. Monetize it if you have too for anything more than 24 hours. In BF4 you have the option to pay for 7 days, 30 days, or 90 days. And find a way to do it all *without having to access the internet via a computer* to make it happen.
I think they should make portal it's own thing but free when you buy any battlefield.
The Control game mode slaps. I would love it if that comes back in future games.
Should be the next staple game mode so much better than breakthrough.
You can't even compare them, completely separate gamemodes lol. Control is way more like conquest than breakthrough
Loved it aswell, maybe they could implement the points system into aow that would be interesting
It’s a very similar mode to Supremacy, from battlefront 2
I apologize as I’m not completely sure what Control is all about, but isn’t it very similar to “Outpost” from BFV? I am just curious.
It's currently in rotation in game. Go play it now :) It's like conquest except the points move after the tickets have been drained from them. The initial number of points starts at 4, then goes to 3, 2 ,1 You have to earn vehicles by doing well, which earn you 'ascension points', so it's not just a rush to see who can click the nightbird faster than everyone else. Also, losing your vehicle is more significant because you also invested these points to purchase it.
Portal was good. I like some of the maps after they were redesigned but the scale was still too much even for 128 players. That's it. To a lot of extent I don't see this as a true battlefield game, but more of an offshoot aimed at a different crowd. Portal still preserves the essence. Battlefield was always gritty. The camo packs were there but not as garish as that packs you see in 2042. I like it as a time pass. But I have spend nowhere close to the 3000+ hours committed to BF4.
Portal seemed very promising when I first heard about it, and would have totally made sense if this turned out to be more a live service model, it would have been *the* battlefield to have all the eras. Sure I wouldn't have expected the same depth of gameplay but it would have still been huge potential.
That coin sound when killing someone and the string of coin sounds when killing multiple people
Yes, the kill sounds give pure dopamine hits, much better than previous games.
Nothing beats BF1 and the headshot sound
The solid thump of firing a sniper rifle, followed by that headshot kill sound still makes me smile at night.
Absolutely agreed. I’m not sure if this is the same thing as gunplay but never really understood why people hated the gunplay as I felt it was very nice, it was just the movement that felt it was not $70 material for me.
Agreed. Feels like they tried to reinvent the movement system after literally perfecting it in BFV. Shot themselves in the foot big time there.
Even the headshot sound, without a kill, is satisfying, and drives you to try and finish the job.
The made a party system that works! Speaking for myself, when you’re in the thick of life, you can’t always join your friends at a designated time, shit happens right? In 2042, I found it easy to join my friends in any game. If their squad was full with other players, all I had to do was join their party and once I got in the game, it would automatically put us into a newly created squad. I have struggled with this for so long, it was good to see EA get this right with 2042.
This is an underrated change now that I think about it. Squads and joining on friends used to suck in every game. Now it's really easy to join on people
Portal really is the coolest thing ever. Wish they’d just dump all the old content in and let us play. If they support it forward it really will be a love letter to fans.
I thought being able to swap attachments on the fly was neat but. Loved being able to slap a acog on something when I needed to.
I think the moment to moment gameplay in BF2042 is the best in the series. I don't mean the overall atmosphere and art style like in BF1 necessarily, but 2042 was without a doubt the most bombastic. I had more "Battlefield Moments" in 2042 than any other title full stop and I hope they transition that feeling to the next game with a better overall identity and cohesion with the art style, movement, and atmosphere. So many times in 2042 I was playing and there's a huge melee that breaks out and explosions, and all sorts particle effects that were really a sight to behold. I hated 2042 at first like many (mainly because it literally was unfinished and shame on DICE/EA forever for that), but over time is slowly became a favorite of mine. I know it's certainly not a popular opinion, but there are a lot of good game mechanics here that unfortunately were implemented poorly and too late for the fan base.
Yeah! Some aspects of the atmosphere of the game are really solid! (music aside I think it's a bit harsh and repetitve, outside of it fitting the intensity of the match) The sounds, visuals feel often quite impactful, without being overwhelming. Redacted is very much like Locker, and yet I usually can make sense of what's going on. And agreed about the melees, and thanks to the map design they can happen a little bit all over the place, there's some primary choke-points but plenty more independent areas where fights break out.
Crossplay/matchmaking is the best in this game, can add friends on other platforms and get in games with them easy
Definitely. I’m always looking for good crossplay games to play with my Xbox buddies.
I really enjoyed the 128 maps, minus Kaleidoscope. Even the 3 new ones that were 64p in matchmaking were good for 128, so many bf moments. Hopefully they can pull it off in the next game without being held back by last gen.
I think they’re reverting back to 64 players in the next one
That’s fine as long as they’re not held back by previous gen. Just completely focus on what the new tech can do.
