Battlefield 2042

dreamers75

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

Everybody laughed at COD 2019 being called 'Modern Warfare' but once you play the story you realise that it's a genius title. Although with Battlefield I'm less confident since there hasn't been a good Battlefield campaign since Bad Company 2.

What is this tacked on poorly made mode you speak off?

Battlefield is 64 player Conquest, everything else is an addon

:pac::D.

Homelander

I could be remembering wrong but I thought the BF3, BF4 and Hardline campaigns were sort of passable entertainment.

Only played a bit of BF1 and all of BFV, found both a bit painful despite the amazing visuals.

Dcully

I fully expect yet another unremarkable BF game, Dice havent made a decent map in a decade[except Amiens in BF1 :P] not to mention a good game.
Slight exaggeration but im not convinced they can deliver i pray im totally wrong.

Homelander

There was a few decent maps in BFV. I think a few of them actually came much later though, the base maps were fairly generic and uninspired I would agree.

I think BF1 was a great game. Loved that one. It had real atmosphere and a proper sense of identity. Even though I've now put more time into BFV, I think it's a far inferior and more generic game overall even if it has some better mechanics.

Arras, Iwo Jima, Provence, Solomon Islands, Mercury were all fairly good and I enjoyed playing them....but a lot of the other maps I often used to just stop playing when they cropped up.

The pacific campaign maps for BFV showed more the potential the game could have had from launch but it was far too late at this stage. At launch it barely even felt like a WW2 game.

You know something's really wrong when studios with far less resources than DICE create vastly superior maps for WW2 games like Hell let Loose or Enlisted.

Panic Stations

I don't think I've ever played a battlefield campaign except for Bad Company 2. I have MW and still haven't played the campaign on it.

As long as BF6 has a strong multiplayer I'll be happy. I'll also probably try to pick it up on Day 1 too.

Glico Man

Dcully wrote: »

I fully expect yet another unremarkable BF game, Dice havent made a decent map in a decade[except Amiens in BF1 :P] not to mention a good game.
Slight exaggeration but im not convinced they can deliver i pray im totally wrong.

Thought every map I played on BF1 or BF5 were boring tbh. All of my favourite maps come from previous games. Mashtuur City, Karkand, Seine Crossing, Gulf of Oman, Caspian Border, Guilin Peaks and Zavod.

Could just be the power of nostalgia, but there's nothing memorable about the more recent games

Dcully

Homelander wrote: »

You know something's really wrong when studios with far less resources than DICE create vastly superior maps for WW2 games like Hell let Loose or Enlisted.

Spot on, both games have really great maps.
HLL in particular every single maps is fantastic.

Blazer

Battlefield has basically sucked since BF3.
While BF3 was no BF2 or BC2 it was still a great MP experience.
This whole focus on SP mode should be done away it...BF was and always should be MP focussed.
BF1 was awful muck, grand for hopping on for an hour but never got the thrills of BF2/BC2 or even BF3.
BF5 was even worse....bland boring as hell and it was obvious DICE didn't give a crap about it.

If they really want a battlefield hit remake BC2 in a modern engine and don't touch anything in it.. even drop the SP mode.
It would be a massive hit.

Dcully

Agree BF and single player is a waste of resources.

BlitzKrieg

You know something's really wrong when studios with far less resources than DICE create vastly superior maps for WW2 games like Hell let Loose or Enlisted.

Wont speak for Hell let loose. But Enlisted is built on top of the work of War Thunder and Cuisine Royal (I think it's now called Cursed or something)

and war thunder itself was built on the resources of Birds of steel

which itself was built on the resources of Il 2 Birds of prey.


Smaller companies may not have as much resources but they tend to be a lot more efficient with what they have. Which can be both a blessing and a curse.


Post Scriptum (the WW2 game with the best multi crew tank combat) is similar built on top of Squad which is well known to be made by the team behind the project reality mod for battlefield 2.

It's a blessing because if you've played squad, post scriptum is fairly quick to pick up, it's a curse in that a lot of the problems of squad, post scriptum inherits. beyond the wire (the new ww1 shooter) has a similar situation.

Same with enlisted, it inherits a lot of issues from war thunder and cuisine royale. Which is probably why I'm surprised you mention map design as one of enlisted's strengths, as I would have marked it as one of the weakest aspects of the game.

Spear

The audio for the trailer has leaked:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Battlefield/comments/n6k43i/bf6_trailer_audio_leaked_confirmed/

It doesn't give away much at all.

BlitzKrieg

it gives a lot more weight to the tom henderson leaks with what sounds like a rocket at the end.

Unless the *confirmed* is that tom henderson confirmed it which puts this all in snake eating its own tail territory.

not proving it's fake but the dialogue doesnt match henderson's claim (he says Hold back, the audio is pull back) also the audio appears to come from this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOYWbxrlGko at 00:35

but using audio like that is not unheard of, even in a trailer for a multi million project. It could even just be scratch audio for during the editing process while final recording is done.

Spear

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

it gives a lot more weight to the tom henderson leaks with what sounds like a rocket at the end.

Unless the *confirmed* is that tom henderson confirmed it which puts this all in snake eating its own tail territory.

Yeah, I'm not sure what to make of that Tom Henderson account. Back when I did some small work for EA, there weren't exactly conveniently labelled files called secretbf6railer.mp4 for anyone to randomly discover. Every file object was labelled with their project codename, Havana, White Shark etc etc. So the leaker is either a member of the media who'd have early access and selling them out for attention, or it's Dice/EA astroturfing themselves.

