Potentially the longest thread in history...

One of the biggest issues for me is the feel of the game. It doesn't feel like a Battlefield game. Everything is sparkly and shiny and the air is clean and clear. the game doesn't have an atmosphere of war, or even any kind of conflict. It reminds me of Fortnite.

Another is the use of specialists instead of classes. I'm sorry but whoever decided on that needs to be castrated and then fed their own testicles.

Yes the specialists suck, I don't understand that at all. The old classes were much better, you actually had to make a tough decision of what class you wanted to play and what weapons you wanted to roll with. Now you can play as recon with a sniper rifle and an anti tank weapon at the same time, and not only that, you can swap between different weapon attachments on the fly. Kind of ridiculous.

The problem with the game is it's a bad clone of CoD. Was trash when it came out and still trash.

It's frustrating because people are dieing for a proper Battlefield. If they went back to battlefield basics but just made the game with new maps and modern game tech it'd be a big success.
 
Yes the specialists suck, I don't understand that at all. The old classes were much better, you actually had to make a tough decision of what class you wanted to play and what weapons you wanted to roll with. Now you can play as recon with a sniper rifle and an anti tank weapon at the same time, and not only that, you can swap between different weapon attachments on the fly. Kind of ridiculous.



It's frustrating because people are dieing for a proper Battlefield. If they went back to battlefield basics but just made the game with new maps and modern game tech it'd be a big success.
EA and Dice have been making poor decisions for a decade now. They don't see resolution, they only want money.
 
EA and Dice have been making poor decisions for a decade now. They don't see resolution, they only want money.

The publisher developer partnership is always up for debate, i'm sure it varies by company and relationship, but typically the publisher funds the development of the game and calls the shots. So i'm not sure how much DICE are actually to blame. They are clearly competent at a technical level, and they just do what they are told. But it's possible they are gave quite a lot of freedom from EA, in which case, shame on them.
 
The publisher developer partnership is always up for debate, i'm sure it varies by company and relationship, but typically the publisher funds the development of the game and calls the shots. So i'm not sure how much DICE are actually to blame. They are clearly competent at a technical level, and they just do what they are told. But it's possible they are gave quite a lot of freedom from EA, in which case, shame on them.
I wouldn't even go that far. They have butt fucked Frostbite and EA has forced their other in house devs to use it simply because they spent money on it. Dice used to be competent, now it's about money because that's how daddy EA is.
 
I wouldn't even go that far. They have butt fucked Frostbite and EA has forced their other in house devs to use it simply because they spent money on it. Dice used to be competent, now it's about money because that's how daddy EA is.
Maybe i'm naive but i'd bet $10 that DICE would make a good game if you told them to make another Battlefield with zero input from EA and zero deadline, just release it when it's ready.
 
Maybe i'm naive but i'd bet $10 that DICE would make a good game if you told them to make another Battlefield with zero input from EA and zero deadline, just release it when it's ready.
They'd have to make a generic war FPS then because I'm sure EA owns the rights to Battlefield and assets.
 
Back
Top Bottom