Another of our favorite franchises, seemingly on the ropes... :(. I hope you guys enjoyed this video, thanks for the support (apologies about the mic quality being a bit inconsistent I was in an airbnb apartment!) Thanks to Micro Center for sponsoring this video! Micro Center wants to offer new customers a free 240 GB SSD! (see the link in the description): ○ micro.center/a1bb41 ○ New Customers Only; No purchase necessary; Limited time offer; Valid in-store only; Limit 1 coupon per-customer
The fact that EA touched this make me ask if there was any goodwill for this franchise from the start. At this point are there really any players out there still willing to eat outta Everyones Asshole
I’m surprised GeekSlayer didn’t bring up the fact that EA pulled all the DICE developers from working on Battlefront 2 for BF2042. The fact that the outcome was as bad as this really angers me that EA would be so bad at managing their properties. What’s worse is that Battlefront 2 was doing so well! Ever since the Celebration Edition, the games playerbase was skyrocketing, and EA pulled the plug just a few months later, even though we were supposed to get even more content! SCREW EA!!!!
how to be a pro dice dev: - go in direction nobody wants - have playtesters tell you they're not good decisions - have playtesters tell you the game needs another year of development at least - ignore playtesters completely - release jank broken unfinished game - game flops - blame reddit and halo infinite
more like be a dev for EA as this also applies to a lot of other games from them. Bioware had a similar experience, the Need for Speed Series aswell. Fifa had launch issues on release for years. Its not just DICE, its EA. Dont buy their stuff before you know its good.
How to be incompetent in general really. The dev cycle of this one really reads like it was made by inexperienced douche's straight off the turnip truck.
@@invalid8774 the last game EA released that i played was nfs heat, which is after a year it launched, used and on promo by the store. serously, i played bf2042 beta and i could see by a mile that it would flop really hard, i didnt even bother to think if i would buy this game.
The whole “love letter to the fans” angle DICE tried to push really, really, really stings when you see how out of touch with the fans this game actually was.
@@77wolfblade I guess people weren’t expecting to be straight up lied to lol “They wouldn’t just lie to us would they?” Yes, yes they would. And they’d do it again.
@@77wolfblade Honestly at this point people who preorder games are just part of the problem most of the time and I've gotten to the point where I believe they even deserve to get shit games. People need to learn not to preorder and they still can't even do that. I avoid AAA games nowadays so I don't really care, but it's still somewhat sad to see games I once loved end up like this.
Playing as a random soldier makes you feel like YOU are in the field... when you play as a named specialist you are playing as a avatar of someone else. It doesn't feel the same.
Yea like most fps games you play as an unidentified unnamed person it’s you. When you play a named character it’s the characters story. Not the same feeling from a battlefield experience
It's still kind of mind boggling how much they managed to do things wrong with this. It's one of those times too that you know even while playing the beta, things are just wrong to the very core of the game. There's disappointing or same-y AAA releases, and there's these complete disasters that not even being a juggernaut IP is enough to carry through things. Shame really, people already had low expectations after the lukewarm BFV and they had the advantage to easily win people over again but missed the mark entirely.
I'm actually really glad that they offered a beta so that I could make a profound decision on not buying the game. The trailers and stuff that was shown beforehand were amazing. I would be saying "here's maybe hoping for a Bad Company 3" but I doubt that any studio under EA could do it justice.
@@Wrathful_Scythe That is at least one silver lining of it yeah. I went from cautious optimism from the initial reveal trailers to downright "yeah this is bad". I know some friends who actually still pre-ordered anyway and wasted $100+ on the big deluxe editions, kind of crazy too how hype can still overtake sometimes despite having a clear view of something beforehand. Even the coolest feature BF Portal was far from enough to give the game any sort of redeeming quality.
Sid Meier was right. This is what happens when they are so concerned with adding ways to monetize the game they fail to make a game thats actually polished and fun
Though point taken that it wasn't a particularly great game, it wasn't concerned with monetisation afaik. Civ6 however.... Dlc Central.... But also a polished game. Shame Civ games need an expansion or 2 to be "finished" though...
Strangely I was just thinking of him when this video began for some reason.. I’m personally new to the series.. I’m not much of a FPS guy but being I’m a huge WWI historian I had to check out Battlefield 1 Revolution
Sad how true it is for 2042. Skins for operators and removes class system, 64v64+32v32+Tarkov+portal catches headlines and ruins development. No singleplayer. No standard community tools(fucking scoreboard). Lacking game modes like Rush. And egregious bugs on launch. A damn shame
2042 was the kind of "Love Letter" you get from a cheating spouse telling you she's been cheating with Randall for over a year, she's moving to Costa Rica, burnt all your clothes, and gives you a sh*tty papercut just before you throw in the trash.
"Don't be sad. This is just how things work out sometimes." Feels like a mantra for this game. They dropped the bag HARD, especially when the goal was basically open. I remember the hype when the trailer came out.
Dice: "You will still have a narrative driven world in multiplayer" Specialist ingame: "A good days work but I'm not one to brag" while the earth is fucked up
It really would have been so easy. If they'd just made BFV with modern military hardware and player models you could actually see and called it BF 2042, I'd have actually bought the game.
@@MrKfloz I guess people were reading between the lines, or at least though they were. From how it was structured (with the focus on "battlefield moments", customizability, and mechanical callbacks like the jet scene), the trailer strongly suggested that DICE understood why people play Battlefield games, and that this was going to be a simple, mechanically-played-safe, return-to-what-works sort of game. Except, of course, the end product was anything but that. It's like the trailer and the game were built by different teams. Or, alternatively, that the end product was just _that_ badly compromised by money-hungry trend-chasing execs dictating terrible design paradigms.
clearly he didn't put enough hours to even realize you can call in a vehicle drop so it's not a walking simulator, then calling it a core design issue because of his mistake
The first time I saw Kaleidoscope, I was like "wow, this is gonna be Siege of Shanghai but set in Seoul and with 128 players." but then when I actually played on the map, it was the most painfully boring experience I've ever had. So sterile, so lifeless, you couldn't tell there was a war and climate catastrophe going on, you couldn't even tell you were in Korea, you were just in a park with a city as a "background".
@@sk8erbyern that's fair. Siege of Shanghai is an Overhyped map. The skyscraper is obviously the biggest hotspot, yet you cannot get to it without helicopter or Lift. So when yoir opponent has a capable heli pilot the enemy team ends up camping the lift doors and there's nothing you can really do about it. So people bring down the tower which would be the right thing to do as there's no other way to have a shot at capping C, except it ruins the entire map as now C is just a bunch of rubble randomly scattered around. Some destroy the tower just for the levolution, which looks sick once but that's it
@@sk8erbyern Fair enough. Siege of Shanghai itself could use a lot of reworks, but its still hell of a lot more interesting to play on than Kaleidoscope.
When a game has huge-ass posters on Time Square, one of the most expensive places ever to have your advertisement, then you just know there was a TON more money and time put into advertising, than actually making a good product.
That's the rub isn't it? it feels like EVERYTHING about BF2042 was made with monetization/marketing in mind first and making a fun game second, or third?. The specialists being the most glaring example, to shill cosmetics, and the 128 player cap, a "next-gen" feature to slap on the cover despite how obviously detrimental it is the game's design.
@@wilm2109 Anytime they come out with a multi-year time table 90% of the time now it will suck. Since how can something last 10 years if you didn't even finish it?
I quite literally just got back from a friend's wedding - a friend I met while playing Battlefield 3 almost 10 years ago. I was flying a little bird and he was repairing in the back. It's such a shame that stories like mine probably won't happen again due to the current state of Battlefield. It's so sad.
Probably won’t happen due to the current state of gaming companies & western entertainment* Y’all keep ignoring that and act like nothing is happening.
To get another idea as to how bad Battlefield 2042 is doing, here's a comparison. There are currently 4,118 people playing Battlefield 2042. The game came out in November of 2021 and sold... let's say 2 million copies as EA has never released any actual figures. This game, like all Battlefields, had a massive marketing campaign, had the financial backing of EA and the brand recognition of the Battlefield franchise. In less than 6 months, after peaking at 100k concurrent players, it is currently reaching about 4000 players daily (4% of launch). Guilty Gear Strive, an anime-styled, 2d fighting game currently has 2,218 people in game. It came out in June of 2021 (it's been around twice as long as Battlefield 2042), has sold less than 1 million copies, did not have a massive marketing campaign, was self-published by its developer and the best brand recognition it had was the fact that it was made by the same people who made Dragonball Fighterz. After peaking at 30k concurrent players, it has consistently reached 2k players daily (6.6% of launch). A much smaller game, in a much less popular genre, with much less brand recognition and financial backing, that is most notable for its soundtrack and the Jack-O pose meme is doing better than Battlefield by comparison. Yikes.
The trick is for the developers to listen to player feedback and take their time. Guilty Gear Strive was delayed like 3 times before it was released and the biggest complaints people had with it on launch was the sheer amount of time it took to connect to the server when you started the game up (about 3 minutes on a good day) and Sol was just far too strong. This was coming from a fanbase that has been with this series for 20+ years and initially called Strive a betrayal of the previous entries in the series, only for that take to fall mostly silent because it was clear that the game they were worried about turned out to be a new take on Guilty Gear that didn't just iterate or simplify the game, but even improve on it in many aspects, but most importantly was a very good game. Their complaints weren't anything about the functionality or the gameplay; it was something that was hindering their ability to play it. Battlefield 2042 suffers from the physics seemingly functioning off of RNG, poor map design that leads to a lot of nothing happening, uninspired art design and gameplay that sometimes just doesn't fucking work. The game doesn't work, plain and simple. It's a bad game and it's all because it was rushed and developers didn't listen to player feedback, but I don't think more time would have completely salvaged it. The design issues can't be patched. The boring gameplay and artstyle can't be patched. The game sucks. There's better options in the same series for cheaper. Battlefield 1 is way better than this, and that game had to deal with the limitations of it being set in WW1. What is this game's excuse being set a literal 124 years later? Moral of the story: Guilty Gear Strive is a good game. Battlefield 2042 is not. Play Guilty Gear.
Personally, I'm a fan of the Steam meme showing better reviews for a furry porn game released the same day. I wonder how many concurrent players THAT game gets nowadays by comparison lmao
And halo.. And GT was sort of trying with the monetization practices/online only.. I'm sure there's more but those 2 along with battlefield are my top 3 played franchises of the last 20 years :/
The thing with identification with specialists, is that games fixed this ages ago, shitty free to play shooters very quickly realised having two models for each character works fine if they don't have team restrictions Like have the character shown on the friendly team, and a mask different model with different colours on the other, this shouldn't have been hard
@@metro-hb8mz and its not like its something like a healthbar or name color, its part of the whole design. The characters, the cosmetics, even the maps, everything was designed to color code the characters. Not to mention, tf2's silly nature let you ignore the fact everyone were technically clones of eachother. EA would never understand that. Theyre all suits, no soul
battlefield one was truly the pinnacle. i felt immersed, i felt a real historical touch. the maps were interactive, unique, and historical. there wasn’t a single boring moment in that game. Modes like operations never had a dull moment, man i really miss bf1.
One thing seldom mentioned is the highly advertised "on-the-fly" attachment swap feature. That thing must have cost them a good chunk of their dev time, with all the fancy UI and tech that gets used nowhere else in game. It does look pretty cool, but I can't for the life of me figure out how or why anyone would want that outside of a BR game where you loot the stuff. The system by definition comes down to either having to do your gun laundry every time you step in a door (because having attachment A is far superior in CQ), or never using it at all (because the attachment differences dont alter gameplay enough to warrant the time and vulnerability). Turns out constantly having to reconfigure your entire gun isn't really entertaining...
It ruins the gameplay aspect of having to play around your weapon's strengths and weaknesses as well. I had no attachment to the guns I was using (in the beta thank god i didn't pay for it) because they all felt the same.
It makes more sense in the actual game. The shift from 10 - 20m engagements to 50 - 100m engagements happens often enough that being stuck with a configuration tuned to one or the other would be annoying. The switching also only takes a few seconds. Only slightly longer than issuing commands as a squad leader.
Honestly, this is a criticism I do not understand. Always seemed easy enough to use, would seldom have to use it, but was happy to have the option. The part about the guns feeling samey? Sure, that's fair, but I'd have loved it in BF4, especially if the maps were the same size as in 2042, as mentioned above.
I actually liked that feature and used it often when I played the game. If I was using a dmr I would have a long range scope and a shorter range one for cqc engagements. If I was running an AR or smg I would usually swap ammo types to fit either my ammo count or the situation I was in.
It also ruins weapon balance. Because having a weapon with attachments built for close ranges means you’re worse at longer range. But now just press a few buttons and suddenly you go from a cqb loadout to a sniping god. It makes weapons pointless
I am still convinced this was a scrapped BR game. The maps are too big and empty, there were "operators" not classes, and they didn't even put in a revive notification when a team member went down unless they were in your squad. What a terrible game, still the only game I've ever refunded lol.
I could be wrong, but I feel like you should take advantage of what typically makes your series unique over what the competition is doing. Trying to be more like the competition feels counter productive and unhealthy for a franchise.
EA: "Well the chart says..." Seriously, in a see of stupid operators and endless microtransactions, being the one and only class system would be good - it's different, a breath of fresh air in a sea of stagnation, but most importantly *what they've been doing already and already knew how to do who woulda fuckin known* (I don't hate operators actually, I just hate the fact they're everywhere. I want a game with operators, not operators with my game, like 95%)
As a smart person said recently: "Most times you try to 'revolutionize' something, you are taking a loosing bet. Most of the time people would settle for 'good enough' and love the product." Thanks to EA for making the lack of Battlefield spirit in this one so glaringly obvious that my wallet was spared.
This game was changed 180deg in mid development. You can see they went for a BR. No other reason to have such huge open maps and “operators” with super powers. But at last minute they said, no… we gotta go with the old formula
Big maps are a staple of Battlefield though that seems like a normal thing for them, and with 128 players the maps are of course going to be even bigger
a 7 out of ten should be a decent rating. A "this is pretty good, some room for improvement but its fun" kinda deal. Battlefields State shouldn't have warranted something higher than 4
The older I get and the more games I've played, the more I find myself using 5's, 6's, and 7's when rating games. When someone rates everything either a 1, or 7+, it's a good sign that they haven't played enough games to have a decent baseline.
@@Zanzibawrr I dont like when people use masterpiece=10/10, guess its thanks to critics who use it as a synonym. Or idk maybe i am translating it incorrectly but a master piece is literally the best work that artist or in this case, developer has made. Doesnt really mean 10/10, just that they have outodone themselves
@@FDALl-ms5kg a masterpiece means a work of outstanding artistry, skill or workmanship. While it’s true that definition could be used with 9/10s and so on, i do think it fits the 10/10 model. After all what do we mean when we say 10/10? It doesn’t mean it’s perfect. Imo it means that the game excels in all areas and has very few flaws, or that the sum of its parts stand out way more that the sum of its flaws.
My favorite part about all of this is the fact one of the UI designers of this game complained about Elden Rings UI design. Meanwhile BF2042 UI is still broken and unfinished in many places.
I have no interest in Elden Ring and think it's just the newest hotness and even I think a lot of devs were being weirdly bitter complaining about it's popularity.
One thing that used to be pretty fun was being medic and running around saving people while holding the line. It made it feel like a real battle with real stakes, sucks to see that be basically removed.
I was playing bf4 yesterday, as a medic trying to revive as many teammates as possible. Me and a squad mate were running up a hill towards cover, but right before we got there he got sniped. So I run back revive him, and he doesn’t move. So I decide to stand between him and the sniper, body blocking an easy re-kill until he got up again. It didn’t work of course, I had miscalculated where the sniper was exactly, but it was still such a cool moment. And not something I see happening in bf2042.