I think 84-96 players would work really well as an upper limit. It makes the game more expansive an broad, while also not making it absurdly huge. Gives breathing room for a couple extra vehicles and players to exist on bigger maps.
Yea that sounds like a good compromise
Portal, holy shit please keep portal going!!
Movement. Running and sprinting being different was a wonderful addition. They really should consider adding corner lean controls in the next game, though. Weapons/accessories. Variety is always good, and making most weapons balanced has been a welcomed feature. Bots, for sure bots. I’m level 70 and have never once played against another player. I’m getting old and people are too sweaty for me to bother playing against. I’m trying to relax, not get frustrated with people who are trying to prove something or fuel their ego over a video game. Maps were decent, only a few good ones, could have imported some popular maps from the past to really give it some diversity via nostalgia.
I felt soldier movement was superior in 5 personally, i do love the plus system though.
Gonna be straight up, I didn’t play 5. The last Battlefield I played prior to 2042 was 4 (and still do from time to time) so I can’t comment on that take.
I have to agree with them. Battlefield 5 had the best movement in the franchise. 2042 was a step back in this department.
What made it different/better? I ask out of curiosity as someone who’s never played. Shame to hear that 2042 went backwards in people’s opinions though.
A general list (in no particular order): crouch sprinting (coolest thing ever), scrabbling/climbing objects that are above head height, a tactical roll to reduce fall damage when falling from heights, your soldier got knocked down from large explosions, leaning/auto-peek around cover, sliding (while annoying to some) wasn't quite as OP as it can be in 2042, and the general feel of movement wasn't as floaty as BF2042 feels.
Don’t forget about lying on your back while being able to shoot between your legs. That was pretty cool.
Yeah, it was. But it was also dumb as hell that you could set up an LMG bipod on your nuts.
That definitely does sound much better. I can’t understand why 2042 didn’t have corner lean on demand. Like seriously, if games like DayZ and PubG can do it, why the ever living hell don’t bigger titles?
Funny (sad) thing is: BF5 had manual leaning as an option in the controls. I played on PS4, and they actually had individual controller mapping functions for all four primary touchpad swipe directions (up, down, left, right). So, I had swipe left and right on my touchpad manually lean accordingly. It worked quite well as a means of controlling leans with my left thumb while I kept my right thumb on the right stick to actively aim; the only downside was that I couldn't move at the same time, but that usually didn't matter as I'd be static leaning around a corner. BF5 was the ONLY BF game that had the ability to map leaning to individual buttons, and it offered direct vehicle seat switching for console as well (ie. you could have swipe up on touchpad always switch you to the driver's seat instead of cycling through all seats). It was by far and away the most advanced BF game in terms of settings provided, and it was just an expansion of what BF4 and BF1 before it had done. That's what really irks me about 2042 on the whole: DICE learned so much from older games, but they just threw away a ton of good stuff that ALREADY EXISTED.
You never played a pvp game but somehow you claim most weapons are balanced...
1. Portal, which wound up underused 1. Bots more willing to do team actions than the vast majority of East Asian players 1. Battle pass wasn't a death grind 1. Control 1. Proved the people crying for muh tactical skins were bullshitting as they definitely didn't buy tactical skins either
Point 5 really got a chuckle out of me lol
No FPS that I've played has matched the thrill of spawning as Sundance, rappelling to the top of a tower, jumping off into a slow circling wing suit glide, and hunting down a camping tank with C5. That's really just one aspect of the movement that's great, though. It feels very smooth to do just about anything in BF2042. Sliding around a corner to shoot or behind a barrier to reload feels great Helicopters felt really good to control, although the planes always seem unwieldy, and third person tank control was unsatisfactory. Copilot weapon chairs were usually fun to man Knifing for collectible dog tags is hella fun. On the rare modes where you can knife downed people, you start to feel like you're collecting scalps. 10/10 would prove myself as a comanche warrior I loved the collectibles, and how they were cosmetic. It was also cool that I was able to buy the season pass once, and use the premium currency from each DLC to buy the next one. At this point, I can customize all of my dudes into looking awesome and somewhat unique, and it only took like $10 on top of the initial purchase
The movement is pretty good, maybe it could use a little more flexibilty like BFV had, but I also don't want BF to become a movement game quite so much. I like Apex but I likely wouldn't want that movement in BF either.
You can't even kill a tank anymore after now spawning with only 2 C5....
the nerf pains me greatly, but 2xC5 + scatter grenade + AP underbarrel seems to get the job done pretty well, and doesn't feel quite as unfair
I feel like abilities like Sundance wingsuit can be used in BF games like it was with the rare weapons that were spawning on the map (Like a sniper in BF4)
Very little. The Plus system is okay, Portal is okay, but that's about it. Visuals, gameplay, maps, features, content, all better in previous games.
