Agree. They don’t need to reimagine, they need to de-imagine and find out what made the BF series unique and fun. They’ve gone so off-target that someone made the game they should have made, but with block figures, and its a success! (Im talking about Battlebit).
They could have built new and refreshing features on top of the well-functioning formula. BF in a future dystopia could have been great. Wingsuits and extreme weather of various sorts would have been cool. As long as the game still had a fun balance between vehicles and infantry and snipers. Destructable buildings and close city streets combat made all 3 sides feel like they had options.
It is clear Battlefield just has no place in modern gaming.
The niche Battlefield fit into did not disappear. Rather, the company/publisher/developer just pissed away so much goodwill with how poorly they handled BF V. They destroyed their playerbase with their behavior and broken promises.
Players have been getting less and less patient with disaster launch and thus hated the game which is known for disaster launches. A few games get away with it but since Cyberpunk or maybe even Fallout 76, the general concensus is that a broken game is not worth the time, not even if it gets better later. Games that get away with it usually have some saving grace, like Jedi Survivor being playable but having unplayable performance on PC. Even then, it pretty much lost the PC crowd. BF 2042 was unplayable at launch on every platform, had no redeeming qualities and it even tore out core parts of the game, like the class system, in favor of systems that can be indefinitely monetised. In a game that costet AAA money.
The only reason Ubisoft is getting away with the “it’ll be good later” thing is that a) they invented it in the AAA space with Rainbow6Siege and b) they actually stick to these games for a long time. EA gave 2 years for Star Wars BF2 to sort its shit out, put out a new release of the game with all the cosmetics in it and the the next week announced that they no longer support it. Neat. Meanwhile, Ubisoft has not only stuck with R6S, but also developed a new anti-cheat system so it doesn’t die to cheater and are still sticking with it. Another Ubisoft title, For honor. The game was okay at launch but playercount wise it was DOA. Yet, the game is still getting updates and new content regurarly 5 or so years later. THAT is the difference. EA dips on the first sign of losing money while, for all the things I despise Ubisoft, I gotta give props to them for sticking to their games for long time.
Also, Battlebit has shown that BF has a place in the modern gaming, EA/Dice just refused to just make a BF game for the past almost decade. They made something that resembled BF with WW1 and WW2 paint, then a piece of turd, but not a single BF game.
It’s probably a thing where it’s cyclical of how much people are accepting of broken releases based on parameters like ‘when was the last huge broken launch?’ and the current generation who didn’t experience broken launches sunddently entering the gaming space.
Once again they aim for something that looks unpromising. I hope they drop the single player, come to their senses and make something closer to bf4. They should know better.
Battlebit has been scratching this itch really well for me lately.
I hope the battlefield series can make a return to form but I am not holding my breath. Shooters tend to change with the times (imagine if all games still played like the original DOOM?) and I imagine they’re going to keep changing things, but hopefully for the better.
It’s interesting to compare Battlefield vs. Call of Duty and how the games have done in the past decade. COD is still a top seller and is doing great, Battlefield not so much. I feel like they both have iterated in ways (the newer COD games are similar to the ones I played in the early ~2010’s, but there have been some changes), but the ways COD has iterated have been better accepted. They even had a Battle Royale attached to the game (It sounds like BF was trying to do this at one point) and it was positively received as well.
Reimagination. So we have this mode Reimagi-match which is Team Death Match but with another name on it. But it won’t be playable for like 48 months after release.
But players can buy Reimagi-Coins and get Reimagi-Crates. These have NFTS made by AIs. They are also the only way to get new guns and perks. You have to trade the NFTS for them. Of course you can get these Reimagi-Crates by playing the game and it will only take 36 days of grinding to get a single one.
Also please be aware that you have to buy the seasons pass to play at all. It costs 39.99$ and every week will be it’s own season (progress will not be taken to new seasons, so you can feel the pride and accomplishment every week).
Oh, you are angry for the 5th time in a row about our game not being playable or being player unfriendly? Sorry, you already bought the game years before launch like a fucking idiot and we will do the bare minimum just to get away with it. And we will do it again. And again. And again. Because we know, you will come back every single time. You sad joke of a human being 😘
I’ll once again throw in my hopes for a fantasy battlefield.