I don't know if you actually played 2042 then. You can still do that very well on both of the medic specialists. Also the healing medic heals about 3 times faster than a med back and theres no cooldown, so shes dramatically better. Angel (insert Angel memes here) isn't as effective but he gives immediate healing in the form of armor. Two ways to play medic, similar to the two versions of medic in BF:V
@@lolbuster01 Squad reviving is slow, and I like it; it lets my campy squadmates come revive me when I get killed trying to revive an idiot. If you think that it ruined playing medic then I'm not really sure you've ever played a battlefield game because revives hardly ever happen ;)
The saddest thing is I doubt the corps will learn, most likely quit AAA and double down on mobile for easy money. Which means less AAA. Maybe a good thing if indies can take over that market with actual good games, or if the market will just disappear completely for mobile garbage.
@@cattysplat there are some decent mobile games. It's the monetization that's killing every type of game. They make design decisions that make no goddam sense just so they can monetize it.
Games have become big bussiness, and the major releases nowadays tend to have zero passion behind them. They're made by corporate suits to make money, everything else is secondary. Instead of by someone who has an idea they care about that might make them money. I recommend just abandoning mainstream game releases, they're a landfill now. Look to smaller games made with passion, like Peppered or The Haunted Chocolatier.
@@planescaped agreed. The days of bedroom coders creating the next big thing are few and far between. I guess this is a case of too much money moving into a young industry to soon. It is killing all originality and creativity in the AAA space. Elden Ring is the exception lol
When money is the only motivating force left behind our favorite franchises, "toxicity" is the only appropriate response. Complete and utter rejection of the product being sold is the only way to create change for future titles. If some EA exec wants to cry about the response then he should quit his job because he clearly sucks at it and history will surely repeat itself because of it.
most of battlefields audiency aswell as cod is "head empty shooty shoot" so making a good game really is not needed. What matters is day one and week one sales
@@philithegamer8265 this was the first game I pre-ordered. Nope. Never doing that shit again. Wish I would have refunded it before it was too late to. I'm over this fucking franchise
@@the_Googie While your statement is true, I sorely disagree. AAA studioes hungers for retainability since the initial game requires much more effort than subsequent updates/maps etc. They all want the continuous cash cow, like BF3, BF4 and BF1 and if they make a shit game then people will just leave quickly. We saw it with BF5 and we will see it with BF2042
Maybe I missed it in the video, but seems you left out how some of the features were left out intentionally (voice chat/scoreboard/etc). The devs blamed the playerbase for being 'toxic' and said that's why they *chose* not to put those features in. Not only did they miss those features, they blamed the players for it.
I don’t agree with the logic but I can see how they would say voice chat could be toxic but how the hell could a scoreboard be toxic it’s inanimate text lol what
@@jjcoola998 For a lot of younger people these days, the concept of competition is considered toxic. No scoreboard means you win or lose as a team, without feeling bad if you were the one who sucked and dropped the ball. Its a stupid idea, but then I am old.
Ah yes, because everyone knows that by insulting the fan base that gives you money, it always goes right. Just like the last time they told players that if they don’t like it don’t buy it, that definitely didn’t bite them in the ass.
Deluxe Edition, $120. NO SCOREBOARD, NO SERVERS, NO TEAM COMMUNICATION. Industry standards are termed "LEGACY" implementations, TO BE ADDED IN THE FUTURE. This wasn't a trainwreck. It was a publisher known for NOT PUTTING GAMERS in mind, painting a turd and selling it to consumers full price and pretend "love letter to the fans". The amount of entertaining youtube videos that it helped launched, that is a substantial success. No one can take that away from EA.
17:05 DICE can't legally remove the specialists from the game. DICE promised 4 new specialists coming in battle passes to people who bought the gold/ ultimate edition, so if they'll remove specialists, they'll be in legal trouble. I want to make this clear that I am NOT defending DICE here, but just pointing out a fact
DicE/A can always pull a Todd Howard like during the whole canvas bag ordeal and offer $5 in-game credit for their troubles. (Keep in mind that FO76 customers dropped twice as much money than this games top of the line asking price).
Doesnt matter at this point. The game can be legally sued in most countries as selling an unfinished product at full price, therefore players would all be allowed for a full refund as well as DICE/EA being in deep legal shit.
The specialist system is so fucking retarded. Its not just visual identification, go back to bf4, notice something weird, you don't speak the same language as the enemy. You hear a russian round the corner and you already know, oh fuck it's not a teammate. It also added so much immersion having your own character speak in the right language, you felt like you were really fighting for your faction, or at least it was a good bit of added immersion.
Similarly, this is why failed games are promised to be worked on and updated just long enough to get them out of legal liability. Case in point, Anthem. 2042 is going to get the bare minimum needed to cover liability issues and then they’re going to drop it off a cliff.
22:51 “some time to kills needed juggernaut levels of bullets to target down” He says as a plane nose dives into the mountain and bounces upwards completely un-phased lmao I love this
Please do. Battlefield has pretty healthy numbers now and as someone who played at launch, promptly quit because of the technical issues, and then returned a year later... this game is at the top of my currently played multiplayer rotation. It's SO much better than it used to be, my friends and I have a *riot* every time we play.
I got burned too many times by this series. I wait for the release and wait for the PLAYER'S feedback (not from the PAID HACKS). I am not going to pay to beta test an EA game ever again.
It sounds like the files for the BF4 OST got corrupted, or something. Especially the main theme, which just feels so overwhelming that you can't make out any real instrumentation or nuance. The worst part is that the composer can make good tracks. They worked on Chernobyl and Joker. But I feel like they were lead to believe that the tone would be much darker, causing it to clash with how matches actually go, and all the quips. It's like Overwatch but with the OST of Year 1-3 of Rainbow Six Siege. On top of that, they aren't good for games, which will have those songs play repeatedly, causing it to grate. Again, BF3 and 4 nailed the atmosphere, with the electronic aspects, while still making sure they were decent songs in the moment. Frostbite Pillars, After Science, Long Journey, the BF4 theme. Those tracks are iconic because of their composition, and their usage.
What's so offensive is they killed off battlefront 2 and battlefield V when they were hitting their stride to put everyone on 2042. This killed two great games and apparently is what all hands on deck to put out their best looks like. On a side stuff like this makes me appreciate siege more. Rocky launch but they turned it around and churn out consistent content and updates. Say what you will but it's probably the most consistent and highest playcount paid multiplayer game the last few years.
That pissed me off too. Star Wars Battlefront 2 was really shaping up to being a great game. With all the new heroes and maps along with the removal of the shitty lootboxes the game is good but the fact that they then just said "fuck it" and moved on to this dumpster of a Battlefield game just kills me. I love Star Wars and Battlefront 2 was on the road to redemption but EA put a land mine in its path.
@@badasscrusader it's funny enough 5 has more players than 2042. I'm having fun with it more than playing 2042 with at least two hours. Let this be a lesson to DICE
True. Siege's path may be pretty shaky going forward (If the talk of Ubisoft's financial problems/possible buyout is any indication), but it can't be denied that it made a massive comeback and really had a great thing going for a while.
Practically speaking, the map issue could have been somewhat mediated by introducing some kind of sector system, where a set number of squads could be set to fight in individual sectors, each sector having ''unique'' objectives to progress the battle. For example, sector A is in the mostly rural area of the map with 3 squads from each team max with the largest amount of vehicles, and the objective in the sector is deathmatch, winner in this sector gest more vehicle spawns to use in other sectors. Sector B is urban combat where the objective is basically to capture the flag, except with an intel briefcase. The winner here gets a limited map hack for other sectors. Whoever gets the most sectors until the timer expires, or has a 2/1 majority of sectors won, wins the game. Still wouldn't be a perfect solution, and definitely wouldn't address other issues.
I was absolutely mortified with BF2042’s end result, this was a game series where I met some of the most generous and fun loving people in my life that grew to be my friends both online and in real life. So when we saw this game, the gameplay, the trailers, the HYPE we were holding it in high regards only to get kicked in the balls by a company that would rather butcher everything it touches instead of listening to the fans. I won’t act like I didn’t have some fun in 2042 but that’s simply because you can make even the worst games fun with friends. I sincerely hope this isn’t the end for Battlefield but I can’t see it continuing in it’s current direction after the enormous backlash that 2042 has gotten. EA needs to WAKE UP and actually give a little extra care to their franchises, otherwise the gravy train will last a little longer until it hits a wall.
The one who needs to wake up is DICE. I'm fairly certain EA gives them a lot of creative freedom, and they used that creative freedom to go around implementing unnecessary controversial shit like those females with prosthetic arms running and sliding around in BF5, and now specialists and COD-like stuff and arcadey gameplay and season passes, etc to try and get COD's audiences + all around poor design choices like the exact same looking damn specialists on both team. As long as a company can makes a fuck ton of money and has the potential to make another gold mine like APEX Legend, I'm 99% certain EA don't care. People keep blaming EA for everything but they don't realize it's DICE's internal management team is the one likely fucking shit up.
2042 didn't just die, it was murdered, no, slaughtered in equal part by the clueless/careless publisher and executives, as well as the inept silicon valley hipster devs that thought they had their finger on the pulse of BF fans.
You have to understand just how malicious EA is not just to customers, but also their developers. They wring companies, devs, employess, whatever; completely dry. DICE just had the misfortune to be hardier than most for EA to empty completely. They only exist to appease shareholders. Think COD but with none of the benefits of it being handled by 3 different studios, but the same pace.
@@auroranovae4493 same price? Bf2042 is way better than the newest COD, IMO. What benefits of being handled by 3 studios though, cos Bf2042 is a more ambitious game than COD, I feel like they put more resources towards it, than COD received. The graphics spread out over those giant maps with that many players, while it didnt work the way they thought it would, there's still tons of work gone into it. Misguided work. But damn, I played the new COD for a week or two and just couldn't continue. Halo is boring. small studio shooters like ww3, honestly, sucks. Everything sucks lol, but I still prefer bf2042 over any shooter out right now. Battlebit looks fun once they get the test servers back up I might migrate to that.
@@JunkBondTrader You're entitled to your own opinion, but I could not disagree more about BF2042. Everything about it feels cheap and terrible, ESPECIALLY on launch. All of the guns were garbage (except that one SMG that outperformed rifles in accuracy for some reason), the vehicles were an unbalanced mess, the 64 vs 64 added absolutely nothing and even probably hurt the game in the end as they had to try and balance, make maps, try to optimize and do many other design decisions around 64v64. Talking about maps, these are the most boring and terrible maps I've ever played in, in any shooter. Hell, most community maps in TF2 have more sensible design than every single one in BF2042, and they were made by some randos. Out of anything in that game, the maps are probably the most infuriating thing design-wise I have seen, and that is not easily fixable, they have to go through all of those maps and remake them from the ground up if they want them to be any fun. I CANNOT believe that some people at Dice didn't play these maps and go "Wow, this is absolute trash! We should redo them", it's just mind bogglingly bad stuff from that team. You don't design a map in a game with snipers, vehicles and helicopters with just absolute flat areas, no chokepoints and no cover, yet this is 90% of the areas in those maps! Sorry, rant over. But man did this game piss me off.
@@JunkBondTrader comparing it too bf4. They didnt even give us 1/8 of the content of that game. No static weaponry, only 3 guns per class? How the hell was hazard mode work with the lack of equipment available to the player? They spent more time putting muha female player models in game. If they just focused on generic bf4 infantry. They could of freed up talent from that!
Watching this just makes me so depressed about the state of Battlefield. I started with Bad Company 1 and was blown away by the destruction in the game. I was like "one minute this building has a wall I can take cover behind, and the next minute it can be blown up completely!?" When BC2 was announced, I was so beyond hyped for it and it exceeded even my wildest expectations. Seeing Battlefield in its current state just makes me so sad. Some of my best gaming memories came from BC2 and the fun I had with friends, coordinating attacks and pushes on the objective. Now it barely resembles Battlefield at all, looking more like a parody of Battlefield than a proper Battlefield game.
This is what happens when a developer haemorrhages the majority of its talent and thinks that chasing a trend will make up for the shortfall. Add EA into the equation and the results are predictable to everyone - apart from the developer and the publisher. DICE are like BioWare these days - just a name retained for EA's marketing, the actual creative spark has long gone out.
When the marketing team thinks that they are absolute by determining deadlines according to their calendar and it all backfires. The idea of scrapping Battlefield 6 and recycle its concept to make 2042 as something that fits their agenda might be possibly one of their ideas aswell. Big company marketeers are widely known to aim at maximizing profits at all costs while neglecting every other factor, especially the newest generation: they somewhat love to project their own ideals as if they would 100% work, but projecting ideals is mentally like a one-direction way communication, as they mostly avoid any sort of feedback (which ends like a double standard towards their profit maximization results to the very company in the long term).
These studio's have bled all the people that had talent, that had vision. And under a corporate structure like EA the personalities that would have been able to steer the company into making a good game would never flourish, so when the old guard left there was nobody to replace them in the management but yes-men and ass-kissers. And like a ship without a captain the crew that's left still goes trough the same motions, mindlessly making the same game over and over because that's just the kind of game their studio makes. But the final products is a mess, scattershot design, meandering everywhere, like a ship without a anyone at the helm they're still going but never getting anywhere. I said the same about 343 Studios and Halo Infinite, the only people involved with the development that had a definitive 'vision' of what they were making where the marketing and monetization people. Everyone else was just coming in to make their hours and fulfil contractual obligations.
Player: "Wow, this game I payed at least $60 for is a severe downgrade from not one but TWO previous titles and there are game breaking bugs that happen constantly." Developer: "Jeez guys, these expectations are brutal! We do have to sleep you know."
What they really meant is that "yes we DEVELOPERS FIXING BUGS need to sleep, do you realize how brutal your expectations are for us to fix this enormous mess our colleagues made before dumping the project on us after launch?!"
As someone who was a diehard battlefield fan from 2, 1943, BC1, BC2, 3 and 4, it's really a shame what has happened to DICE. Absolutely ridiculous. They literally thought removing a scoreboard was a good design decision. I used to build tools for the community for free because I loved the franchise so much. Battlefield was literally the franchise that made me want to join the games industry. How far they've fallen. It's almost like DICE cannot understand their core customers.
I used to love this game. It breaks my heart... I still watch news in this from time to time to see what's up with it. They always manage to reaffirm my disappointment with the series.
Nobody loses if they can’t see the score. It’s the same reason CoD removed deaths from the scoreboard. But at least you could see other stats. It’s pathetic the way the industry is heading.
Or also taking their core players for granted and assuming they will never leave no matter what they do to spite him in the process of trying to get players from other franchises to play
It fucking sucks dude, I've enjoyed literally every Battlefield game EXCEPT 2042. They weren't my favorites but sometimes I still load up BF5 and BF1 for that period gameplay when I'm feeling an urge. I uninstalled 2042 last year and literally haven't had a single urge to reinstall since, that's insane.
The second I saw specialists and no classes I turned my nose up at it. This isn’t a battlefield game. The entire point is to immerse yourself as just another soldier.
BF2042 is a straight up tragedy. Never thought we would go into a new generation of consoles and get a rushed product but here we are. I feel Babylon's Fall will eventually make it's way to this video series.
The specialist thing really got to me. Like I understand that it makes creating skins easier and more profits but, like you said, if your core audience didn't ask for (actually wanting it to be removed) how do you expect to make a profit??