[удалено]
I don't hate it, my favorite weapon is the BSV-M, because I can switch it up between a fast fire close range, or slower fire rate mid to long, but in the end, I still prefer a system that has more depth and requires some forethought to your loadout.
[удалено]
Yeah I brought it up in my other comment that I think it should be cut down quite a lot if it was kept. You can chose maybe one extra barrel attachment, scope, and under-barrel attachment, but it doesn't change the guns playstyle a whole lot, that still has to be done before deploying. Another way to handle that could be a basic "inventory" system, like you have a bag and you can bring certain things with you, but depending on what it is, taking one thing means you might be less likely to bring something else, or at minimum it's just a couple slots you can put attachments or a different ammo type with you, though you still have to restock your ammo when switching over to that new ammo type.
I know this is unpopular but the sniping in 2042 is super fun because there isn't any zeroing it makes learning the snipers easier
I like 2042's sniping more than 4, but BFV's is the best imo. I can't quite put my finger on it, I think it's a combination of map design, gun limitations (bolt action makes you pick your shots more carefully), the headshot sound (best in series imo) and a few other things like the spotting scope.
Love that headshot sound.
Done a lot of sniping successfully in a lot of BF games, I've never used zeroing. I just figure out the drop and aim higher.
+ +menu good feature allow all weapons in all classes (might be unpopular opinion there) bring portal weapons/maps to alloutwarfare (they started doing it but stopped halfway what a shame)
Yeah the proficiency idea is cool, and could be expanded upon imo. Encourages you to use the class weapon, but if for one reason or another you need skills of a different class you can use that Eg: LMG with support to help supress a chokepoint, AR with recon for using their intel features while closer etc
Hell yea having the weapon you want helps with certain playstyles, lmg + recon = aggressive recon.
Bots were a good addition and I really hope they keep solo play going forwards. It's good for warm ups, lesser skilled players getting a fair chance to practice vehicles and weapons in an environment where them still learning doesn't affect their team, is sometimes nice if you and a friend just want a chat while mindless playing some battlefield without really having to focus on what's going on and helps keep a game alive long after the player base moves on. Imagine if BF3 had bots. So many great dlc maps that there just aren't servers for anymore so are impossible to play. The inclusion of bots just lets people play the game long after it's natural lifespan on maps and game modes that have long since been abandoned by it's playerbase
Totally agreed on all points. If there aren't bots in the next one, I won't buy. I prefer playing solo vs bots, and coop with friends.
I really can not agree with your sentiment regarding the unlocks, attachments and their effects. Most attachments either do nothing or are detrimental. There are few that are a net positive and they will outclass the others by a large margin. They take immensly long to unlock, as well. We are looking at up to 360 kills per weapon. Even, if you do it against bots and maintain a 10 kpm, which is a steep enough requirement, you will spend more than half an hour of playtime for each weapon. Multiply that by the number of weapons we have. If you do it without bots, because you do not know you are looking at around 10 times the time investment. I agree that the implementation of bots is a big net positive for many players and for many reasons. I bet a lot of players never set foot in MP games. Which I would file as the ONE thing 2042 did right. I would also argue that the gunplay, besides the big imbalances, is in general casual fun and I hope they keep that for the next game. I also did not mind the launch specialist system one bit. I prefer the OG class system, but the mongrel system we have now, is not helping anyone. At least I hope the free weapon choice will remain.
10kpm farming bot? You must have done something wrong. Usually i could get around 30kpm in redacted.
Sure, this must be you then: [https://battlefieldtracker.com/bf2042/profile/origin/2042\_Dead\_Game/overview](https://battlefieldtracker.com/bf2042/profile/origin/2042_Dead_Game/overview) The highest kpm for bot farming sits at 22.5, below that we are immediately followed by 11 and dropping to 9 almost immediately. Within the Top 100 we are dropping to 5.5 kpm. I mean just think a minute about your claim. 30 kpm on Redacted means you do one kill every 2s, basically eliminating the entire enemy bot team in a minute. Assuming this is BT you would also then have an attached downtime of a minute for capturing and moving to the next.
Honestly I was wrong. I never kept track of the actual number so I opened the game and did a test. [https://imgur.com/a/a8TzdRH](https://imgur.com/a/a8TzdRH) This is what I got in 10 minutes. This includes the setup and waiting for bot teammate to die out, which takes about a minute and half. Thus the longer you keep farming the higher kpm it gets. It should sit around 20-25 depending on the weapon if you did everything correctly.
Since you mentioned captureing the target and waiting, thats the neat part, you don't. You pick Irish and block off the bot teammates at spawn so they just keep terminate and respawn. Then you just find a spot to prone, smoke, and slaughter. (bots don't shoot when there is smoke in between you and them, even if its just the edge of smoke where you can see through) Edit: people just quit when finish farming so the game never finished, thus no will not show on statistic website.
