Battlefield 2042 was supposed to be the series' grand return to modern combat. After a couple of ventures back into the past, fans were keen on the idea of developer DICE building on 2013's Battlefield 4. Things didn't really work out that way, as fan reception of Battlefield 2042 has been extremely negative overall.
So, where does DICE go from here? Well, it looks like they're heading back to the drawing board. In a detailed post titled 'Battlefield Core Feedback - Maps', the team breaks down what went wrong with 2042's map design. In short, quite a lot.
Much of the mistakes outlined hinge upon the team's decision to go bigger. Battlefield 2042 debuted 128-player battles, which fundamentally changed the way the game works. The move has led to unbalanced map design, and the team is looking to fix that.
Many of the game's original maps are being actively re-worked, the first being Kaleidoscope. This urban arena will be changed in the now-delayed Season One, for both Conquest and Breakthrough modes. Other map re-works are expected in future seasons.
Speaking of which, these learnings will also be applied to brand new maps. The team expects future maps to be more condensed, and is even considering 64-player scenarios, instead of the sprawling 128-player matches that headline Battlefield 2042.
The biggest action point for ourselves is that bigger maps doesn’t necessarily mean more freedom and playstyles, or fun. So you can expect future maps to be smaller in scale than most of our release maps. This also means we are reviewing a possible reduction in the number of Sectors and total Capture Points per map when playing at 128 players.
We’ll also review the player counts across modes such as Breakthrough, as well as the types and number of vehicles that can be used on specific maps.
All in all, this looks like a good direction for 2042, although it'll take some time for all this to be implemented. If you have your own feedback on this update post, EA has opened up a forum thread asking for fan feedback.
Are you interested in these major Battlefield 2042 changes? Let us know in the comments.
[source ea.com]
Comments 8
Might be too late. This is sure to bring in some curious players, but in gaming first impressions matter A LOT. After all the Reddit posts and YouTube videos and bad PR condemning the game, I think this might be dead on arrival.
It took them three months to identify this? Balance the vehicles as well. You can take a hovercraft UP vertical surfaces such as boats and mountains. Going to have to do a lot for them to get me back playing but they already got my money.
Ignoring the bugs, load out system, quick swap, UI, connection issues, hero characters, etc, the issue wasn't 128 players.
The issue is they doubled the player account. The QUINTUPLED map size.
Now I don't hold any degrees in mathematics, but that player increase to map size ration isn't quite right.
Back in my day, Delta Force Black Hawk Down, 25v25, would often respawn you a literal mile outside of the map. And even in that time, goofing it back in a straight line, there was more action going on than in 2042.
Too late. Should have delayed the game instead. More fool me for pre ordering. Sigh.
if sony every made MAG 2 id get a ps5 the first one was on ps3 and allowed 64 player battles...loved that game played it till the day they shut the servers down....Raven all the way.....F#@$ SVER obviously i still have feelings about the factions in that game... point is not sure why EA screwed up so badly there have been games to do big matches well and MAG was one i loved that did that way back in the ps3 era....
@Savage_Joe just redownloaded the trial to see if it got better and nope still pretty much crap....best preorder cancellation i ever done...
Anthem 2.0 like promesse..
Back to the drawing board, refund everybody, and come back with BF 2023. Saw steam player count yesterday was 1700, that's basically on life support, but clinically dead.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...