BlitzKrieg

More audio popping up as from other sources, this time films.

So either its again a wip scratch audio or fake.

Spear

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

More audio popping up as from other sources, this time films.

So either its again a wip scratch audio or fake.

I saw, it had been described as an early prototype of the trailer audio, but that sounds more like an ass covering attempt to help it pass off as legit in retrospect.

BlitzKrieg

Spear wrote: »

I saw, it had been described as an early prototype of the trailer audio, but that sounds more like an ass covering attempt to help it pass off as legit in retrospect.

You know I'm kicking myself as I should have realised this all much earlier.

all the material being leaked is Previs work.

Henderson got the material from a Previs studio not DICE itself.


The third floor did a bunch of previs for EA and if you look at their work and the quality of the leaked stuff it does match

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w06Tf_2yq0U

Also they would use a bunch of scratch audio like this (I should know I worked for them) so it lines up a lot better then any of this being a leak from DICE

Dcully

Same with enlisted, it inherits a lot of issues from war thunder and cuisine royale. Which is probably why I'm surprised you mention map design as one of enlisted's strengths, as I would have marked it as one of the weakest aspects of the game.

Possibly so but still a lot better than efforts from Dice.

dreamers75

Dcully wrote: »

Possibly so but still a lot better than efforts from Dice.

I dont understand this, I played BFV and BF1 and there is some amazing maps in there, the BF map design is not geometry like COD, its more large scale because stuff in the sky can kill you and the building you are in can be destroyed.

Squad, HLL have flat canvases they are not "maps" for games but partially 3d generated maps of actual areas which function well in the game (very well in HLL)

never played Enlisted, did enjoy Cuisine Royale but more for the armour than the actual game.

BlitzKrieg

I am kinda confused on the enlisted has good maps position. Enlisted doesnt have great maps at all. They're very functional at most. But I'd put that down to Enlisted leaning very heavily on it's mechanics to push the game, because of the whole squad system enlisted tends to have more open maps to allow for easier AI pathing, there is a lot less sense of a design to its layout as the game fully expects you to throw bodies at objectives. There is a very poor sense of pace to a lot of the enlisted maps. And there's nothing particularly interesting and some of the maps on the 1940 campaign are painfully small. I'd say ones enjoyment of Enlisted is much more tied to how much you like the game's unique mechanics then it's map design.



Hell Let Loose I've only played a few maps, but I do have a serious dislike for their d-day map, there's just something about how it's laid out that I struggle with. But their Hurtgen Forest map and one other who's name I am drawing a blank on I really enjoyed.


Post Scriptum has visually terrible looking maps for most of it's initial run, some of the normandy maps and french 1940 maps look good, but most of the original market garden maps have a horrible amateur look to them. But functionally they work for the most part.

Of the ww2 shooters out there, Post Scriptum would be my pick just because I think it has the best tank combat, but I am getting why Hell let loose is popular. Enlisted was fun for a week and a bit, but it's free to play model is grinding my gears so I've kinda checked out on that one.

Dcully

HLL has superior infantry combat to post scriptum that's why it's so popular I reckon.
Im bored of enlisted now to be honest.
The more I played past 20 hours or so the more shallow it became.

BlitzKrieg

Dcully wrote: »

HLL has superior infantry combat to post scriptum that's why it's so popular I reckon.

Yeah I think thats why post scriptum is doing a big tank rework next patch, I think they'll push that more to the front and doubling down on being #1 for tank crew gameplay.

honestly I'd be all over tank focused spin off from post scriptum, but judging by how much more popular HLL is with infantry I feel like I'd be in the minority for that.

Will_I_Regret

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

Is this what losing an erection feels like?

EA confirmed Battlefield 6 will be cross gen.

**** sake. All that panic to get a Series X...

BlitzKrieg

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

Is this what losing an erection feels like?

EA confirmed Battlefield 6 will be cross gen.

so that likely puts a damper on the 128 player matches theory

Akrasia

bf2 modern combat ps2 vs ps3, basically two entirely different games that shared almost no assets but still called itself cross gen

They've done it before, and as a Ps2 user who didn't upgrade to a xbox 360 for years afterwards, I was really glad they did because the PS2 version, was really really fun, even though technically inferior to the next gen title

Homelander

That is actually slightly different as that was developed for the original Xbox and PS2 which hadn't any hope of running the actual Battlefield 2 game even cut down, so they made MC instead, which was decent enough.

They re-released it on Xbox 360, it was the same base/core game with much better visuals, effects and improved assets. A bit like comparing an original game (say, Halo or Mass Effect) with a re-master (say Halo Anniversay or Mass Effect remastered).

Also it made more sense to re-release MC on the 360 as it was already an Xbox game....they could easily have ported the full Battlefield 2 over to 360, but that would have been a significantly bigger undertaking and wouldn't have been worth it at that stage.

It would be like if they had tried to get BFV or BF1 running on the Xbox 360 or PS3. It just wouldn't be possible and would also have necessitated a different build altogether.

BF6 will be broadly speaking the same base game with lower fidelity and less players, same as BF4 was on 360/PS3 v PS4/XB1.

The big thing is that as time goes on the gap between console and PC has become almost non existant, so there's less need to tailor games to console platforms with the current gen.

When the Xb1 and PS4 were first released, their processors were considered low-end/obsolete on day one and it showed in quite a lot of very CPU heavy games.

Whereas The PS5 and Series X processors are superior to probably 90% of average gaming PCs at present.