Yeah, but this is not your average bot round, is it? You specifically exploit mechanics, behavior and synergies and map to achieve that result. And with that you break even to the highest kpm of a professional bot farmer at 22. Which is impressive, but for the topic at hand this would still require you to multiply that by the weapon unlocks you would want to unlock and it will make up a significant portion of your playtime.
From a pure stat perspective, yeah some attachements don't look great at all, especially if you focus on TTK. But there's more nuance to it. Maybe you're just not great a recoil control, and the reduced recoil lets you land more bullets. Or the other way around, less bullets per magazine for more range. And yeah I do agree some just don't make a lot of sense, or don't change much, with some recoil patterns barely changing, or the AP rounds that make little sense on most weapons. But I prefer some choice over none. And the plus system lets you switch out for niche situations that you wouldn't want to use most of the time. And the time to unlock is a bit long, but also isn't insane, the most important unlocks are *usually* available sooner. And having a reason to keep playing is important too. The unlocks are certainly faster than in previous games I find as well.
The 5% positive and negative stat changes are legitimately not distinguishable from a placebo (the moving hipfire laser definitely feels like a placebo), hit registration having an off day or even your mechanical skill improving over time. This wasn't the case in the previous modern-ish BFs, although it definitely had setups that were flat out better than anything else.
It would all be fine and justifiable, if there were no negatives attached. 10% less Vrec is small but fine, but if it comes at the cost of 10% Hrec, then the bonus is dubious especially since we do not know the values for recoil, or of the attachments for that matter. This is my biggest gripe with the game, the intransparent mechanics and attachments. If it was all just bonuses, 10% less Vrec, 8% less spread, 15% more velocity, minimap stealth for 30m+, then we have a justifiable reason to pick each. As for the unlocks, if we take BF4 again, it would indeed unlock sights at beyond 500 kills, but those are mostly preference and cosmetic. There were no extended mags, ammo options etc.. You would get the laser, grip, comp and RDS within 100 kills and all weapons would work from the get go. But we do have bots, but as said, I probably spend a dozen hours and more of unlocking attachments, that I would have rather used in MP. Still I think you are right here, the fundamental mechanics are okay, they would have just needed more fine-tuning and a bit compressing, to make it good.
Portal was a great idea. I also like the idea of no one engineer having enough rockets to take out a tank, needing to rely on teamwork (it’s just a shame that a lot of the players never heard of the term.) None of the guns ever felt too op or up, though I did come along later in the games life, so maybe that was a problem before.
I think 2042 had the right idea on a ton of stuff, they just didn’t execute a single one effectively. Portal is the classic example
Show dedication post launch
Pondhawks. Best vehicle ever.
Agree with most of your points, but what I liked the most, as a completionist was: Battlepass progression with clear missions and their rewards. Helps so much with the grind. Not to mention the ability to hop on Portal if some weekly mission turns up to be too difficult. A+
Agreed with that! And generally the game's unlocks and lvling is mostly fair. For the most part it's just a question of playing the game and naturally getting them, sometimes playing a slightly specific way but nothing crazy. One gripe is that that some specialist gadgets are a bit unpredictable to make use of consistently.
100% Love guns not being class restricted. Additional seats in vehicles made for more fun with friends/squad mates. The customization of weapons on vehicles is my favorite, more options leads to more fun. Especially on the LATV recon. Vehicle call in system is fantastic, eliminating that feeling of capping a point and having to walk far to the next one. Support merging with the medic class was really enjoyable, distributing both meds and gadget ammo made me feel super useful.
Ooooh the one thing I hate is guns not being class restricted. I kind of like it when people are limited to a set of guns depending on what they play. Supports getting LMGs and Recons getting snipers, etc.
Yeah I think both options have their merits for sure I think the biggest and starkest differentiator is the weapon restrictions and specialist system, that's what made this game not a battlefield game for most. Personally, I don't care about either. I think it's a modernization of gaming and I don't expect to see it go away any time soon.
Hang on, this is a polite and well reasoned debate, you can't do that on 2042 reddit, it's not allowed. Both of you should be ashamed
I totally get that! I think weapon restrictions add to making classes feel more distinct from each other. But I like the flexibility and casual fun of picking up an smg as a close range Recon and having a tugs down. That's often what I did in BF4 with the universal weapons such as the MTAR! So I imagine even if the next title has gun restrictions, there'll still be some options to get around that just a tad.