Corporate heads look at industry trends, they don't look at real human opinions and feedback. Well, the bad ones do that. Two guesses if EA is good or bad.
make a good complete game that incorporates specialists in a way that either allows or even enhances the Battlefield Formula. y'know stuff EA doesn't want to do. Because it might hamper profit. For ex. Make specialist classes who can only use certain weapons and certain abilities 'Medic' class Ops can only us ARs and heal for example 'Engineer' class ones have anti-vehicle or anti-personel such as vehicular repair, rockets, mines etc. and some have special items like turrets, deployable heavy weapons (50 BMG deployable etc.) Or 'hybrid' operators - like a Recon operator who has exclusive access to the only 20mm rifle, allowing them to take out all non-tank vehicles, but still requires other tanks and actual engineers to take out tanks, and the 20mm rifle has its own downsides (slowest rounds with the highest drop, and takes away any other sniper option - you're forced to use it if you play this character alongside a sidearm.) there's ways it could theoretically work, but EA isn't interested in the why and how, just the possibility (i.e. profit) not even that it's better, just that EA was more interested in making the square peg go into the round hole, rather than use woodsmithing tools to make the square peg round enough to fit. As well, they want money - so they theoretically want all specialists to be viable, so all weapons on all specialists - they have no interest in having 'specialists' who can only sniper because that locks all purchase options from players who don't snipe, so just make it so everyone can use them.
@@ShudowWolf Even if 2042 had designed the specialists better, I don't think it would make much difference. The game would still be a hero shooter, a subgenre that has been slowly becoming less and less popular. Indeed there hasn't really been a really successful hero shooter since Apex. After all, the whole appeal of the pre-release marketing for 2042 was going to be a "return to form", but the specialists system was the exact opposite of that.
This was the Battlefield game that I was most excited about since BF4. A return to modern era battlefield sandbox. I even did the blasphemous act of pre-ordering it. I was excited god dammit. But then open beta rolled in, and I quickly realised that I was duped. Cancelled pre-order and watched the destruction of the franchise from the balcony.
@@thecompanioncube4211 the fact that BF4 and BF1 (and even BF3) have significant playerbases that just won't let those games die shows the level of quality those games reached.
for me, the worst thing about this was the company complaining that people didn't like their product and said and I quote "these are harsh expectations" BRO. HOW IS WANTING A PROPER WORKING GAME WITH 5 COMPANIES. 5 COMPANIES HARSH EXPECTATIONS???
The best part about that is that Battlefield 1942 was developed by, (depending on the source) anywhere between 14-40 people and even with its many issues is a fully functional video game at the very least. They couldn't meet the "Harsh Expectations" set by a team of less than 40, twenty years prior, with all five of those companies combined.
@@Killerduck0213 games are becoming more costly and time consuming to make, I doubt battlefield 1942 would be able to be made by the same group nowadays to a modern standard but I get your point
This is a gen z Era excuse that all corporations are using. You either don't like their product because something is wrong with you or you're just a troll. That's what, especially EA, goes with. It couldn't be that their product is just shit.
Trying to get rid of the scoreboard has been a very annoying trend with highly funded western shooters. It was intentionally left out, not forgotton. Scoreboards keep being put in nutered states where data is ofcuscated. "Takedowns" instead of kills so assists are worth the same, hiding death counts, or just abandoning all of it for a generic "score".
@@TheSlashd0t I guess its not politically correct? kills/deaths and so on might trigger you, and you are not a mature adult who can deal with the fact that you are not good at the game. Dice is a swedish studio with new people (the veterans left) so guess what: you have younger devs and game directors that want to have a safe space and think of themselves as protectors.
@@TheSlashd0t its because they want everyone playing the game to have a participation trophy so by hidding your K/D and just showing a score they like : nobody feel like they bad
@@andreiasimov33 they want people who suck at the game to buy it, not refund it, and ideally put money into micro transactions. Why is it so hard for Epic Gamerz to think out of a culture war based paradigm? Do you realize these are businesses? They care about sales before anything else. The so called culture war stuff is literally just advertising and to avoid litigation. I shouldn't wish this on anyone, but you people should really work a job where you have to prepare materials for investors, potential acquirers or merger targets or anyone else who actually cares how the business is run. You'll work yourself to death on call 24/7 and all you'll do related to "going woke" is throw in some BS DEI statement from last year's 10-K no one even read.
@@andreiasimov33 It's customer manipulation / psychology of spending. Same reason you don't see (as many) ads over TH-cam content that corps deem negative or uncomfortable: On a very large and rough scale, people are less likely to spend money when they associate the product with any negative feeling. This doesn't make much sense for a game, especially not a relatively competitive squad-based shooter, but it's exactly the way EA has been operating for years.
The map size issue would be improved significantly if people could summon basic non-combat vehicles like bikes or ATVs to speed up the transit across the empty landscape.
Or you know actually MAKE THE MAPS not be so fucking big in the first place that they look like freaking Battle Royale maps, even Act Man was saying they were too big and used Orbital's map as the example in his footage, it was even called a MEDIUM-SIZED map, if someone is saying a MEDIUM-SIZED map is too big how much of a difference could a small-sized map and a large-sized map be. 1942 had what I'd say is the perfect map size for all of its maps, heck they would even make sure you never went too far out of bounds especially when the map was surrounded by water as you couldn't really stay in the water for too long otherwise you would start losing health (which I would always think that there was a shark or two taking bits out of you until you either got out of the water or died.
When a "gaming journalist" outlet doesn't want to piss a publisher off, they ALWAYS give them a 7 out of 10. That's just standard practice now. I don't even bother listening to them anymore tbh. There's nothing "critical" about their scoring. Even IGN admitted as much when they began their practice of not averaging their breakdown score into their final product score. It's like really? How could you score a game across the board all 6s yet somehow give them a 9 as your "final" score? Just blah.... And I'm starting to wonder if I was one of the few that saw the trailer for this game and thought "This is a trainwreck begging to be criticized." There was no way I was paying for it after I saw the trailer. Nothing in it screamed "Battlefield" to me. They really should take a page out of CoD, put back in a story mode, and if they're insisting on not basing things on historical wars or events, at least utilize the modern geographical landscape of the world, along with the current technology, and craft a narrative from there. At least maybe build a lore with the "Operators" you're trying to make people buy into before shoving them into our faces? It's an idea anyway.
Honestly, i dont know if battlefield 2042 was ever alive in the first place. They basically shipped out a dying corpse and waited for people to find the body.
Have we now, at long last, finally learned the dangers of preordering, and the lies corporations will tell just to get your money in their pockets? Or do people _still_ think that DICE was "well ahead of schedule" on all of this? Stop preordering games. Don't give companies a cent of your money until reviewers have had the opportunity to find out just how bad the game is. And if it's not up to your standards, don't buy it anyway with the fantasy of "it'll get better in time". Don't reward this "games as a service" garbage, or soon enough it'll be _all we'll have._
Say it louder for the people in the back. This shit's been going on for 10 years and anyone with a better memory than a fruitfly can read off a fucking _list_ of games that released in such a shoddy/controversial state that they've become notorious for it. Diablo 3, Simcity, Aliens: Colonial Marines, Assassin's Creed Unity, Batman: Arkham Knight, Battlefront 2, Fallout 76 to just name a few. Hell just look at how many Battlefield titles released with more bugs than a bloated corpse floating in a fetid swamp.
The most insulting part of this is how they marketed this as a love letter to the fans, and delivered a giant fuck you. Codfield Apexorant 2042 is a dumpster fire. Im glad they were at least kind enough to put out an open beta so I could find out the game was horribly designed before I ever bought it.
What I watch for during development is how many features the new games in a series like Battlefield are missing compared to older games in the series. My benchmark for the Battlefield franchise is Battlefield 2142 - which also was a half-baked flop but it at least launched in a mostly playable state.
i knew it would flop when i saw the trailer where they recreated the guy who jumped out of a jet - destroyed another with an rpg- and jumped back to his. that wasn't "love letter to the fans" that was pure chaos and no direction at all
AGREED. I am very glad, it's the first BF I have not purchased since I started playing BF3 and fell in love with it. I also love BFV. I also love BF1 (you get the jist)
I second that. A blessing in disguise. The funniest part was seeing the mainstream sites claiming it was just a beta and it would get ironed out. What a bunch of jokesters.
@@ZeroHxC07 for real. I remember playing bf4 at launch which was horribly buggy, and still having so much fun with it. I played maybe 6 hours of 2042 in the beta and the whole time I was sitting there thinking to myself, "what the fuck even is this. Where's the battlefield part of battlefield?" The worst part is that I was so excited for this game and it just let me down so hard. To this day BF4 is still my favorite multiplayer shooting game, and to see it fall so far actually makes me sad.
This has been a long time coming. No game has completely devastated me as much as the failure of 2042 in recent years. I've been a long time fan of the franchise and for me I was in love with all of the releases all the way to BF1 but I noticed a deep drop off in quality with BF:V. I thought that they were returning to form when they announced they were going back to a modern setting akin to the bad company and bf3/bf4 offerings. I thought that's what Dice and BF did best so I was confident they'd be able to pull it off. Obviously the games always release like crap and there's always a scramble for patches and fixes but 2042 was something different. The game at it's core was lacking far more lacking than any other recent BF. I'm truly bothered by the state of this game and I feel like the Dice I loved so much growing up is on it's way out unless there's an incredible turn around but I have to say after BF:V and 2042 releasing back to back and being lackluster to say the least I've given up majority of the hope I'd have in a future title. I've lost my faith in the brand and now I'm a wait and see gamer when it comes to Dice games and they'd have to prove themselves to me all over again.
I imagine, much like Bioware, that the DICE you loved is long gone. The name stays the same, but if the people who made that name leave, then it becomes nothing more than a skinsuit worn by EA to capitalize on brand recognition.
I feel ya. After these disappointments. I don’t feel the need to buy games day 1 anymore. I will wait too. See if the game lives. Or dies out pathetically. I have a feeling this one will die pathetically. Too much wrong at its core.
I will forever until the end of time. Be mad at specialists. the last star in the universe will burn out and my existence will be forgotten for eons to come. and my hatred will still be felt in the outer reaches of space.
Not to diverge but: You know what the worst thing about being an F-Zero fan is? We know even if we get another entry it won't be what we want, because Nintendo's stated the reason they don't go back to old series like that is because they don't want to do so unless they can find a way to reinvent it. That approach obviously works with widely defined adventure games like Mario and Zelda and Metroid, but not so much when it's a RACING game, a genre where people want the next entry to be pretty much all the same fundamentals but marginally improved.
The worst part is the arcade racer has been dead for over a decade now and was dying years before that. You've got Mario Kart and Sonic racing, both of which are almost a decade old now too. That's it.
37:22 you have to remember as well, bf4 only came out on steam a few years ago, before that it was only out on origin, which means the vast VAST majority of people who have and play the game will play through origin and not steam
@@MooncricketsInc ok? i never said you didnt? i made the argument that using steam charts to map out bf4s playerbase is in accurate due to most people not owning the game through steam, so your comment does litterally nothing to contradict that? what is the point of your reply in the first place?
@@vissermatt1058 It’s a loss. Almost 96% of players lost from launch till now, even “if” they give it a slight recovery, it’ll be gone shortly after. They’ve effectively killed the franchise and I hope DICE all together is shuttered. Absolute embarrassment to even put their name on it.
I agree to an extend, because he did one on overwatch which I still play regularly and wouldn't consider dead at all. I never have to wait longer than a minute for mystery hero's or quick play.. and maybe a cpl min tops for dmg in competitive. This game on the other hand I never even considered buying after I played the godawful beta.. and now there's less than 1000 people playing it on steam. Subjectively, overwatch may have been in critical condition to some.. but this game was objectively DOA
As a software and hobby game dev my bet is the following: It was first planned as a battle royal and thus the engine, servers, the netcode etc. needed to support more players and more action. They decided to rewrite a large amount of their gameplay code in a more data oriented fashion (ECS), which is the only explanation I have for why things are broken that have worked for the last 3+ games. Or for the new game they threw away a large part of the gameplay framework for whatever other reason. And because management and shareholders don't understand the magnitude of the work to be done and maybe some critical people jumped ship they dug themselves a grave. They bet on people being more forgiving and ironing the bugs out over time but because the core gameplay loop is more or less broken, esp. compared to the high art these guys usually produce, dung hit the metal propeller.
@@phoenix1453 Shareholders want games that makes a profit fast, battle royale games were some of the most profitable games in the last few years. That’s the same reason why they tend to prefer multiplayer games over single player games, it’s easier to implement things like micro transactions and battle passes in multiplayer games than in single player ones. EA is controlled by its shareholders, they have to make everything with that in mind (it lead to multiple failures) so if shareholders want a battle royale set in the battlefield universe, EA will make a battle royale set in the battlefield universe.
@@davidinass because we shouldn't shut up and accept when a company goes full greedy mode and delivers something like this Edit: In my view, death treats and this kinda of things are out of the line. Now, wanting to play what you r paying full price for and receiving this kinda of thing, is just a disaster.
@@davidinass that whole all publicity is good publicity isn't real. Just because we talk about if doesn't make people flock to it. Because if that was the case the number that back the fact that it's ass would be different
This was a disaster waiting to happen. The writing was on the wall since BF3 release. We used to write essays on the official DICE forums over the last 10 years or so, highlighting a lot of these issues and our concerns. How the studio was moving away from what Battlefield was as a franchise, how they continuously failed to learn from past mistakes: releasing games with the same bugs, gameplay issues and poor map design (infantry vs vehicle experience was always hit and miss). We pleaded, we were genuinely passionate about the franchise. Not anymore. After BF V failure I just stopped caring. I belonged to a lose community of diedhard BF fans. We used to play BF together for more than a decade, most of us played it since BF 1942. Almost all of those people just moved on.
BFV was AMAZING, as was BF3, 4 and 1, loved them all, I even felt Hardline was underrated lol. 2042 is the first BF I have not purchsed since I started. BF3, BF4, 1 and V were all slightly different and you simply can't please EVERYONE. If I had my way I would have made changes to every one of them, but I can't have a game tailored specifically for me so there will always be some things we like, some we don't. Unfortunately 2042 is a shit game and that's really the upshot. Not to mention, the moment you force me to play vs M+K players with my CONTROLLER, is the moment you lose my money. Bad game, horrid experience, unenjoyable, and this is before mentioning the bugs. One of the most ridiculous decisions made was to change the 64 player experience, the reason it was a ridiculous decision was because there was NOTHING LACKING about the 64 player experience lol the maps were already HUGE. I really could make a list.... PS The gunplay is VILE compared to BF1 and V.... PPS they took away the server browser so they could use SBMM and that tries to compensate for mixing M+K and Controller uses allowing for Crossplay (MONEY). Online FPS gaming is dead to me as evrywhere will be going on this direction now.
I literally wouldn't play this game if it was entirely free - from a huge, HUGE BF fan. I am SO GRATEFUL BF1 and BFV are still so active. I play BFV a lot still. 32:00 into the video - I knew all this, and said all this very early on and got shouted down by fanboy morons. It's SO FUNNY when all the things I said keep getting spoken about in the exact same vein by reputable youtubers and players LOL. Running..... And running... And running............. AND RUNNING, die, repeat. Uninstall.
I miss BF2 with all of its great expansions.. Good times. The original passion is gone, and the originals devs have apparently pretty much all moved out of DICE. The company we (old school players since BF1942, BF2 or the original 2142) knew is pretty much gone. We should start following developers and not companies.
Can't remember the last time a game died almost immediately after birth. I had enjoyed some bits of 2042 but the open fields to cover and the check points on roof tops where enemies where spawning in tanks just killed any sense of enjoyment. Always needing to find a new match after each game had me playing the same map 2 or 3 times. It felt very underwhelming for a game that was only multilayer they lacked alot of content limited weapons a handful of maps felt like I was getting dlc quantity for a full price value.