Working with real countries is a chore when the game needs to be sold globally. The game loses identity when it cannot identify any of the concrete reasons for the conflict or let any opponents be demonized.
Gameplay will need to justify crazy shit to let people do fun things like fly around, revive teammates from the dead, or drive giga-vehicles. Fictional worlds are perfect for that; and they can still choose to have damage models influenced by military tactics games.
Fantasy worlds can establish a visual uniqueness that conveys appeal for the game in its marketing, without the brand getting confused with others involving “tough soldier holding assault carbine while backed up by a tank”.
EDIT: One more. Fictional firearms don’t give licensing money to the manufacturers of real arms.
My other, separate hope is for a Battlefield game that rewards squad play even when the players in question are not amazing crackshots. They’ve aimed for that many times, but generally I only see campers and lone Rambo wolves win these games.
Yeah I was a diehard Battlefield fan starting from Bad Company 2. I logged thousands of hours between that and BF3/4/1. BF5 was quite boring and my playtime tapered off drastically. By 2142, I’d purchased the game but have only played maybe 20 minutes of it.
I don’t think it’s solely on Dice as I don’t play many games at all now (only Horizon Forbidden West and now Elder Scrolls), but they surely haven’t given me a reason to choose their game over any other.
I really didn’t care for stuff like Battle Royal and it seems like they really changed what the game is starting with BF1. It feels more like an arcade game than something you can really build skills with now. Gone are the crazy things like parachuting out of a jet and blowing up a chopper with a stinger missile and it really bugged me that there were no choppers due to the WWI setting of BF1.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
I want bad company 3 with building you can destroy.
Agree. They don’t need to reimagine, they need to de-imagine and find out what made the BF series unique and fun. They’ve gone so off-target that someone made the game they should have made, but with block figures, and its a success! (Im talking about Battlebit).
They could have built new and refreshing features on top of the well-functioning formula. BF in a future dystopia could have been great. Wingsuits and extreme weather of various sorts would have been cool. As long as the game still had a fun balance between vehicles and infantry and snipers. Destructable buildings and close city streets combat made all 3 sides feel like they had options.
removed by mod
The niche Battlefield fit into did not disappear. Rather, the company/publisher/developer just pissed away so much goodwill with how poorly they handled BF V. They destroyed their playerbase with their behavior and broken promises.
Players have been getting less and less patient with disaster launch and thus hated the game which is known for disaster launches. A few games get away with it but since Cyberpunk or maybe even Fallout 76, the general concensus is that a broken game is not worth the time, not even if it gets better later. Games that get away with it usually have some saving grace, like Jedi Survivor being playable but having unplayable performance on PC. Even then, it pretty much lost the PC crowd. BF 2042 was unplayable at launch on every platform, had no redeeming qualities and it even tore out core parts of the game, like the class system, in favor of systems that can be indefinitely monetised. In a game that costet AAA money.
The only reason Ubisoft is getting away with the “it’ll be good later” thing is that a) they invented it in the AAA space with Rainbow6Siege and b) they actually stick to these games for a long time. EA gave 2 years for Star Wars BF2 to sort its shit out, put out a new release of the game with all the cosmetics in it and the the next week announced that they no longer support it. Neat. Meanwhile, Ubisoft has not only stuck with R6S, but also developed a new anti-cheat system so it doesn’t die to cheater and are still sticking with it. Another Ubisoft title, For honor. The game was okay at launch but playercount wise it was DOA. Yet, the game is still getting updates and new content regurarly 5 or so years later. THAT is the difference. EA dips on the first sign of losing money while, for all the things I despise Ubisoft, I gotta give props to them for sticking to their games for long time.
Also, Battlebit has shown that BF has a place in the modern gaming, EA/Dice just refused to just make a BF game for the past almost decade. They made something that resembled BF with WW1 and WW2 paint, then a piece of turd, but not a single BF game.
removed by mod
It’s probably a thing where it’s cyclical of how much people are accepting of broken releases based on parameters like ‘when was the last huge broken launch?’ and the current generation who didn’t experience broken launches sunddently entering the gaming space.