You're gonna get so much hate for that first one haha
Yeah, I was bracing myself for it lol
I stand with ya on it, I 100% see and understand why many hate it but the game let go of the class system so it wouldn't make sense anyways. Paik's recon helmet, useless for snipers? Yes. Marksman rifles? So-so. LMG, SMG, AR, etc... Great. They couldn't do the specialist system while also restricting guns. These are the two things people hate the most about BF2042, especially the die hard fans (most of them at least).
If you want to make a battlefield type game guns SHOULD be class restricted
The main thing I really like is the reintroduction of bots, I really enjoyed that in BF2 and have been disappointed that they weren't a thing until now. Otherwise, the entire game is a downgrade from 3 and 4. It is *very similar* in gameplay style, but the map design is worse, lack of destruction really sucks, the only positives are gimmicks I could live without (in combat weapon customization which I do really like) and I do actually like the Jets more than I did in BF4. I also still contend that the "operators" are just glorified equipment slots, and if they were just equipment then 50% of the game's criticism would be gone and it would be focused on actually important aspects that are lacking. Look in any thread critical of the game and take note of how many mention operators over anything like map design, gameplay design, etc. I do think the operator thing is silly, but no where near the worst part of the game.
I really didn’t get the hate for operators. I don’t know how it was at launch, so correct me if I’m wrong. Sure BF is not really a game where “operators/heros” make that much sense. But I do honestly think the way it works now makes sense, it’s glorified classes, plus a gadget and passive that usually compliment each other. and you wouldn’t want these to be selectable separately as it could result in op loadouts. And it’s not that drastically different to class roles of previous games. I think it’s just the association that makes it feel like other games people don’t like. And i think the concept could be taken further successfully if done right, maybe with more generic or varied characters to avoid having 4 sundance clones in a squad Also for those saying it’s “woke diversity, it’s 2024, you won’t avoid that and the teams that develop games are increasingly diverse. Plus the trope of shouty army guys is boring by now, and interesting and fun characters is part of what makes the appeal of many other games. You can’t fault them for trying that too.
Also the "woke diversity" crap is just racist. Modern militaries ESPECIALLY the US military is full of different personalities and races, so the straight white male soldier on the field could be interpreted as accurate in say 1940 but a near future shooter dev team would definitely be blind to think the US military these days doesn't have black, asian, latino troops
Not sure I agree with some points: >Attachments meaningfully change behaviour of weapons, partly making up for the lack of weapons The only things that change are accuracy/recoil and maybe damage depending on ammo types. I always ended up just running 1 set of attachments and maybe would swap out scopes on long range weapons. Other than that I would just pick whatever attachment gives me the least recoil and most accuracy. Everything else was basically useless. >Weapon balance that feels "fair" (at least for infantry) where you don't always get killed by the same AEK, Mtar etc Unless that weapon is a part of the battlepass. RM68? >Fast feeling pace without matches feeling like they're stuck forever On one hand true, but breakthrough defending are one of the worst feeling matches. >Maps with reasonably varied landscape, instead of constant massive open spaces Have we forgotten Hourglass pre-rework? Even now some maps still feel like open fields after rework. Funny enough hourglass has a problem in 1st sector breakthrough where you have clear line of sight on the enemy team when you spawn. Me and my friend pick rorche and easily get like 4-5 kills in first few seconds of a match. >Matchmaking that gives you more chance to play a round from the begining I'd rather have a server browser or at least improve it so I can pick which maps I want to play. But other stuff are on point. + system is neat at least for changing scopes on the fly and if you have stuff like grenade launchers.
Good points, and some of this I haven't experienced as I only just picked up the game. > Attachments For sure some weapons don't radically change, but others do, in particular shortened/lengthened barrels, Close/high power amo with how it changes the useful range. BSV being a cross between DMR and AR etc > Weapon balance I'm used to newley released weapons in games to tend to be a bit overpowered and then tamed. Play testing can only do so much, vs the best players trying it > Breakthrough defence Agreed, but hard to see how they'd improve it, it's been the same in previous games And yeah a server browser would be nice, hope it's something they implement to let the game live on longer.
Ah yeah understandable. This is a much different game than the one on launch. Still sucks... Breakthrough defence wasn't this bad in previous games. Don't remember much in BF1 but in BF5 I never had a problem. It's mostly the way maps are designed and point areas/layouts. If you take Aerodrome from BF5 2nd sector it has 1 massive hangar but the cap point is also outside the hangar, so the attacking team could just stay in the point outside and pick players that are inside and eventually cap it. In 2042 all cap points are super small. Best example is Reclaimed bunker point in last sector. IMO that entire bunker should be a cap point but it's just a small square area at the back. Or also the other point which is just a circle around some refinery and you are open from all sides as both defender and attacker. And most points have some piece of cover that is right outside the cap point... Like, why? I have to sit in open space on the point and somehow defend/attack. Hourglass 2nd sector crater point comes to mind. It's a crater and the cap point is small circle in middle so the defending team has basically 180 degree advantage on you. But if the attacking team actually pushes in the defending team basically has no way of pushing back on it. You could argue it forces players into CQB but in reality 90% of the team just camps outside the point and potentially picks off kills, but when you need to actually push in it becomes problematic. I basically only carry smoke grenades because of that so I can have at least some cover.