I remember playing Vampire the Masquerade Bloodlines on release and just getting to Pisha and her questline when I read on gamefaqs that Troika was dead...
maybe I'm just being dramatic, but seeing what Battlefield 2042 turned into was devastating to me, even borderline heartbreaking. Since I was in H.S playing BC2, it's been my favorite series ever. it was so different than anything else and it offered an experience no other game to this day has been able to match. So to see them take a tried and true formula and completely dump it for what is essentially a copy and paste system from a bunch of other games was a sign that now even Battlefield has fallen. This genuinely makes me sad man
They really did f up the Battlefield series big time. I don’t think it will ever come back from this honestly. It might even be the last Battlefield game. Only way it’s getting better is it gets sold to someone who gives a shit about the title.
@@whatfreedom7 i told allot of my friends the same thing. In the hands of the current publishers/devs its not going to recover. I read an article a while back claiming that they are going to make another one close to the originals, then i read that they are revamping the Specialist system which is like...it just feels that devs genuinely do not give a shit about the games they make anymore, and wether that be laziness, lack of creative idea, lack of quality control or even possibly having their hands tied by the publisher, its hearbreaking. While i do think youre right on giving it to someone else, i think alternatively we as the community are gonna have to do our part and send a message by not buying their shit anymore.
Man, I remember having already a really bad feeling when I played the Beta. I tried it in the ps4 and my brother was hyping the game saying that it was so cool even though it had some problems. I played it and took me 5 matches to see how bad this game was going to be. 3 of my "matches" were my character spawning below the map and not being able to join the game and the other 2 were a complete mess. Shooting enemies was not being registered, weapons were not spawning, flying cars, the drone started spinning everywhere making it impossible to control and way more glitches than I wanted to see. Even with all that my biggest problem was that the game felt bland. Classes felt plain and boring, maps barely interacted with player actions, vehicles felt like plastic models, cringe ass voice lines, gameplay resembling more of a CoD model, etc. After the beta I convinced my brother to wait for reviews and yeah, we saved ourselves $60
Some things to note, Bad Company had a campaign, also nobody seems to have cared about the singleplayer being missing. The main thing that really killed the game was the lack of destruction, mirror-astheticed characters for both teams, unoptimization, and above all else- specialists.
I hate that they abandoned Battlefield V for this. Despite its problems, V had a solid foundation of good feeling gunplay, movement, and presentation. It only had technical issues and a lack of content but it was nowhere near the level of 2042. According to leaks, the next scheduled major update for V would have included the Eastern Front, which undoubtedly would have had an even greater revitalising effect than the Pacific update did.
The reality is EA measured it's success on initial sales and aimed to make the BR mode a big deal, which ofcourse it flopped coming like a year after launch. BFV was barebones at launch and had disastrous marketing, I doubt it would ever have been worth investing in EA's eyes.
The question I ask myself: what are they going to do to compensate the people that paid 40$ extra for 4 season passes - there’s no way this game is going to get 4 seasons worth of content.
May the cherished memories of the glory days of battlefield 3 and 4 live on. From your metro and locker meat grinds to your first jeep stuff kill, to your whole squad out flanking and taking an objective together. Games of fun that created memories of fun... rest in piece battlefield. I will miss you, old friend.
In BF4, me and 2 friends used to take the basic Transport chopper, I was the Pilot (and rather good at it), one was mounting one of the two side Miniguns and another was constantly fixing me as an engineer IF I got hit. We were a flying fortress and were in the same chopper for the whole round more than a few times and got sooo many points from kills, conquests, teamspawns etc.
@@brumbarde6817 that was how me and a friend played. i was usually flying an attack heli and i was pretty damn good at it and he would nail people with the gun from accross the map. multiple rounds where we never died.
First time channel viewer here: loved the style of this video and even though I already knew a lot of this stuff, it was a joy to listen to while working. Brilliant work!
Playing battlefield to me is like an abusive relationship. I remember the good times we had and that’s what keeps getting me suckered back into giving it more chances. It continues to give me promises that “this time will be different” and “I’ll right my wrongs” and then when i commit to it again, I continue to realize that what I fell in love with is no longer there. I know that I need it let it go but it’s so hard when I know full well what it can because of how it used to be
I remember saying when they announced that extra studio’s would join development it could only mean one thing; things weren’t going well. You don’t bring in more studio’s if development is on schedule.
Even now. They can literally just remove specialists, go back to classes, add a server browser etc. but they wont. They're still clinging to the specialist idea because they want to sell skins for them. what good are skin sales when nobody is here to buy them? DICE deserves this failure.
sadly they can't. The whole game is build around the specialists. You can't just take out such a core mechanic and place another in it. It won't work. I wont go into detail, but doing this would need additional developed time of AT LEAST one year. There is soo much more behind it than u think
I hate that every dev thinks they can No Man's Sky their game, just because one studio fixed their awful launch does not mean that you can drop an awful game to hope to fix it
If you're old like me you remember Battlefield 2142 in 2006 had a climate refugee based backstory as well. The main differences being it was an approaching ice age and BF2142 was actually a good game.
One of the reasons why im against "Games as a service" and "Early Access" as of whole, its either an excuse to milk more money out of you or to release an unfinished product and use the first wave of players as Beta testers.
I was in the beta in July 2021 you said you couldn't confirm. I have the email if you'd like it. It had huge watermarked play ID's across the screen that was painful to play with the overlay. There were massive server login issues and could only be played in the middle of the night or you'd get booted or unable to login at all.
One overlooked fact is the percentage of the playerbase that consistently, religiously, traditionally(which is a large percent), who have consistently made excuse for and supported the downhill spiral of this once great franchise is just as much to blame as the publisher. No publisher would push a product they know wont sell, their motivation for this level of disrespect to fans is fueled and supported by fans themselves, you cant know something is bad or unproven, throw money at it knowing the reputation and ignoring the signs, then get upset with the obvious result. IF the data EA had on the sales reflected market failure due to the consumers lack of faith and reluctance to buy into preorders and early weeks sales this game would not have failed the way it did. Not making excuses for EA, but Battlefield wont be the only death if things keep going the way its going.
@@margotpreston basically, what needs to change is the way people value their time and money as consumers, we give away a little and in the numbers it's given away in amounts a lot. Imagine what would happen if we used that same energy to help each other in times of need. Would be money well spent in that direction instead of giving it to a company that has no respect or care for the consumer.
this is a problem with the whole gaming industry at this point. as long as people fall victim to the hype train and keep giving money to these shitty corporations, the more and more we'll see this happening. i can't wrap my head around the fact that people will complain about broken shitty games will still give money to the companies behind said broken shitty games (e.g. fucking EA). they're getting what they deserve i guess.
Good point. I knew we were in trouble when they released an entirely CGI trailer and everyone lost their minds declaring "Battlefield is back baby!". I was just scratching my head... and DICE was probably wrapping up development because it looked like an easy sale based on Uber hype that was based on nothing...
I rarely want to commend battlefield games since lately they've been shit, but BFV's urban maps were actually a good standout with how well they were structured. there was always adquiate cover and countertops/buildings to hide inside. tanks felt good to play but infantry could survive
@@Goldrunner1169 I never played it because of the reviews but picked it up about a year and a half ago and it's fun as hell. Can tell if bf4 or bf5 is my favorite anymore
Every TH-camr that defended this shit and told people they’re dumb for not liking it should apologize for ever entertaining the idea that this was a good game
The first thing I noticed when entering the game upon release was that there were like 4 more guns in the main game than the beta. The lack of weapons in comparison to a game like battlefield 4 was absolutely astonishing. 2 LMGs upon release? Seriously?
They literally could have downgraded the graphics a bit and copy pasted all guns from most previous games and slap on new sound design and a few more effects and have much more content
It's really frustrating that DICE insists on checking off every trendy box from shooters I avoid in favor of Battlefield. Battlefield has the appeal to be its own thing but... Money.
It’s funny how when they’re marketing and talking about the game they know EXACTLY what players want. Then when it comes to making it they do almost the exact opposite.
The "it's an older build" excuse is used any time players notice that a "beta" (really just a promotional demo) has a lot of issues. They use that excuse every time, and every time, it's proven to mean nothing as the release build always has the same issues that were noticed during the beta.
Another of our favorite franchises, seemingly on the ropes... :(. I hope you guys enjoyed this video, thanks for the support (apologies about the mic quality being a bit inconsistent I was in an airbnb apartment!) Thanks to Micro Center for sponsoring this video!
Micro Center wants to offer new customers a free 240 GB SSD! (see the link in the description):
○ micro.center/a1bb41
○ New Customers Only; No purchase necessary; Limited time offer; Valid in-store
only; Limit 1 coupon per-customer
"Online only" for me sounds like "Macrotransactions"
I wish I could participate but I'm not American. Still, they sound pretty neat.
Making my day I tested positive of COVID-19 so it's good to watch while in isolation.
Microcenter in Houston is awesome and has benefitted from the final death of Fry's.
The fact that EA touched this make me ask if there was any goodwill for this franchise from the start. At this point are there really any players out there still willing to eat outta Everyones Asshole
Congrats to DICE on the successful world record speed run to get a Death of a Game episode!
I’m surprised GeekSlayer didn’t bring up the fact that EA pulled all the DICE developers from working on Battlefront 2 for BF2042.
The fact that the outcome was as bad as this really angers me that EA would be so bad at managing their properties.
What’s worse is that Battlefront 2 was doing so well!
Ever since the Celebration Edition, the games playerbase was skyrocketing, and EA pulled the plug just a few months later, even though we were supposed to get even more content!
SCREW EA!!!!
Hahaha!!!
Low%
Definitely not glitchless though
Placing all of the blame on DICE likely isn't fair to them given that EA also had a hand in the rushed byproduct that 2042 was.
@@HB-fq9nn On that note, they also halted the development of the newest NFS title, as they pulled Criterion to work on this fine mess
how to be a pro dice dev:
- go in direction nobody wants
- have playtesters tell you they're not good decisions
- have playtesters tell you the game needs another year of development at least
- ignore playtesters completely
- release jank broken unfinished game
- game flops
- blame reddit and halo infinite
more like be a dev for EA as this also applies to a lot of other games from them. Bioware had a similar experience, the Need for Speed Series aswell. Fifa had launch issues on release for years. Its not just DICE, its EA. Dont buy their stuff before you know its good.
How to be incompetent in general really.
The dev cycle of this one really reads like it was made by inexperienced douche's straight off the turnip truck.
@@invalid8774 the Devs don't get a choice, you either do what marketing and the accounting departments ask or get fired.
Completely forgot about them calling out Halo as a reason for the failure, did give me a chuckle (especially with how Halo Infinite is atm)
@@invalid8774 the last game EA released that i played was nfs heat, which is after a year it launched, used and on promo by the store. serously, i played bf2042 beta and i could see by a mile that it would flop really hard, i didnt even bother to think if i would buy this game.
The whole “love letter to the fans” angle DICE tried to push really, really, really stings when you see how out of touch with the fans this game actually was.
In a way it worked and managed to get a good number of people to do preorders.
@@77wolfblade
*ANGRY*
@@77wolfblade I guess people weren’t expecting to be straight up lied to lol
“They wouldn’t just lie to us would they?”
Yes, yes they would. And they’d do it again.
@@xadadax1 this happens when people put too much faith in corporations.
@@77wolfblade Honestly at this point people who preorder games are just part of the problem most of the time and I've gotten to the point where I believe they even deserve to get shit games. People need to learn not to preorder and they still can't even do that. I avoid AAA games nowadays so I don't really care, but it's still somewhat sad to see games I once loved end up like this.
Playing as a random soldier makes you feel like YOU are in the field... when you play as a named specialist you are playing as a avatar of someone else. It doesn't feel the same.
Not as bad as halo infinite lol
BF 2042- The Clone War.
Nothing like seeing 40 of the same person on the battlefield
Yea like most fps games you play as an unidentified unnamed person it’s you. When you play a named character it’s the characters story. Not the same feeling from a battlefield experience
It's still kind of mind boggling how much they managed to do things wrong with this. It's one of those times too that you know even while playing the beta, things are just wrong to the very core of the game. There's disappointing or same-y AAA releases, and there's these complete disasters that not even being a juggernaut IP is enough to carry through things. Shame really, people already had low expectations after the lukewarm BFV and they had the advantage to easily win people over again but missed the mark entirely.
Like I thought Battlefield V failed hard but WOOOOOW 2042 really shouldn't have taken that as a challenge.
I'm actually really glad that they offered a beta so that I could make a profound decision on not buying the game. The trailers and stuff that was shown beforehand were amazing.
I would be saying "here's maybe hoping for a Bad Company 3" but I doubt that any studio under EA could do it justice.
@@Wrathful_Scythe That is at least one silver lining of it yeah. I went from cautious optimism from the initial reveal trailers to downright "yeah this is bad". I know some friends who actually still pre-ordered anyway and wasted $100+ on the big deluxe editions, kind of crazy too how hype can still overtake sometimes despite having a clear view of something beforehand. Even the coolest feature BF Portal was far from enough to give the game any sort of redeeming quality.
This shows just how out of touch with the community DICE is.
EA no longer concerns itself with making good games. The company has been on a steady decline for years. EA won't be around much longer.
Sid Meier was right. This is what happens when they are so concerned with adding ways to monetize the game they fail to make a game thats actually polished and fun
Also Sid Meier: *releases Civilization Beyond*
Though point taken that it wasn't a particularly great game, it wasn't concerned with monetisation afaik.
Civ6 however.... Dlc Central.... But also a polished game.
Shame Civ games need an expansion or 2 to be "finished" though...
Strangely I was just thinking of him when this video began for some reason.. I’m personally new to the series.. I’m not much of a FPS guy but being I’m a huge WWI historian I had to check out Battlefield 1 Revolution
@@WPMarshall civ 6 is is a very solid game, just happens to be 500 dollars lol
Sad how true it is for 2042. Skins for operators and removes class system, 64v64+32v32+Tarkov+portal catches headlines and ruins development. No singleplayer. No standard community tools(fucking scoreboard). Lacking game modes like Rush. And egregious bugs on launch. A damn shame
2042 was the kind of "Love Letter" you get from a cheating spouse telling you she's been cheating with Randall for over a year, she's moving to Costa Rica, burnt all your clothes, and gives you a sh*tty papercut just before you throw in the trash.
"Don't be sad. This is just how things work out sometimes."
Feels like a mantra for this game. They dropped the bag HARD, especially when the goal was basically open. I remember the hype when the trailer came out.
Dice: "You will still have a narrative driven world in multiplayer"
Specialist ingame: "A good days work but I'm not one to brag" while the earth is fucked up
The goal was wide open and they still somehow managed to score an own goal.
It really would have been so easy. If they'd just made BFV with modern military hardware and player models you could actually see and called it BF 2042, I'd have actually bought the game.
I never understood the hype over a trailer.
@@MrKfloz I guess people were reading between the lines, or at least though they were.
From how it was structured (with the focus on "battlefield moments", customizability, and mechanical callbacks like the jet scene), the trailer strongly suggested that DICE understood why people play Battlefield games, and that this was going to be a simple, mechanically-played-safe, return-to-what-works sort of game.
Except, of course, the end product was anything but that. It's like the trailer and the game were built by different teams. Or, alternatively, that the end product was just _that_ badly compromised by money-hungry trend-chasing execs dictating terrible design paradigms.
If this is DICE's "Love Letter" to the fans of the franchise then the fans have all the right to a divorce and a restriction order.
This is clearly EA’s fault, not the studios they own
@@alexanderdiaz2196 No, Dice is at fault too, maybe they aren't guilty for everything but they surely are to blame too.