Screenshot looks like Far Cry
Battlefield 2
Squared
They are going to make Battlefield into Fortnite, aren’t they?
Apex, but they’ll fuck it up again.
They tried. And failed at that with 2042
Please. Please! Do not pre order. Wait until it is released
deleted by creator
Please bring back Battlefield Heroes
Or Bad Company
only reimagination dice seems to do these days is trying to find ways to monetise instead of making a fun game
see: their battle royale fail, 6v6 mode they wasted time on that didnt even release, heroes in 2042, battle passes
Once again they aim for something that looks unpromising. I hope they drop the single player, come to their senses and make something closer to bf4. They should know better.
“including a single-player campaign from Halo veteran Marcus Lehto’s new studio. A multiplayer experience is also on the way from DICE.”
Thats news to me. Thats going to be weird.
Reimagining…well you rebrand the solution and and if that fails rebrand the problem
EA can fund Neebs Gaming / Hank and Jed for new Battlefield Friends season and get them to advertise new game through it and I’ll pay attention
RIP thick44
Goddamnit that’s right we lost recon.
what?!
Yeah he had a long battle with cancer
fuck…sad to hear
Battlebit has been scratching this itch really well for me lately. I hope the battlefield series can make a return to form but I am not holding my breath. Shooters tend to change with the times (imagine if all games still played like the original DOOM?) and I imagine they’re going to keep changing things, but hopefully for the better.
It’s interesting to compare Battlefield vs. Call of Duty and how the games have done in the past decade. COD is still a top seller and is doing great, Battlefield not so much. I feel like they both have iterated in ways (the newer COD games are similar to the ones I played in the early ~2010’s, but there have been some changes), but the ways COD has iterated have been better accepted. They even had a Battle Royale attached to the game (It sounds like BF was trying to do this at one point) and it was positively received as well.
Reimagination. So we have this mode Reimagi-match which is Team Death Match but with another name on it. But it won’t be playable for like 48 months after release.
But players can buy Reimagi-Coins and get Reimagi-Crates. These have NFTS made by AIs. They are also the only way to get new guns and perks. You have to trade the NFTS for them. Of course you can get these Reimagi-Crates by playing the game and it will only take 36 days of grinding to get a single one.
Also please be aware that you have to buy the seasons pass to play at all. It costs 39.99$ and every week will be it’s own season (progress will not be taken to new seasons, so you can feel the pride and accomplishment every week).
Oh, you are angry for the 5th time in a row about our game not being playable or being player unfriendly? Sorry, you already bought the game years before launch like a fucking idiot and we will do the bare minimum just to get away with it. And we will do it again. And again. And again. Because we know, you will come back every single time. You sad joke of a human being 😘
I’ll once again throw in my hopes for a fantasy battlefield.
My other, separate hope is for a Battlefield game that rewards squad play even when the players in question are not amazing crackshots. They’ve aimed for that many times, but generally I only see campers and lone Rambo wolves win these games.
Honestly i feel like if they would have just kept updating battlefield 4 with new maps and content I would have just stuck with that.
Multiplayer gaming has been in a rough state the past while
Yeah I was a diehard Battlefield fan starting from Bad Company 2. I logged thousands of hours between that and BF3/4/1. BF5 was quite boring and my playtime tapered off drastically. By 2142, I’d purchased the game but have only played maybe 20 minutes of it.
I don’t think it’s solely on Dice as I don’t play many games at all now (only Horizon Forbidden West and now Elder Scrolls), but they surely haven’t given me a reason to choose their game over any other.
I really didn’t care for stuff like Battle Royal and it seems like they really changed what the game is starting with BF1. It feels more like an arcade game than something you can really build skills with now. Gone are the crazy things like parachuting out of a jet and blowing up a chopper with a stinger missile and it really bugged me that there were no choppers due to the WWI setting of BF1.
I very much enjoyed BF5, but Dice constantly fucked it up until I gave up on it entirely.
BC2 is a great game but I think it’s funny you say the game got more arcade
They said the same thing about bad company simplifying battlefield to play on consoles.
but I do think they should have leaned more on destruction, environments and strategy