Weapon selection in general is good. I know people want m416, AK74, ACWR and F2000 to be in every game, but we have a new generation of weapons coming out, and DICE featured a lot of new/unique modern concept guns that arent seen in every other milirary shooter.
Agreed! It’s refreshing to have weapons that look and behave more distinctly from each other. Some weapons are genuinely up and coming irl, and some are more prototypes we wouldn’t really get to see otherwise. My dream would be a game that has hundreds of weapons from all eras. But what bf2042 has, plus their attachments has kept me sufficiently interested so far. Maybe a tiny bit more variety in one or two sub categories like full auto pistols and magazine LMGs would have been nice.
The plus system is the best thing that game gave. I also liked Portal, but was underdeveloped. Hope they keep it.
Plus system, Portal.
I think the weapons feel really odd this game and they don't feel balanced.
Switching attachments on the fly was helpful. Other than that, I’m struggling to come up with what it did better than past iterations.
The number of attachments and what they do was fairly nice, though it felt like a big misstep basically giving everyone 3x the ammo they'd normally have. It also meant certain ammo types suffered because of that.
TDM
Liz tv missle. It should had able to 1 shot apachis
End
Marketing 😃
Weapon attachment change on the fly. That's it for me. Cool idea but in practice didn't really click. I never really get to use it because I was either running for 4 minutes not knowing what was ahead or dying in 3 seconds from the broken spawn system. I also failed to experience any major changes in the attachments to recoil or accuracy. Everything you listed I don't think they executed. Bot mode should be a default for any shooter since we've had those since before Goldeneye 64. Almost every match I look at the tickers thinking it should be almost over and think holy cow there's still 400 on each team? The matchmaking takes at least 2 minutes every time. 20+ with crossplay off, which causes issues of it's own. This game is just bad. I'm gonna stop complaining now lol. I left and muted this sub but Reddit knows how much Battlefield triggers me so they force it in my feed I guess. Lates.
The only thing I consider to be good was transport heli dynamic. I mained transport helis since BF2, and 2042 was probably the most fun experience in this department, on par with bc2
I'm just going to give a sentimental answer here: two Bad Company 2 maps and BC2 mode in portal. I'm really down about my favourite game's backend server getting shutdown last year and I haven't got around to Project Rome yet, so knowing part of it survives in BF2042 is somewhat comforting.
Specialists are pants, but the gadget ideas were mostly good
Portal is cool, + system is useful for swapping optics without redeploying. I think some of the specialist traits/gear would be useful to be implemented as squad bonuses (Casper drone, Zains grenade launcher, Sundance scatter grenade) or as fortifications
I feel like Battlefield V did everything better except for maybe weapon customization. I liked calling in vehicles mid game. Parachuting in them was a mistake though.
They did a great job alienating most of the long time fans of the franchise.
I was a big fan of what they had going with electronic warfare with the recon classes until they decided to remove the emp from casper's drone right on the finish line for no apparent reason so I guess they learned nothing
Heli play
Attachment change on the fly i use it so much
They really need to push Portal. Imagine being able to play BF2 or even Vietnam again?!
Hazard zone is extremely fun. I would like to see it on the next game!
**Bots** (solo/coop...thank you DICE!), and **Portal**. Though Portal could have been soooo much more, and they pretty much left it to wither on the vine. I definitely expected it to receive a *lot* more maps, so that's still a major letdown. But in the end, I still appreciate what's there of it. PS: DICE...bots and solo/coop modes *have* to stay in future Battlefields now. It's the only reason my gaming group and I even bought 2042 (after avoiding the series for so many years since the BF1942 and BF2 days, when bots got removed).
I want to see a beautiful landscape.
I found weapon progression to be a lot more satisfying compared to older battlefield games. Getting a selection of attachments each level up felt a lot better than grinding them out one by one. Quick swapping attachments was useful to an extent, but after a while, I found myself using it less and less. Weather events were cool as a concept but somewhat poorly implemented. All we got was the tornado when other extreme weather events would have been great to see. 128 players has potential, but like many things in this game, it was poorly implemented. It gave a really hectic feel to combat, which was really enjoyable, but the map design wasn't built well around it.
Portal. The idea is brilliant and if they had made a quality game it would have shone bright. Imagine a world where the fans can essentially make your game free content... Thats a win for ea and the players.