If this a love letter, can't imagine what a despise one would look like.
It’s like a “love letter” you find next to your car after your ex burns it
“Love letter” is a strange name for a package bomb
"How does it feel to have lived long enough to see all of your favorite franchises go down in flames?"
"Feels great!"
I RECOGNISED THAT REFERENCE AND I CLAAAAAPED
😂
@@notmbr I CLAPPED, I Clapped WHEN I CONSUMED PRODUCT AND CLAPPED AGAIN WHEN IT DIDNT BREAK NEW GROUND
"I love being destroyed emotionally!
Feels great!"
Star wars reference?
dude put more hours into making this video than anyone put into playing battlefailed 2042
what a brutal slog it must have been too, well done
More hours were put into this video than what were put into making this game
he did miss a few things. A few features he said were missing were actually in the game and functional at launch.
clearly he didn't put enough hours to even realize you can call in a vehicle drop so it's not a walking simulator, then calling it a core design issue because of his mistake
@D D It's not easy to build a car either, but if your new car has 3 wheels with one of them being on the roof, you fucked up.
@D D that idiotic peopel buying your bs full of hack and bugs games
The first time I saw Kaleidoscope, I was like "wow, this is gonna be Siege of Shanghai but set in Seoul and with 128 players." but then when I actually played on the map, it was the most painfully boring experience I've ever had. So sterile, so lifeless, you couldn't tell there was a war and climate catastrophe going on, you couldn't even tell you were in Korea, you were just in a park with a city as a "background".
That map was atrocious in Breakthrough too. Holy hell. Defending team had an insane upper-hand
Siege of Shanghai also sucked
@@sk8erbyern that's fair. Siege of Shanghai is an Overhyped map. The skyscraper is obviously the biggest hotspot, yet you cannot get to it without helicopter or Lift. So when yoir opponent has a capable heli pilot the enemy team ends up camping the lift doors and there's nothing you can really do about it. So people bring down the tower which would be the right thing to do as there's no other way to have a shot at capping C, except it ruins the entire map as now C is just a bunch of rubble randomly scattered around. Some destroy the tower just for the levolution, which looks sick once but that's it
Wait it was in Korea?
@@sk8erbyern Fair enough. Siege of Shanghai itself could use a lot of reworks, but its still hell of a lot more interesting to play on than Kaleidoscope.
When a game has huge-ass posters on Time Square, one of the most expensive places ever to have your advertisement, then you just know there was a TON more money and time put into advertising, than actually making a good product.
Reminds me of that one part of Line Goes Up, where they show those shitty NFT games on a billboard in Times Square
That's the rub isn't it? it feels like EVERYTHING about BF2042 was made with monetization/marketing in mind first and making a fun game second, or third?. The specialists being the most glaring example, to shill cosmetics, and the 128 player cap, a "next-gen" feature to slap on the cover despite how obviously detrimental it is the game's design.
At least people are going back to BF4, It's good to finally find servers with a decent population.
Meh, it's not entirely about money, even with infinite money, some choices were simply not good at all and they would've taken them anyway.
@@wilm2109 Anytime they come out with a multi-year time table 90% of the time now it will suck. Since how can something last 10 years if you didn't even finish it?
I quite literally just got back from a friend's wedding - a friend I met while playing Battlefield 3 almost 10 years ago. I was flying a little bird and he was repairing in the back.
It's such a shame that stories like mine probably won't happen again due to the current state of Battlefield. It's so sad.
love your videos
damn
That's a cool story.
we cant ever go back. i know your pain. these greedy companies is why we cant ever have nice things.
Probably won’t happen due to the current state of gaming companies & western entertainment*
Y’all keep ignoring that and act like nothing is happening.
What did we learn today? Never skip 2031 games in the franchise.
But they succeeded with 2142.
They started skipping the 1941 first ones and it turned out to be ok
To get another idea as to how bad Battlefield 2042 is doing, here's a comparison.
There are currently 4,118 people playing Battlefield 2042. The game came out in November of 2021 and sold... let's say 2 million copies as EA has never released any actual figures. This game, like all Battlefields, had a massive marketing campaign, had the financial backing of EA and the brand recognition of the Battlefield franchise. In less than 6 months, after peaking at 100k concurrent players, it is currently reaching about 4000 players daily (4% of launch).
Guilty Gear Strive, an anime-styled, 2d fighting game currently has 2,218 people in game. It came out in June of 2021 (it's been around twice as long as Battlefield 2042), has sold less than 1 million copies, did not have a massive marketing campaign, was self-published by its developer and the best brand recognition it had was the fact that it was made by the same people who made Dragonball Fighterz. After peaking at 30k concurrent players, it has consistently reached 2k players daily (6.6% of launch).
A much smaller game, in a much less popular genre, with much less brand recognition and financial backing, that is most notable for its soundtrack and the Jack-O pose meme is doing better than Battlefield by comparison. Yikes.
If there was a way to like a comment more than once, I'd do it just for this. Spot on. The absolute state of modern gaming, man.
The trick is for the developers to listen to player feedback and take their time. Guilty Gear Strive was delayed like 3 times before it was released and the biggest complaints people had with it on launch was the sheer amount of time it took to connect to the server when you started the game up (about 3 minutes on a good day) and Sol was just far too strong. This was coming from a fanbase that has been with this series for 20+ years and initially called Strive a betrayal of the previous entries in the series, only for that take to fall mostly silent because it was clear that the game they were worried about turned out to be a new take on Guilty Gear that didn't just iterate or simplify the game, but even improve on it in many aspects, but most importantly was a very good game. Their complaints weren't anything about the functionality or the gameplay; it was something that was hindering their ability to play it.
Battlefield 2042 suffers from the physics seemingly functioning off of RNG, poor map design that leads to a lot of nothing happening, uninspired art design and gameplay that sometimes just doesn't fucking work. The game doesn't work, plain and simple. It's a bad game and it's all because it was rushed and developers didn't listen to player feedback, but I don't think more time would have completely salvaged it. The design issues can't be patched. The boring gameplay and artstyle can't be patched. The game sucks. There's better options in the same series for cheaper. Battlefield 1 is way better than this, and that game had to deal with the limitations of it being set in WW1. What is this game's excuse being set a literal 124 years later?
Moral of the story: Guilty Gear Strive is a good game. Battlefield 2042 is not. Play Guilty Gear.
I can't wait for the next one! 2043 is coming out next month
He hoo is right ! Well one more Battlefield rejected !
Personally, I'm a fan of the Steam meme showing better reviews for a furry porn game released the same day. I wonder how many concurrent players THAT game gets nowadays by comparison lmao
Nothing like watching your childhood franchises crash and burn in front of your eyes. I'll miss you, Battlefield :/
happens a lot nowadays
Makes me really appreciate BF1. To me that is their magnum opus. The immersion is unmatched
And halo.. And GT was sort of trying with the monetization practices/online only.. I'm sure there's more but those 2 along with battlefield are my top 3 played franchises of the last 20 years :/
@@EhEhEhEINSTEIN Halo isn't dead yet, or even close to it. Infinite is also very much savable if the devs get their shit together, unlike 2042.
i just want to go back to bf2. its only downhill from there
The thing with identification with specialists, is that games fixed this ages ago, shitty free to play shooters very quickly realised having two models for each character works fine if they don't have team restrictions
Like have the character shown on the friendly team, and a mask different model with different colours on the other, this shouldn't have been hard
Team Fortress 2 did that, im surprised EA couldn’t figure that out 😭😭
Word
@@metro-hb8mz and its not like its something like a healthbar or name color, its part of the whole design. The characters, the cosmetics, even the maps, everything was designed to color code the characters. Not to mention, tf2's silly nature let you ignore the fact everyone were technically clones of eachother.
EA would never understand that. Theyre all suits, no soul
even Black Ops 3 and 4 knew this.
Specialists had red lights on them that brightly indicated they were the enemy.
@@Armin2012 And no brain
battlefield one was truly the pinnacle. i felt immersed, i felt a real historical touch. the maps were interactive, unique, and historical. there wasn’t a single boring moment in that game. Modes like operations never had a dull moment, man i really miss bf1.
Still very popular hop on with me
the graphics were beautiful. So contrasty. Those flanders field poppies? Beautiful!
I personally think bad company 2 was the best game they ever made and I wish they would do a remake.
hell no, and there is no "real historical touch" the game is literally alt history fantasy nonsense.
@@vgamedude12 lmao
One thing seldom mentioned is the highly advertised "on-the-fly" attachment swap feature.
That thing must have cost them a good chunk of their dev time, with all the fancy UI and tech that gets used nowhere else in game. It does look pretty cool, but I can't for the life of me figure out how or why anyone would want that outside of a BR game where you loot the stuff. The system by definition comes down to either having to do your gun laundry every time you step in a door (because having attachment A is far superior in CQ), or never using it at all (because the attachment differences dont alter gameplay enough to warrant the time and vulnerability).
Turns out constantly having to reconfigure your entire gun isn't really entertaining...
It ruins the gameplay aspect of having to play around your weapon's strengths and weaknesses as well. I had no attachment to the guns I was using (in the beta thank god i didn't pay for it) because they all felt the same.
It makes more sense in the actual game. The shift from 10 - 20m engagements to 50 - 100m engagements happens often enough that being stuck with a configuration tuned to one or the other would be annoying. The switching also only takes a few seconds. Only slightly longer than issuing commands as a squad leader.
Honestly, this is a criticism I do not understand. Always seemed easy enough to use, would seldom have to use it, but was happy to have the option. The part about the guns feeling samey? Sure, that's fair, but I'd have loved it in BF4, especially if the maps were the same size as in 2042, as mentioned above.
I actually liked that feature and used it often when I played the game. If I was using a dmr I would have a long range scope and a shorter range one for cqc engagements. If I was running an AR or smg I would usually swap ammo types to fit either my ammo count or the situation I was in.
It also ruins weapon balance. Because having a weapon with attachments built for close ranges means you’re worse at longer range. But now just press a few buttons and suddenly you go from a cqb loadout to a sniping god. It makes weapons pointless
I am still convinced this was a scrapped BR game. The maps are too big and empty, there were "operators" not classes, and they didn't even put in a revive notification when a team member went down unless they were in your squad. What a terrible game, still the only game I've ever refunded lol.
Funny, because these maps look like they would suck even as BR maps.
@chinsaw2727 he mentioned a game mode in it a couple of times so my comment is a little useless, but BR stands for Battle Royale
Wow that would make a ton of sense. You blew my mind
Henderson reported a while back that it was indeed originally a BR.
@chinsaw2727 What exactly did you think BR meant? Bad Reputation?
I could be wrong, but I feel like you should take advantage of what typically makes your series unique over what the competition is doing. Trying to be more like the competition feels counter productive and unhealthy for a franchise.
EA: "Well the chart says..."
Seriously, in a see of stupid operators and endless microtransactions, being the one and only class system would be good - it's different, a breath of fresh air in a sea of stagnation, but most importantly *what they've been doing already and already knew how to do who woulda fuckin known*
(I don't hate operators actually, I just hate the fact they're everywhere. I want a game with operators, not operators with my game, like 95%)
Tell that to EA and all the unique games and companies they've drove into the ground over following trends.
As a smart person said recently: "Most times you try to 'revolutionize' something, you are taking a loosing bet. Most of the time people would settle for 'good enough' and love the product."
Thanks to EA for making the lack of Battlefield spirit in this one so glaringly obvious that my wallet was spared.
@@SirIsaacClarke Rip Dawngate and desperately hope it makes an appearance here someday
It's worse because they couldn't even decide which competition they wanted to chase. 2042 is a Frankentstein's monster.
This game was changed 180deg in mid development. You can see they went for a BR. No other reason to have such huge open maps and “operators” with super powers. But at last minute they said, no… we gotta go with the old formula
Big maps are a staple of Battlefield though that seems like a normal thing for them, and with 128 players the maps are of course going to be even bigger
@@edun4513even for 128 players it is still way too big
a 7 out of ten should be a decent rating. A "this is pretty good, some room for improvement but its fun" kinda deal. Battlefields State shouldn't have warranted something higher than 4
Battlefield Hardline was a 6.
A 7 is good. 5 is average, 6 is decent, 7 is good, 8 is great, 9 is awesome and 10 is masterpiece
The older I get and the more games I've played, the more I find myself using 5's, 6's, and 7's when rating games.
When someone rates everything either a 1, or 7+, it's a good sign that they haven't played enough games to have a decent baseline.
@@Zanzibawrr I dont like when people use masterpiece=10/10, guess its thanks to critics who use it as a synonym. Or idk maybe i am translating it incorrectly but a master piece is literally the best work that artist or in this case, developer has made. Doesnt really mean 10/10, just that they have outodone themselves
@@FDALl-ms5kg a masterpiece means a work of outstanding artistry, skill or workmanship. While it’s true that definition could be used with 9/10s and so on, i do think it fits the 10/10 model.
After all what do we mean when we say 10/10? It doesn’t mean it’s perfect. Imo it means that the game excels in all areas and has very few flaws, or that the sum of its parts stand out way more that the sum of its flaws.
My favorite part about all of this is the fact one of the UI designers of this game complained about Elden Rings UI design. Meanwhile BF2042 UI is still broken and unfinished in many places.
The UI is ugly, unimformative. He failed as UI designer
I have no interest in Elden Ring and think it's just the newest hotness and even I think a lot of devs were being weirdly bitter complaining about it's popularity.
Seriously the on/off switch looked like a MENSA test
One thing that used to be pretty fun was being medic and running around saving people while holding the line. It made it feel like a real battle with real stakes, sucks to see that be basically removed.
Squad reviving neutered the medic class in the same way the supply points neutered the support. As a support player, I feel your pain.
I was playing bf4 yesterday, as a medic trying to revive as many teammates as possible. Me and a squad mate were running up a hill towards cover, but right before we got there he got sniped. So I run back revive him, and he doesn’t move. So I decide to stand between him and the sniper, body blocking an easy re-kill until he got up again.
It didn’t work of course, I had miscalculated where the sniper was exactly, but it was still such a cool moment. And not something I see happening in bf2042.
I don't know if you actually played 2042 then. You can still do that very well on both of the medic specialists. Also the healing medic heals about 3 times faster than a med back and theres no cooldown, so shes dramatically better. Angel (insert Angel memes here) isn't as effective but he gives immediate healing in the form of armor. Two ways to play medic, similar to the two versions of medic in BF:V
@@lolbuster01 Squad reviving is slow, and I like it; it lets my campy squadmates come revive me when I get killed trying to revive an idiot. If you think that it ruined playing medic then I'm not really sure you've ever played a battlefield game because revives hardly ever happen ;)
@@Dynnen it's true that it's rare, but I was revived even less in battleshit 5 than 4. I got revived a ton in 1 though.
These past couple years have had some of the biggest triple AAA blunders I've seen in my life. Just billions of dollars flushed down the drain.
The saddest thing is I doubt the corps will learn, most likely quit AAA and double down on mobile for easy money. Which means less AAA. Maybe a good thing if indies can take over that market with actual good games, or if the market will just disappear completely for mobile garbage.
@@cattysplat there are some decent mobile games. It's the monetization that's killing every type of game. They make design decisions that make no goddam sense just so they can monetize it.
I swear it started as soon as the PS4 and Xbox One came out and devs and pubs realized they could finish a game after release
Games have become big bussiness, and the major releases nowadays tend to have zero passion behind them.
They're made by corporate suits to make money, everything else is secondary. Instead of by someone who has an idea they care about that might make them money.
I recommend just abandoning mainstream game releases, they're a landfill now. Look to smaller games made with passion, like Peppered or The Haunted Chocolatier.