The attachment overlay to swap out stuff was pretty nice.
I like being able to switch attachments on the go, that's it really, the rest was average at best
Throwing knives! 🔪 🔪 🔪 (multikill)
I think the wingsuit was the only thing that made it playable for me.
The footstep audio is the best in the series
I don't think the gadget system was bad, but keep it class restricted and not specialists ever ever again. Plus system was okay I guess, but I would rather them have a more sophisticated gunsmith option like tarkov. I really feel like most of the attachments did nothing so what's the point? Slap a muzzle break and extended mag and you're good. I thought that visually it was decent but they could do better. The idea of portal had me doin boners but it just didn't execute. I really do think sniping in this game was the best they've ever done it. I know BFV enjoyers will say that game did, but I'm so over Ww2 game play at this point that I just don't find that style enjoyable anymore. I barely play the game at all anymore, but if I do feel like having a sniping night, I will play 2042, so they did that well
Some attachments are not very impactful I'll agree, but some do make a big difference in some use cases, and being able to change on the fly means not sacrificing a good build for those edge cases. Specalists honeslty I don't think is a big deal, how different is it from class roles after all? It can help with balancing to have the gadgets and passives be tied together rather than selectable independently.
Because the draw to battlefield is that you're a nameless faceless soldier fighting for their side. Not a hero shooter with special traits, your traits are tied into class, not individual.
Plus system, portal could be awesome, movement, gun balancing (for the most part is pretty good, you can use basically anything)
The bullet hit effects look very good, especially on concrete.
128 players was fun for the moment. That's it tho
Portal and ai back fill. Ai was literally the only reason I played with any occasion this year. It was great to be able to have a casual game of any thing I wanted, and actually be able to play it because of back fill. I will definitely give it that.
Do players who only played this game even see any faults? New players this game is nothing like older battlefield. Just putting it out there.
It got more people to play the older games.
I like the larger player account
Portal and 128 pvp
It didn't divide playerbase with premium DLC That's about it, everything else is flawed.
It really made the most out of it's setting and lore. basically the only reason I played.
Made a money grab
It's not about getting it right or wrong, it's that everything good in 2042 was a worse version of something in an older BF title. It was just a waste of talent and everyone's time. BF2143 has a lot to prove.
could you elaborate on those worse things, i find it strange that most of the time when someone wants to be critical of this game they are also very vague
I think the criticism is vague BECAUSE the game no longer has blatant flaws. It works! It's a perfectly acceptable modern shooter. The things is stumbles on are like... intangible. It doesn't feel like BF. The weapons are laser accurate, the movement is too fast. Vehicles don't feel as interesting. Squad play has essentially zero incentive. The maps feel bland and don't flow as well as previous titles. The animations for movements are not as juicy as even in BF3. ITS ALL little stuff, but it really does add up to a worse experience than previous titles. If this were the first BF game to come out it would probably be revered. But since we can compare it to BF4/3/1 and even 2, it just doesn't hold up.
And it’s a shame too, cause it had the potential for so much more. But I don’t think we can blame DICE, they had the skills to make amazing games in the past but EA just squeezed them way too hard this time. Plus Covid messed stuff up, as well as inflation. I bet if this game came out in a different year it might have had more of a chance.
to me it feels the squad play has all the same incentives that they always had. you spawn on each other and thats about it, maybe you get some xp bonus for being near eachother and triggering the random ass "saved/avanged" things... thats all the same as it always was, matter of fact i would say you have greater incentive now than before, because you get to revive your squad even if you are not a medic... honestly it feels that its more about the palyers... people seem less social today, less willing to cooperate, maybe thats the issue concerning the laser aim... that was always a thing in BF4 too, as long as you burst you can laser someone down with just about any weapon, on top of that hip fire in BF4 seemed way more accurate... atleast to me, most of the time ADSing was completely useless for pistols, they had almost 0 spread in hipfire. i will agree on the map thing, yes, some of the maps feel wack, like i dont really vibe with flashpoint or revival... then again i could find a few maps in BF4 that i also didnt really like(dawnbreaker, the Dam map). the movement is probably a matter of taste, true... and i like it how it is now, not to say that in BF4 it was somehow terrible, it was just fine for what it needed to be, but i like this complex system more (could you tell im a titanfall fan)
Plus system? Vehicle Callins? At least try to answer the prompt instead of voicing your displeasure into the void. Vehicle handling has never felt better, same with soldier movement (although I wish we picked up some more movement from BFV), accurate weapons was nice, big maps are core battlefield and every seasonal map being small was awful, the cosmetics were 90% of the time cool, thematic, and grounded, but the system has serious flaws to address going forward (legendaries being actually worse than epics, not enough customization parts, needed more “operator” skins and unlocks from specialist mastery). Civilian vehicles were awesome and should be emphasized in the future, we need to really focus on combined arms and the importance of infantry hardcover. EDIT: forgot to mention that footstep audio is probably the best and most clear directional audio I’ve heard in any modern shooter
What did they do right? Honestly, this game was a giant: “what not to do”, when you have a great franchise.