@@planescaped agreed. The days of bedroom coders creating the next big thing are few and far between. I guess this is a case of too much money moving into a young industry to soon. It is killing all originality and creativity in the AAA space. Elden Ring is the exception lol
To an IGN reviewer a 7/10 for a big-budget title means it didn't run on the reviewer's computer and lead to the death of their parents
When money is the only motivating force left behind our favorite franchises, "toxicity" is the only appropriate response. Complete and utter rejection of the product being sold is the only way to create change for future titles. If some EA exec wants to cry about the response then he should quit his job because he clearly sucks at it and history will surely repeat itself because of it.
most of battlefields audiency aswell as cod is "head empty shooty shoot" so making a good game really is not needed. What matters is day one and week one sales
@@the_Googie Never Pre-order games.
@@philithegamer8265 i never preordered a game. But thanks for ur advice i guess
@@philithegamer8265 this was the first game I pre-ordered. Nope. Never doing that shit again. Wish I would have refunded it before it was too late to. I'm over this fucking franchise
@@the_Googie While your statement is true, I sorely disagree. AAA studioes hungers for retainability since the initial game requires much more effort than subsequent updates/maps etc. They all want the continuous cash cow, like BF3, BF4 and BF1 and if they make a shit game then people will just leave quickly. We saw it with BF5 and we will see it with BF2042
Maybe I missed it in the video, but seems you left out how some of the features were left out intentionally (voice chat/scoreboard/etc). The devs blamed the playerbase for being 'toxic' and said that's why they *chose* not to put those features in.
Not only did they miss those features, they blamed the players for it.
I don’t agree with the logic but I can see how they would say voice chat could be toxic but how the hell could a scoreboard be toxic it’s inanimate text lol what
That doesn't make sense because all they had to do was add a mute and kick system and let the players determine what's toxic
@@jjcoola998 For a lot of younger people these days, the concept of competition is considered toxic. No scoreboard means you win or lose as a team, without feeling bad if you were the one who sucked and dropped the ball. Its a stupid idea, but then I am old.
Ah yes, because everyone knows that by insulting the fan base that gives you money, it always goes right. Just like the last time they told players that if they don’t like it don’t buy it, that definitely didn’t bite them in the ass.
@@kuo8088 I don't think that was the same group and I don't see nothing wrong with that statement.
This game broke the whole "trainwreck" analogy, because that analogy implies that it worked at some point. BF2042 is more like the Hyperloop
Oof
@@DarthFerder Darth Jabba o7
jesus christ bro, I wanted it roasted not e v a p o r a t e d
Lmfao
Deluxe Edition, $120. NO SCOREBOARD, NO SERVERS, NO TEAM COMMUNICATION. Industry standards are termed "LEGACY" implementations, TO BE ADDED IN THE FUTURE.
This wasn't a trainwreck. It was a publisher known for NOT PUTTING GAMERS in mind, painting a turd and selling it to consumers full price and pretend "love letter to the fans".
The amount of entertaining youtube videos that it helped launched, that is a substantial success. No one can take that away from EA.
17:05 DICE can't legally remove the specialists from the game. DICE promised 4 new specialists coming in battle passes to people who bought the gold/ ultimate edition, so if they'll remove specialists, they'll be in legal trouble.
I want to make this clear that I am NOT defending DICE here, but just pointing out a fact
DicE/A can always pull a Todd Howard like during the whole canvas bag ordeal and offer $5 in-game credit for their troubles. (Keep in mind that FO76 customers dropped twice as much money than this games top of the line asking price).
Doesnt matter at this point. The game can be legally sued in most countries as selling an unfinished product at full price, therefore players would all be allowed for a full refund as well as DICE/EA being in deep legal shit.
Man, they dug a hole for themselves...
The specialist system is so fucking retarded.
Its not just visual identification, go back to bf4, notice something weird, you don't speak the same language as the enemy. You hear a russian round the corner and you already know, oh fuck it's not a teammate. It also added so much immersion having your own character speak in the right language, you felt like you were really fighting for your faction, or at least it was a good bit of added immersion.
Similarly, this is why failed games are promised to be worked on and updated just long enough to get them out of legal liability. Case in point, Anthem. 2042 is going to get the bare minimum needed to cover liability issues and then they’re going to drop it off a cliff.
the "love letter to fans" is more of a death sentence to the franchise
22:51 “some time to kills needed juggernaut levels of bullets to target down”
He says as a plane nose dives into the mountain and bounces upwards completely un-phased lmao
I love this
Dude has his priorities.
That's fricking hilarious
Lmaoooo I saw that , it still happens when you jetram a chopper or a jet still lol
A " Revival of a game " would be a sweet series if you haven't done any !
Seconded. This sounds fun, like a mystery of how a missing person suddenly reappeared years after vanishing
Please do. Battlefield has pretty healthy numbers now and as someone who played at launch, promptly quit because of the technical issues, and then returned a year later... this game is at the top of my currently played multiplayer rotation. It's SO much better than it used to be, my friends and I have a *riot* every time we play.
like "yes woman's land, the engoodening of 'no man's sky'"?
That's what I came here to comment, seeing that this video was way before they revived it.
Battlefield V saw a revival after 2042 was so bad.
I got burned too many times by this series. I wait for the release and wait for the PLAYER'S feedback (not from the PAID HACKS). I am not going to pay to beta test an EA game ever again.
It's always surprising (though it shouldn't be) seeing big game review outlets give decent-good reviews to hot garbage big name releases.
i strongly suggest you do this with every game it will save you a lot if you want to
You pay for beta tests? You must have been scammed
You didnt mentioned how even the soundtrack got absolutely massacred, the one thing that was always top tier no matter how bad the game was.
Fair point
It sounds like the files for the BF4 OST got corrupted, or something. Especially the main theme, which just feels so overwhelming that you can't make out any real instrumentation or nuance. The worst part is that the composer can make good tracks. They worked on Chernobyl and Joker. But I feel like they were lead to believe that the tone would be much darker, causing it to clash with how matches actually go, and all the quips. It's like Overwatch but with the OST of Year 1-3 of Rainbow Six Siege. On top of that, they aren't good for games, which will have those songs play repeatedly, causing it to grate.
Again, BF3 and 4 nailed the atmosphere, with the electronic aspects, while still making sure they were decent songs in the moment. Frostbite Pillars, After Science, Long Journey, the BF4 theme. Those tracks are iconic because of their composition, and their usage.
"It sounds like whales dying."
-Angry Joe
What's so offensive is they killed off battlefront 2 and battlefield V when they were hitting their stride to put everyone on 2042. This killed two great games and apparently is what all hands on deck to put out their best looks like. On a side stuff like this makes me appreciate siege more. Rocky launch but they turned it around and churn out consistent content and updates. Say what you will but it's probably the most consistent and highest playcount paid multiplayer game the last few years.
That pissed me off too. Star Wars Battlefront 2 was really shaping up to being a great game. With all the new heroes and maps along with the removal of the shitty lootboxes the game is good but the fact that they then just said "fuck it" and moved on to this dumpster of a Battlefield game just kills me.
I love Star Wars and Battlefront 2 was on the road to redemption but EA put a land mine in its path.
They lied and cheated us. 1 step forward 100 steps back.
@@Mincecroft bfv too,there's files in both games for future updates we're never going to see because of the failed abortion that is 2042
@@badasscrusader it's funny enough 5 has more players than 2042. I'm having fun with it more than playing 2042 with at least two hours. Let this be a lesson to DICE
True. Siege's path may be pretty shaky going forward (If the talk of Ubisoft's financial problems/possible buyout is any indication), but it can't be denied that it made a massive comeback and really had a great thing going for a while.
Practically speaking, the map issue could have been somewhat mediated by introducing some kind of sector system, where a set number of squads could be set to fight in individual sectors, each sector having ''unique'' objectives to progress the battle. For example, sector A is in the mostly rural area of the map with 3 squads from each team max with the largest amount of vehicles, and the objective in the sector is deathmatch, winner in this sector gest more vehicle spawns to use in other sectors. Sector B is urban combat where the objective is basically to capture the flag, except with an intel briefcase. The winner here gets a limited map hack for other sectors. Whoever gets the most sectors until the timer expires, or has a 2/1 majority of sectors won, wins the game. Still wouldn't be a perfect solution, and definitely wouldn't address other issues.
I was absolutely mortified with BF2042’s end result, this was a game series where I met some of the most generous and fun loving people in my life that grew to be my friends both online and in real life. So when we saw this game, the gameplay, the trailers, the HYPE we were holding it in high regards only to get kicked in the balls by a company that would rather butcher everything it touches instead of listening to the fans.
I won’t act like I didn’t have some fun in 2042 but that’s simply because you can make even the worst games fun with friends.
I sincerely hope this isn’t the end for Battlefield but I can’t see it continuing in it’s current direction after the enormous backlash that 2042 has gotten.
EA needs to WAKE UP and actually give a little extra care to their franchises, otherwise the gravy train will last a little longer until it hits a wall.
It's gonna need a massive blow to change the leadership if they can't see it.
The one who needs to wake up is DICE. I'm fairly certain EA gives them a lot of creative freedom, and they used that creative freedom to go around implementing unnecessary controversial shit like those females with prosthetic arms running and sliding around in BF5, and now specialists and COD-like stuff and arcadey gameplay and season passes, etc to try and get COD's audiences + all around poor design choices like the exact same looking damn specialists on both team.
As long as a company can makes a fuck ton of money and has the potential to make another gold mine like APEX Legend, I'm 99% certain EA don't care.
People keep blaming EA for everything but they don't realize it's DICE's internal management team is the one likely fucking shit up.
😂😂
@@saint8257 did you listen to the video?
2042 didn't just die, it was murdered, no, slaughtered in equal part by the clueless/careless publisher and executives, as well as the inept silicon valley hipster devs that thought they had their finger on the pulse of BF fans.
You have to understand just how malicious EA is not just to customers, but also their developers. They wring companies, devs, employess, whatever; completely dry. DICE just had the misfortune to be hardier than most for EA to empty completely. They only exist to appease shareholders. Think COD but with none of the benefits of it being handled by 3 different studios, but the same pace.
@@auroranovae4493 same price? Bf2042 is way better than the newest COD, IMO. What benefits of being handled by 3 studios though, cos Bf2042 is a more ambitious game than COD, I feel like they put more resources towards it, than COD received. The graphics spread out over those giant maps with that many players, while it didnt work the way they thought it would, there's still tons of work gone into it. Misguided work. But damn, I played the new COD for a week or two and just couldn't continue. Halo is boring. small studio shooters like ww3, honestly, sucks. Everything sucks lol, but I still prefer bf2042 over any shooter out right now. Battlebit looks fun once they get the test servers back up I might migrate to that.
@@JunkBondTrader You're entitled to your own opinion, but I could not disagree more about BF2042.
Everything about it feels cheap and terrible, ESPECIALLY on launch. All of the guns were garbage (except that one SMG that outperformed rifles in accuracy for some reason), the vehicles were an unbalanced mess, the 64 vs 64 added absolutely nothing and even probably hurt the game in the end as they had to try and balance, make maps, try to optimize and do many other design decisions around 64v64.
Talking about maps, these are the most boring and terrible maps I've ever played in, in any shooter. Hell, most community maps in TF2 have more sensible design than every single one in BF2042, and they were made by some randos. Out of anything in that game, the maps are probably the most infuriating thing design-wise I have seen, and that is not easily fixable, they have to go through all of those maps and remake them from the ground up if they want them to be any fun. I CANNOT believe that some people at Dice didn't play these maps and go "Wow, this is absolute trash! We should redo them", it's just mind bogglingly bad stuff from that team. You don't design a map in a game with snipers, vehicles and helicopters with just absolute flat areas, no chokepoints and no cover, yet this is 90% of the areas in those maps!
Sorry, rant over. But man did this game piss me off.
@@JunkBondTrader comparing it too bf4. They didnt even give us 1/8 of the content of that game. No static weaponry, only 3 guns per class? How the hell was hazard mode work with the lack of equipment available to the player?
They spent more time putting muha female player models in game. If they just focused on generic bf4 infantry. They could of freed up talent from that!
Watching this just makes me so depressed about the state of Battlefield. I started with Bad Company 1 and was blown away by the destruction in the game. I was like "one minute this building has a wall I can take cover behind, and the next minute it can be blown up completely!?" When BC2 was announced, I was so beyond hyped for it and it exceeded even my wildest expectations. Seeing Battlefield in its current state just makes me so sad. Some of my best gaming memories came from BC2 and the fun I had with friends, coordinating attacks and pushes on the objective. Now it barely resembles Battlefield at all, looking more like a parody of Battlefield than a proper Battlefield game.
I doubt they'll be able to do a 1.0 on this mess and restore the franchise to its former glory. Here's to hoping.
a parody by people who hate battlefield and want to "fix" it
I love it when companies just copy each other's idea so that they can "compete" with each other.
This is what happens when a developer haemorrhages the majority of its talent and thinks that chasing a trend will make up for the shortfall. Add EA into the equation and the results are predictable to everyone - apart from the developer and the publisher. DICE are like BioWare these days - just a name retained for EA's marketing, the actual creative spark has long gone out.
I’m guessing the last few good devs that were carrying the bf franchise left after bf1
Sad but true
When the marketing team thinks that they are absolute by determining deadlines according to their calendar and it all backfires.
The idea of scrapping Battlefield 6 and recycle its concept to make 2042 as something that fits their agenda might be possibly one of their ideas aswell. Big company marketeers are widely known to aim at maximizing profits at all costs while neglecting every other factor, especially the newest generation: they somewhat love to project their own ideals as if they would 100% work, but projecting ideals is mentally like a one-direction way communication, as they mostly avoid any sort of feedback (which ends like a double standard towards their profit maximization results to the very company in the long term).
I live in Edmonton, where BioWare started and had friends working QA during the EA takeover. It was a bloodbath in terms of layoffs. F EA forever.
These studio's have bled all the people that had talent, that had vision.
And under a corporate structure like EA the personalities that would have been able to steer the company into making a good game would never flourish, so when the old guard left there was nobody to replace them in the management but yes-men and ass-kissers.
And like a ship without a captain the crew that's left still goes trough the same motions, mindlessly making the same game over and over because that's just the kind of game their studio makes.
But the final products is a mess, scattershot design, meandering everywhere, like a ship without a anyone at the helm they're still going but never getting anywhere.
I said the same about 343 Studios and Halo Infinite, the only people involved with the development that had a definitive 'vision' of what they were making where the marketing and monetization people.
Everyone else was just coming in to make their hours and fulfil contractual obligations.
Player: "Wow, this game I payed at least $60 for is a severe downgrade from not one but TWO previous titles and there are game breaking bugs that happen constantly."
Developer: "Jeez guys, these expectations are brutal! We do have to sleep you know."
Ok top of that the publisher said "yeah we actually are ahead of schedule"
constant game breaking bugs? I can't say I ever experienced a single one over 150 hours, except for maybe the first version/month or so.
What they really meant is that "yes we DEVELOPERS FIXING BUGS need to sleep, do you realize how brutal your expectations are for us to fix this enormous mess our colleagues made before dumping the project on us after launch?!"
Battlefield 4 is still great
@@JunkBondTrader There's always that one guy that always manages to avoid any problems. I am seeing a pattern here
As someone who was a diehard battlefield fan from 2, 1943, BC1, BC2, 3 and 4, it's really a shame what has happened to DICE.
Absolutely ridiculous. They literally thought removing a scoreboard was a good design decision.
I used to build tools for the community for free because I loved the franchise so much. Battlefield was literally the franchise that made me want to join the games industry.
How far they've fallen.
It's almost like DICE cannot understand their core customers.
I used to love this game. It breaks my heart... I still watch news in this from time to time to see what's up with it. They always manage to reaffirm my disappointment with the series.
Nobody loses if they can’t see the score. It’s the same reason CoD removed deaths from the scoreboard. But at least you could see other stats. It’s pathetic the way the industry is heading.
Or also taking their core players for granted and assuming they will never leave no matter what they do to spite him in the process of trying to get players from other franchises to play
It fucking sucks dude, I've enjoyed literally every Battlefield game EXCEPT 2042. They weren't my favorites but sometimes I still load up BF5 and BF1 for that period gameplay when I'm feeling an urge. I uninstalled 2042 last year and literally haven't had a single urge to reinstall since, that's insane.
The second I saw specialists and no classes I turned my nose up at it. This isn’t a battlefield game. The entire point is to immerse yourself as just another soldier.
The classes are back now, it plays very similar to 4
BF2042 is a straight up tragedy. Never thought we would go into a new generation of consoles and get a rushed product but here we are.
I feel Babylon's Fall will eventually make it's way to this video series.
The specialist thing really got to me. Like I understand that it makes creating skins easier and more profits but, like you said, if your core audience didn't ask for (actually wanting it to be removed) how do you expect to make a profit??
Nah bro, everyone is going to leave Abex, fortnut and modernborefare for OUR awesome specialist shooter.
Corporate heads look at industry trends, they don't look at real human opinions and feedback. Well, the bad ones do that. Two guesses if EA is good or bad.
make a good complete game that incorporates specialists in a way that either allows or even enhances the Battlefield Formula.
y'know stuff EA doesn't want to do. Because it might hamper profit.
For ex.
Make specialist classes who can only use certain weapons and certain abilities
'Medic' class Ops can only us ARs and heal for example
'Engineer' class ones have anti-vehicle or anti-personel such as vehicular repair, rockets, mines etc. and some have special items like turrets, deployable heavy weapons (50 BMG deployable etc.)
Or 'hybrid' operators - like a Recon operator who has exclusive access to the only 20mm rifle, allowing them to take out all non-tank vehicles, but still requires other tanks and actual engineers to take out tanks, and the 20mm rifle has its own downsides (slowest rounds with the highest drop, and takes away any other sniper option - you're forced to use it if you play this character alongside a sidearm.)
there's ways it could theoretically work, but EA isn't interested in the why and how, just the possibility (i.e. profit)
not even that it's better, just that EA was more interested in making the square peg go into the round hole, rather than use woodsmithing tools to make the square peg round enough to fit.
As well, they want money - so they theoretically want all specialists to be viable, so all weapons on all specialists - they have no interest in having 'specialists' who can only sniper because that locks all purchase options from players who don't snipe, so just make it so everyone can use them.
@@ShudowWolf Even if 2042 had designed the specialists better, I don't think it would make much difference. The game would still be a hero shooter, a subgenre that has been slowly becoming less and less popular. Indeed there hasn't really been a really successful hero shooter since Apex. After all, the whole appeal of the pre-release marketing for 2042 was going to be a "return to form", but the specialists system was the exact opposite of that.
I love the graphics and the whole detective theme. It makes you stand out and makes me feel like I’m playing along with something. Great choice
This was the Battlefield game that I was most excited about since BF4. A return to modern era battlefield sandbox. I even did the blasphemous act of pre-ordering it. I was excited god dammit. But then open beta rolled in, and I quickly realised that I was duped. Cancelled pre-order and watched the destruction of the franchise from the balcony.
You were lucky enough to cancel smh I put my belief in this game and listened to them.
@@xmicoz I feel you bro. It's saddens me to see what's happened to the BF franchise. BF3/4 were one of the best FPS memories that I have ever had
@@xmicoz You STILL believe them?! Damn bro i don't even know what to say ...
@@thecompanioncube4211 the fact that BF4 and BF1 (and even BF3) have significant playerbases that just won't let those games die shows the level of quality those games reached.
Trusting EA and Dice is like trusting a pedophile in a nursery
for me, the worst thing about this was the company complaining that people didn't like their product and said and I quote "these are harsh expectations"
BRO. HOW IS WANTING A PROPER WORKING GAME WITH 5 COMPANIES. 5 COMPANIES HARSH EXPECTATIONS???
The best part about that is that Battlefield 1942 was developed by, (depending on the source) anywhere between 14-40 people and even with its many issues is a fully functional video game at the very least. They couldn't meet the "Harsh Expectations" set by a team of less than 40, twenty years prior, with all five of those companies combined.
@@Killerduck0213 games are becoming more costly and time consuming to make, I doubt battlefield 1942 would be able to be made by the same group nowadays to a modern standard but I get your point
It's like how Yahtzee from Zero Punctuation put it. Having 100 more people doesn't make you cook any faster.
This is a gen z Era excuse that all corporations are using. You either don't like their product because something is wrong with you or you're just a troll. That's what, especially EA, goes with.
It couldn't be that their product is just shit.
Trying to get rid of the scoreboard has been a very annoying trend with highly funded western shooters. It was intentionally left out, not forgotton. Scoreboards keep being put in nutered states where data is ofcuscated. "Takedowns" instead of kills so assists are worth the same, hiding death counts, or just abandoning all of it for a generic "score".
And I really don't understand why. My K/D is not great from time to time but you can compensate it easily with PTFO-ing
@@TheSlashd0t I guess its not politically correct? kills/deaths and so on might trigger you, and you are not a mature adult who can deal with the fact that you are not good at the game.
Dice is a swedish studio with new people (the veterans left) so guess what: you have younger devs and game directors that want to have a safe space and think of themselves as protectors.
@@TheSlashd0t its because they want everyone playing the game to have a participation trophy so by hidding your K/D and just showing a score they like : nobody feel like they bad
@@andreiasimov33 they want people who suck at the game to buy it, not refund it, and ideally put money into micro transactions. Why is it so hard for Epic Gamerz to think out of a culture war based paradigm? Do you realize these are businesses? They care about sales before anything else. The so called culture war stuff is literally just advertising and to avoid litigation.
I shouldn't wish this on anyone, but you people should really work a job where you have to prepare materials for investors, potential acquirers or merger targets or anyone else who actually cares how the business is run. You'll work yourself to death on call 24/7 and all you'll do related to "going woke" is throw in some BS DEI statement from last year's 10-K no one even read.
@@andreiasimov33 It's customer manipulation / psychology of spending.
Same reason you don't see (as many) ads over TH-cam content that corps deem negative or uncomfortable: On a very large and rough scale, people are less likely to spend money when they associate the product with any negative feeling.
This doesn't make much sense for a game, especially not a relatively competitive squad-based shooter, but it's exactly the way EA has been operating for years.
The map size issue would be improved significantly if people could summon basic non-combat vehicles like bikes or ATVs to speed up the transit across the empty landscape.
Screw realisim, this is 2042.
@@Anvil1137 I've got an ATV in a can.
Or you know actually MAKE THE MAPS not be so fucking big in the first place that they look like freaking Battle Royale maps, even Act Man was saying they were too big and used Orbital's map as the example in his footage, it was even called a MEDIUM-SIZED map, if someone is saying a MEDIUM-SIZED map is too big how much of a difference could a small-sized map and a large-sized map be. 1942 had what I'd say is the perfect map size for all of its maps, heck they would even make sure you never went too far out of bounds especially when the map was surrounded by water as you couldn't really stay in the water for too long otherwise you would start losing health (which I would always think that there was a shark or two taking bits out of you until you either got out of the water or died.
When a "gaming journalist" outlet doesn't want to piss a publisher off, they ALWAYS give them a 7 out of 10. That's just standard practice now. I don't even bother listening to them anymore tbh. There's nothing "critical" about their scoring. Even IGN admitted as much when they began their practice of not averaging their breakdown score into their final product score. It's like really? How could you score a game across the board all 6s yet somehow give them a 9 as your "final" score? Just blah....
And I'm starting to wonder if I was one of the few that saw the trailer for this game and thought "This is a trainwreck begging to be criticized." There was no way I was paying for it after I saw the trailer. Nothing in it screamed "Battlefield" to me. They really should take a page out of CoD, put back in a story mode, and if they're insisting on not basing things on historical wars or events, at least utilize the modern geographical landscape of the world, along with the current technology, and craft a narrative from there. At least maybe build a lore with the "Operators" you're trying to make people buy into before shoving them into our faces? It's an idea anyway.
Honestly, i dont know if battlefield 2042 was ever alive in the first place. They basically shipped out a dying corpse and waited for people to find the body.
It's a ka without ha. Body without soul. No different to not existing, at least to me.
Have we now, at long last, finally learned the dangers of preordering, and the lies corporations will tell just to get your money in their pockets? Or do people _still_ think that DICE was "well ahead of schedule" on all of this?
Stop preordering games. Don't give companies a cent of your money until reviewers have had the opportunity to find out just how bad the game is. And if it's not up to your standards, don't buy it anyway with the fantasy of "it'll get better in time". Don't reward this "games as a service" garbage, or soon enough it'll be _all we'll have._
amen brother. preach it.
Say it louder for the people in the back.
This shit's been going on for 10 years and anyone with a better memory than a fruitfly can read off a fucking _list_ of games that released in such a shoddy/controversial state that they've become notorious for it. Diablo 3, Simcity, Aliens: Colonial Marines, Assassin's Creed Unity, Batman: Arkham Knight, Battlefront 2, Fallout 76 to just name a few. Hell just look at how many Battlefield titles released with more bugs than a bloated corpse floating in a fetid swamp.
People will still preorder. Latest example where people will preorder despite everything that happened before is the WoW Dragonflight expansion.
Nah, markting departments are too good.
And be EXTREMELY skeptical if there are strict review embargoes.
The most insulting part of this is how they marketed this as a love letter to the fans, and delivered a giant fuck you. Codfield Apexorant 2042 is a dumpster fire. Im glad they were at least kind enough to put out an open beta so I could find out the game was horribly designed before I ever bought it.
What I watch for during development is how many features the new games in a series like Battlefield are missing compared to older games in the series.
My benchmark for the Battlefield franchise is Battlefield 2142 - which also was a half-baked flop but it at least launched in a mostly playable state.
i knew it would flop when i saw the trailer where they recreated the guy who jumped out of a jet - destroyed another with an rpg- and jumped back to his.
that wasn't "love letter to the fans" that was pure chaos and no direction at all
AGREED. I am very glad, it's the first BF I have not purchased since I started playing BF3 and fell in love with it. I also love BFV. I also love BF1 (you get the jist)
I second that. A blessing in disguise. The funniest part was seeing the mainstream sites claiming it was just a beta and it would get ironed out. What a bunch of jokesters.
@@ZeroHxC07 for real. I remember playing bf4 at launch which was horribly buggy, and still having so much fun with it. I played maybe 6 hours of 2042 in the beta and the whole time I was sitting there thinking to myself, "what the fuck even is this. Where's the battlefield part of battlefield?" The worst part is that I was so excited for this game and it just let me down so hard. To this day BF4 is still my favorite multiplayer shooting game, and to see it fall so far actually makes me sad.
Love when the creator of the video makes a mistake and ask the editor to delete it and they not only keep it, but mock it as well xD
This has been a long time coming. No game has completely devastated me as much as the failure of 2042 in recent years. I've been a long time fan of the franchise and for me I was in love with all of the releases all the way to BF1 but I noticed a deep drop off in quality with BF:V. I thought that they were returning to form when they announced they were going back to a modern setting akin to the bad company and bf3/bf4 offerings. I thought that's what Dice and BF did best so I was confident they'd be able to pull it off. Obviously the games always release like crap and there's always a scramble for patches and fixes but 2042 was something different. The game at it's core was lacking far more lacking than any other recent BF. I'm truly bothered by the state of this game and I feel like the Dice I loved so much growing up is on it's way out unless there's an incredible turn around but I have to say after BF:V and 2042 releasing back to back and being lackluster to say the least I've given up majority of the hope I'd have in a future title. I've lost my faith in the brand and now I'm a wait and see gamer when it comes to Dice games and they'd have to prove themselves to me all over again.
At least BF4 is fun. Do people still play it?
@@CrazyChillDog Yep. More than 2042, actually
I imagine, much like Bioware, that the DICE you loved is long gone.
The name stays the same, but if the people who made that name leave, then it becomes nothing more than a skinsuit worn by EA to capitalize on brand recognition.
@@CrazyChillDog BF4 has more players than 2042. You can find plenty of servers on PC.
I feel ya. After these disappointments. I don’t feel the need to buy games day 1 anymore. I will wait too. See if the game lives. Or dies out pathetically. I have a feeling this one will die pathetically. Too much wrong at its core.
I will forever until the end of time. Be mad at specialists.
the last star in the universe will burn out and my existence will be forgotten for eons to come.
and my hatred will still be felt in the outer reaches of space.
JFJ once again never misses
Deep
My hatred for the specialist system is only eclipsed by how pissed I am at EA for scamming me of my money.
@@kuo8088 well it’s you fault for buying this game.
@@Blue-Apple-fc9eo it really was, I got roped into the hype and preordered and now have severe buyer’s remorse
Not to diverge but: You know what the worst thing about being an F-Zero fan is? We know even if we get another entry it won't be what we want, because Nintendo's stated the reason they don't go back to old series like that is because they don't want to do so unless they can find a way to reinvent it. That approach obviously works with widely defined adventure games like Mario and Zelda and Metroid, but not so much when it's a RACING game, a genre where people want the next entry to be pretty much all the same fundamentals but marginally improved.
The worst part is the arcade racer has been dead for over a decade now and was dying years before that. You've got Mario Kart and Sonic racing, both of which are almost a decade old now too. That's it.
21:53 is not a bug, BTW. Back-blasts from explosives can actually kill you and this is also a thing in BFV.
I was thinking the same thing lmao😂
Only took them till 5 to make it a thing though which is sad
37:22 you have to remember as well, bf4 only came out on steam a few years ago, before that it was only out on origin, which means the vast VAST majority of people who have and play the game will play through origin and not steam
That includes me
@@MooncricketsInc Just uninstalled Origin becouse it's a piece of shit ._.
@@MooncricketsInc ok? i never said you didnt? i made the argument that using steam charts to map out bf4s playerbase is in accurate due to most people not owning the game through steam, so your comment does litterally nothing to contradict that? what is the point of your reply in the first place?
Wow, is this your most recently released game you've covered to date?
WOW
he covered Squenix Avengers a couple months back, which was the most recently released game at the time. I'd have to do math.
@@vissermatt1058 I can't imagine the game recovering anything but maybe 30% of the base. That's being generous.
@@vissermatt1058 It’s a loss. Almost 96% of players lost from launch till now, even “if” they give it a slight recovery, it’ll be gone shortly after. They’ve effectively killed the franchise and I hope DICE all together is shuttered. Absolute embarrassment to even put their name on it.
Hello you!
I think you should have a new series called "In Critical Condition" for games that are potentially dying or at the cusp of death.
I agree to an extend, because he did one on overwatch which I still play regularly and wouldn't consider dead at all. I never have to wait longer than a minute for mystery hero's or quick play.. and maybe a cpl min tops for dmg in competitive. This game on the other hand I never even considered buying after I played the godawful beta.. and now there's less than 1000 people playing it on steam. Subjectively, overwatch may have been in critical condition to some.. but this game was objectively DOA
that sounds redundant, it would be the same as these series but without an ending
The game dipped below 1000 players on steam, when a game lost a 90% player count, I would say the game is pretty dead
Planetside 2 definitely needs to be on this list. It's been in and out of Critical Condition for years.
@@BongRipBing i thought that was dead...