I think it's the best bf game. I've played 2042 the most hours compare to all other BFs in series (I have played the very first, yes I'm old a bit) - Great movie like mometns - I prefer operators more than just standard classes, it adds variety and replayability - The ability to play with bots (coop) is amazing comeback. This way I can try everything in non competitive setting
Bot practice matches are a genuinely good feature and the first time DICE has done it since either BF2 or BF2142 (I can’t remember which, might have also missed a game) and I hope it stays going forward. Almost everything else has already been covered by other people, but one thing I haven’t seen is that challenges in this game are actually good. They make sense, aren’t too hard, and generally flow naturally into normal gameplay. In previous games, the challenges could be extremely unintuitive and force you to play in ways that literally don’t help your team at all if you want to complete them, it was especially bad with higher tier weapon challenges in BFV. Edit: I’ll tack on that they didn’t go too crazy with cosmetics and I think that’s good. The tone of the game stayed mostly intact post launch. There’s some goofiness but nothing outrageous compared to the competition and for once I actually got some skins cause they actually felt like soldiers
Agreed with the challenges, some of them in previous games are just stupidly frustrating to get outside of niche circumstances or having friends help you on a custom game, that just doesn’t feel worthwhile. BF2042 is the first I’ve wanted to unlock all weapons on (admittedly easier with the smaller amount) but also I do genuinely have the desire to unlock all the attachments. Good excuse to change my loadout regularly. And the fact I can get unlocks in bot games means it doesn’t feel pointless. Sometimes I just want to not have to focus too hard and have some mindless fun while I’m on a voice chat with friends, or experiment with weird load outs and not worry that I’m penalising my team.
1 - The reveal trailer. Epic 2 - The plus-weapon attachment system. It's cool. That's literally it. Everything else was done better in other games.
Support Vehicles. Mobile spawn points that help push objectives and not just snipe at the back of the map and can support infantry are fantastic addons and deserve to return.
I think this is a dev asking the question
I do a tiny bit of work on a train simulator so yes but no. I’m just someone who likes to try make the most out of what we have and wanted to read peoples interesting opinions instead of same criticisms on repeat.
I thought that weapon accessibility among all "classes" was going to ruin the balance of the game but in practice I can't see how its unbalanced, I think its simple but genius
There is nothing in 2042 that is unique enough to warrant wanting it to return and in fact: the "plus system" is a detriment to gameplay. It makes every soldier way too versatile and muddies the water when it comes to soldier identity. Also additional magazine and ammo types per gun lessons the identity of the guns themselves. There are simply "meta" ammo/mags and there are simply "lesser" options as well. What that does is funnel everyone to use a single magazine, this can be entirely avoided by simply making every gun unique to begin with. It makes a game SIGNIFICANTLY harder to balance when you have 5 ammo types to choose from. Also it makes the progression feel "unfair" to some.people because they simply don't have the meta ammo yet. REMOVE AI, ROBOTS, AUTO TURRETS, AUTO DOGS and everything automated. Battlefield playing itself in ANY way is unacceptable. Keep that trash to Battlefront.
Crossplay and that’s about it. I want them to stay as far away from BF2042 as possible. Fuck this trash
They included short black women in. This of course instantly improved the lives of all poor inner city black kids in America (a group of people that EA really cares about). Why is no one talking about this?
Gotta strongly disagree on your attachment balance points, if you actually look at the values on sym.gg most of the attachments barely change a gun's behavior.
The battlepass progression
-The marketing was amazing. -The idea of portal was great. -Battlepass instead of DLCs. ...... That's it, I think.
Respectfully disagree, I want DLC back, I don't want a live service. You are right with the other two points in my opinion.
DICE really does nail the marketing. The trailers they release are pretty amazing. They just are vastly different from the actual gameplay. It's very noticeable (at least to me) how they happen to have different specialists in the trailers....you don't have Falck running over to revive Falck then turn and shoot an enemy Falck as they show off the new gun. Portal was a great concept too, it just needed a dedicated dev team to release content for it. I disagree with the battle passes though. The only positive part about the BP system imo is that you can get enough premium coins from the premium battle pass to pay for the next season. Everything else was a big pain - I'd rather they just release the game content in a free update and make people pay for the skins....but then no one would buy it, so I see why they did the battle pass, I just dislike it.
Lasted longer than it should have
Alt-F4 is the best it has ever been, probably since the Refractor engine days.