As a software and hobby game dev my bet is the following: It was first planned as a battle royal and thus the engine, servers, the netcode etc. needed to support more players and more action. They decided to rewrite a large amount of their gameplay code in a more data oriented fashion (ECS), which is the only explanation I have for why things are broken that have worked for the last 3+ games. Or for the new game they threw away a large part of the gameplay framework for whatever other reason. And because management and shareholders don't understand the magnitude of the work to be done and maybe some critical people jumped ship they dug themselves a grave. They bet on people being more forgiving and ironing the bugs out over time but because the core gameplay loop is more or less broken, esp. compared to the high art these guys usually produce, dung hit the metal propeller.
Your whole story is a lie. Why anyone wants a battlefield to game like pubg. Lmao its so bad idea
@@phoenix1453 Shareholders want games that makes a profit fast, battle royale games were some of the most profitable games in the last few years. That’s the same reason why they tend to prefer multiplayer games over single player games, it’s easier to implement things like micro transactions and battle passes in multiplayer games than in single player ones. EA is controlled by its shareholders, they have to make everything with that in mind (it lead to multiple failures) so if shareholders want a battle royale set in the battlefield universe, EA will make a battle royale set in the battlefield universe.
@@slaaneshshewhothirst9136 battle royale games dies man i know pubg was popular but now every player bored of br
Some people will still say this game isn't dead, is just sad
Massive copium overdose
Then why talk about it? Your being attention towards it.
Don't be sad.
This is just how things work out, sometimes.
@@davidinass because we shouldn't shut up and accept when a company goes full greedy mode and delivers something like this
Edit: In my view, death treats and this kinda of things are out of the line. Now, wanting to play what you r paying full price for and receiving this kinda of thing, is just a disaster.
@@davidinass that whole all publicity is good publicity isn't real. Just because we talk about if doesn't make people flock to it. Because if that was the case the number that back the fact that it's ass would be different
This was a disaster waiting to happen. The writing was on the wall since BF3 release. We used to write essays on the official DICE forums over the last 10 years or so, highlighting a lot of these issues and our concerns. How the studio was moving away from what Battlefield was as a franchise, how they continuously failed to learn from past mistakes: releasing games with the same bugs, gameplay issues and poor map design (infantry vs vehicle experience was always hit and miss). We pleaded, we were genuinely passionate about the franchise. Not anymore. After BF V failure I just stopped caring. I belonged to a lose community of diedhard BF fans. We used to play BF together for more than a decade, most of us played it since BF 1942. Almost all of those people just moved on.
BFV was AMAZING, as was BF3, 4 and 1, loved them all, I even felt Hardline was underrated lol. 2042 is the first BF I have not purchsed since I started. BF3, BF4, 1 and V were all slightly different and you simply can't please EVERYONE. If I had my way I would have made changes to every one of them, but I can't have a game tailored specifically for me so there will always be some things we like, some we don't. Unfortunately 2042 is a shit game and that's really the upshot. Not to mention, the moment you force me to play vs M+K players with my CONTROLLER, is the moment you lose my money. Bad game, horrid experience, unenjoyable, and this is before mentioning the bugs.
One of the most ridiculous decisions made was to change the 64 player experience, the reason it was a ridiculous decision was because there was NOTHING LACKING about the 64 player experience lol the maps were already HUGE.
I really could make a list....
PS The gunplay is VILE compared to BF1 and V....
PPS they took away the server browser so they could use SBMM and that tries to compensate for mixing M+K and Controller uses allowing for Crossplay (MONEY).
Online FPS gaming is dead to me as evrywhere will be going on this direction now.
I literally wouldn't play this game if it was entirely free - from a huge, HUGE BF fan. I am SO GRATEFUL BF1 and BFV are still so active. I play BFV a lot still.
32:00 into the video - I knew all this, and said all this very early on and got shouted down by fanboy morons. It's SO FUNNY when all the things I said keep getting spoken about in the exact same vein by reputable youtubers and players LOL.
Running..... And running... And running............. AND RUNNING, die, repeat.
Uninstall.
I miss BF2 with all of its great expansions.. Good times. The original passion is gone, and the originals devs have apparently pretty much all moved out of DICE. The company we (old school players since BF1942, BF2 or the original 2142) knew is pretty much gone. We should start following developers and not companies.
Can't remember the last time a game died almost immediately after birth. I had enjoyed some bits of 2042 but the open fields to cover and the check points on roof tops where enemies where spawning in tanks just killed any sense of enjoyment. Always needing to find a new match after each game had me playing the same map 2 or 3 times. It felt very underwhelming for a game that was only multilayer they lacked alot of content limited weapons a handful of maps felt like I was getting dlc quantity for a full price value.
Artifact was a game like that, or maybe even a stillborn game.
@@warmike Just like anthem
Cyberpunk 2077
I remember playing Vampire the Masquerade Bloodlines on release and just getting to Pisha and her questline when I read on gamefaqs that Troika was dead...
F for me. I paid for ultimate 😭
maybe I'm just being dramatic, but seeing what Battlefield 2042 turned into was devastating to me, even borderline heartbreaking. Since I was in H.S playing BC2, it's been my favorite series ever. it was so different than anything else and it offered an experience no other game to this day has been able to match. So to see them take a tried and true formula and completely dump it for what is essentially a copy and paste system from a bunch of other games was a sign that now even Battlefield has fallen. This genuinely makes me sad man
Me too man
They really did f up the Battlefield series big time. I don’t think it will ever come back from this honestly. It might even be the last Battlefield game. Only way it’s getting better is it gets sold to someone who gives a shit about the title.
@@whatfreedom7 i told allot of my friends the same thing. In the hands of the current publishers/devs its not going to recover. I read an article a while back claiming that they are going to make another one close to the originals, then i read that they are revamping the Specialist system which is like...it just feels that devs genuinely do not give a shit about the games they make anymore, and wether that be laziness, lack of creative idea, lack of quality control or even possibly having their hands tied by the publisher, its hearbreaking. While i do think youre right on giving it to someone else, i think alternatively we as the community are gonna have to do our part and send a message by not buying their shit anymore.
Relax it's just a shooter game. You will find hundreds of others.
@@Gutvald if you don't get it you don't get it
The worst part about Battlefield 2042 is that they could've been making Mirror's Edge 3.
Least this didn't happen to mirror's edge
Or Star Wars Battlefront 3
@@soggyman1098 the better option
After “cataclysm” I rather they leave it alone.
Mirror's Edge 3, Star Wars BF 3, Battlefield 2143, BF Vietnam Remake
So many missed chances
Man, I remember having already a really bad feeling when I played the Beta. I tried it in the ps4 and my brother was hyping the game saying that it was so cool even though it had some problems. I played it and took me 5 matches to see how bad this game was going to be. 3 of my "matches" were my character spawning below the map and not being able to join the game and the other 2 were a complete mess. Shooting enemies was not being registered, weapons were not spawning, flying cars, the drone started spinning everywhere making it impossible to control and way more glitches than I wanted to see. Even with all that my biggest problem was that the game felt bland. Classes felt plain and boring, maps barely interacted with player actions, vehicles felt like plastic models, cringe ass voice lines, gameplay resembling more of a CoD model, etc. After the beta I convinced my brother to wait for reviews and yeah, we saved ourselves $60
Some things to note, Bad Company had a campaign, also nobody seems to have cared about the singleplayer being missing.
The main thing that really killed the game was the lack of destruction, mirror-astheticed characters for both teams, unoptimization, and above all else- specialists.
They didn't just kill the game, they killed the entire franchise.
I hate that they abandoned Battlefield V for this. Despite its problems, V had a solid foundation of good feeling gunplay, movement, and presentation. It only had technical issues and a lack of content but it was nowhere near the level of 2042.
According to leaks, the next scheduled major update for V would have included the Eastern Front, which undoubtedly would have had an even greater revitalising effect than the Pacific update did.
The reality is EA measured it's success on initial sales and aimed to make the BR mode a big deal, which ofcourse it flopped coming like a year after launch. BFV was barebones at launch and had disastrous marketing, I doubt it would ever have been worth investing in EA's eyes.
The question I ask myself: what are they going to do to compensate the people that paid 40$ extra for 4 season passes - there’s no way this game is going to get 4 seasons worth of content.
Probably drop some cosmetics without the necessity to do missions or level up.
Realistically it’s either absolutely nothing or free skins and cosmetics
Unintentionally give them a lesson in personal finances.
@@benzski44 They open themselves up for lawsuits if they just do nothing
May the cherished memories of the glory days of battlefield 3 and 4 live on. From your metro and locker meat grinds to your first jeep stuff kill, to your whole squad out flanking and taking an objective together. Games of fun that created memories of fun... rest in piece battlefield. I will miss you, old friend.
In BF4, me and 2 friends used to take the basic Transport chopper, I was the Pilot (and rather good at it), one was mounting one of the two side Miniguns and another was constantly fixing me as an engineer IF I got hit. We were a flying fortress and were in the same chopper for the whole round more than a few times and got sooo many points from kills, conquests, teamspawns etc.
@@brumbarde6817 that was how me and a friend played. i was usually flying an attack heli and i was pretty damn good at it and he would nail people with the gun from accross the map. multiple rounds where we never died.
Oh that metro meat grind! :D Great fun
Dude you realize BF4 is still alive and active right,just go back to it
Lol "jeep stuff" xD got that
First time channel viewer here: loved the style of this video and even though I already knew a lot of this stuff, it was a joy to listen to while working. Brilliant work!
Playing battlefield to me is like an abusive relationship. I remember the good times we had and that’s what keeps getting me suckered back into giving it more chances. It continues to give me promises that “this time will be different” and “I’ll right my wrongs” and then when i commit to it again, I continue to realize that what I fell in love with is no longer there. I know that I need it let it go but it’s so hard when I know full well what it can because of how it used to be
There are so many good alternatives just break loose and go out into the wide world
Hell let loose. Check it out
I remember saying when they announced that extra studio’s would join development it could only mean one thing; things weren’t going well. You don’t bring in more studio’s if development is on schedule.
Even now.
They can literally just remove specialists, go back to classes, add a server browser etc. but they wont.
They're still clinging to the specialist idea because they want to sell skins for them.
what good are skin sales when nobody is here to buy them? DICE deserves this failure.
sadly they can't. The whole game is build around the specialists. You can't just take out such a core mechanic and place another in it. It won't work. I wont go into detail, but doing this would need additional developed time of AT LEAST one year. There is soo much more behind it than u think
Welcome to shareholders, they don't have a choice. If shareholders want marketable characters you get em.
@@fIayff they already took out a core mechanic when removing classes
I hate that every dev thinks they can No Man's Sky their game, just because one studio fixed their awful launch does not mean that you can drop an awful game to hope to fix it
38:44 the way nerdslayer pronounces "photogrammetry" is probably the best thing I've heard all week
I would laugh, but then I kind of feel sad THAT was your highlight of the week.
Photagumutree
I was looking for this comment X). It's foe-toe-gram-ah-tree if anyone was curious
Damn, brutal. One of the earliest death of a games after a game being released yet?
And a AAA title no less
I think Lawbreakers takes that crown
Yes, Anthem too
artifact takes that easy
@@Evanz111 AAA should be a derogatory term at this point
If you're old like me you remember Battlefield 2142 in 2006 had a climate refugee based backstory as well. The main differences being it was an approaching ice age and BF2142 was actually a good game.
One of the reasons why im against "Games as a service" and "Early Access" as of whole, its either an excuse to milk more money out of you or to release an unfinished product and use the first wave of players as Beta testers.
Or both at once!
I was in the beta in July 2021 you said you couldn't confirm. I have the email if you'd like it. It had huge watermarked play ID's across the screen that was painful to play with the overlay. There were massive server login issues and could only be played in the middle of the night or you'd get booted or unable to login at all.
Ya that was so fun especially when I plugged my controller in to try it with that and the entire game broke.
One overlooked fact is the percentage of the playerbase that consistently, religiously, traditionally(which is a large percent), who have consistently made excuse for and supported the downhill spiral of this once great franchise is just as much to blame as the publisher.
No publisher would push a product they know wont sell, their motivation for this level of disrespect to fans is fueled and supported by fans themselves, you cant know something is bad or unproven, throw money at it knowing the reputation and ignoring the signs, then get upset with the obvious result.
IF the data EA had on the sales reflected market failure due to the consumers lack of faith and reluctance to buy into preorders and early weeks sales this game would not have failed the way it did. Not making excuses for EA, but Battlefield wont be the only death if things keep going the way its going.
Even now if you log on and say something mildly critical they get super defensive
Sounds like we need a new video game market crash ala the one in '83.
@@margotpreston basically, what needs to change is the way people value their time and money as consumers, we give away a little and in the numbers it's given away in amounts a lot. Imagine what would happen if we used that same energy to help each other in times of need. Would be money well spent in that direction instead of giving it to a company that has no respect or care for the consumer.
this is a problem with the whole gaming industry at this point. as long as people fall victim to the hype train and keep giving money to these shitty corporations, the more and more we'll see this happening. i can't wrap my head around the fact that people will complain about broken shitty games will still give money to the companies behind said broken shitty games (e.g. fucking EA). they're getting what they deserve i guess.
Good point. I knew we were in trouble when they released an entirely CGI trailer and everyone lost their minds declaring "Battlefield is back baby!".
I was just scratching my head... and DICE was probably wrapping up development because it looked like an easy sale based on Uber hype that was based on nothing...
Devs are so excited to be on your show that they are speedrunning from launch to get here now. :D
Never seen your channel tell this video but everything in the video was well thought out and presented. Definitely subscribing
I rarely want to commend battlefield games since lately they've been shit, but BFV's urban maps were actually a good standout with how well they were structured. there was always adquiate cover and countertops/buildings to hide inside. tanks felt good to play but infantry could survive
I hated bf5 at first but it's actually come to be one of my favorites. I love the maps and the gun play feels great
Battlefield 5 is my favorite fps of all time because of the gunplay
@@Goldrunner1169 it's so damn smooth but something about BF1 just keeps pulling back. That game had so much personality.
@@Goldrunner1169 I never played it because of the reviews but picked it up about a year and a half ago and it's fun as hell. Can tell if bf4 or bf5 is my favorite anymore
bf5 is severely underrated, the launch sucked but its aged so well
Every TH-camr that defended this shit and told people they’re dumb for not liking it should apologize for ever entertaining the idea that this was a good game
Right!!!!!!
every youtuber that said that, probably got paid and as always vote with your wallet, unsub and never watch their content anymore
The first thing I noticed when entering the game upon release was that there were like 4 more guns in the main game than the beta. The lack of weapons in comparison to a game like battlefield 4 was absolutely astonishing. 2 LMGs upon release? Seriously?
They literally could have downgraded the graphics a bit and copy pasted all guns from most previous games and slap on new sound design and a few more effects and have much more content
@@rilesmattix5217 could’ve just done a graphics overhaul of BF4 and would’ve had a top-rated game lmfao
@@BlackHawk2901 indeed a simple solution it would have been
instead of this horrible thing they could have just made Battlefield 4*2*
It's really frustrating that DICE insists on checking off every trendy box from shooters I avoid in favor of Battlefield. Battlefield has the appeal to be its own thing but... Money.
It’s funny how when they’re marketing and talking about the game they know EXACTLY what players want. Then when it comes to making it they do almost the exact opposite.
what? this game me countless hours of fun! I didnt buy it, but its still given me entertainment because of all the memes and articles about it
The "it's an older build" excuse is used any time players notice that a "beta" (really just a promotional demo) has a lot of issues. They use that excuse every time, and every time, it's proven to mean nothing as the release build always has the same issues that were noticed during the beta.