Battlefield 2042

Drexion said:
On one of the streams they said that the largest map is bigger than the pubg/apex/fortnite BR maps, clocking in at about 6km^2. That's something like twice the size of the Fortnite map. If anything, even with 120 players you might end up running around for minutes at a time without seeing another player.

View attachment 365463
Click to expand...
Not if you have vehicles, or planes, or heli's etc etc etc.
 
UltraTaco said:
Still cnt believe they dont have single player campaign. I luv watching those on yourube
Click to expand...

Considering that the only decent campaign DICE ever made was BC2, its no great loss. Better they spend the time and resources in making sure the game isn't a bug infested shit show at release.
 
Blade-Runner said:
Considering that the only decent campaign DICE ever made was BC2, its no great loss. Better they spend the time and resources in making sure the game isn't a bug infested shit show at release.
Click to expand...
Coincidentally, the BC2 campaign is the only one I've tried!
 
Mother of god. So many players on screen when they roll out. Looks like Battlefield is back.

(be sure to switch quality to 4K!)
 
Last edited:
DPI said:
Mother of god. So many players on screen when they roll out. Battlefield is back.

Click to expand...

they always have a ton of people in trailers. but it looks awesome. the grapel hook is gonna be so fun.

I have 5 months to get my hands on a better video card.
 
OMFG... it looks so good. Only gripe, though minor, is being able to customize your weapons (Crysis much?) mid game. But I also want to see new sea based vehicles in action too.
 
Looks like you can change weapon attachments in real time mid match. Not sure I like that. Having someone instantly go from a close range to long range setup because they come under fire from a sniper? Not a huge fan of that idea. Maybe it is limited to certain modes only.

Grapple hook and other future stuff, not a fan of. But looks like the buildings are even more intractable which can be interesting.
 
I don't like it, similar to bf4 with cosmetic climbing accessories.If they developed this for 3 years??
We will see what the game will be like, there will be an open beta for everyone,so it will be seen how the game runs on my pc.
If the tanks are good maybe then i will buy.
 
It looks exciting but I think I am too old for games like these. It looks overwhelming in terms of the combo of speed and information overload. Unless I was in a squad and had a clear idea of a specific role and objective, I wouldn't even know where to start. And even then I'd still probably die constantly with that many enemies all gunning for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ncjoe
like this
peppergomez said:
It looks exciting but I think I am too old for games like these. It looks overwhelming in terms of the combo of speed and information overload. Unless I was in a squad and had a clear idea of a specific role and objective, I wouldn't even know where to start. And even then I'd still probably die constantly with that many enemies all gunning for me.
Click to expand...
I'm also too old for it but can't wait to play. It looks chaotic, but it's like learning to ride a bike or surfing- you kind of struggle at first but then start finding angles and start discovering the overall rhythm to it, and that's when it grabs you. Or a particular vehicle or aircraft might really grab you and then you want to do nothing but that, aka vehicle whoring.

Keep in mind this particular trailer was a frantic compilation of intense combat sequences, and it's not necessarily how every moment of a round is going to play out. The large size of the maps should dilute the frenzied pace the trailer would imply.

I'd also highly recommende getting on some type of voice chat and squad'ing up with people, just to able to make decisions and move as a group. That's really where Battlefield shines. If nothing else, I'm sure there will be [H] people in this thread you can join up with, I'll certainly be playing from day one. The only thing I'm not sure of is what the voice comm platform of choice will be when the game comes out. In the BF3 and BF4 days, most people used Teamspeak and pretty much ignored the in-game VOIP (in BF4 at least). However these days everything is about Discord, plus BF 2042's internal voice comms may turn out to be viable.
 
Last edited:
TangledThornz said:
OMFG... it looks so good. Only gripe, though minor, is being able to customize your weapons (Crysis much?) mid game.
Click to expand...
One way of looking at it is if everyone has the same advantage, then no one has an advantage. I think the lack of animation on equipping/unequipping attachments was made as a gameplay pacing decision since it's a return to fast-paced, huge MP sandbox. It would have probably also added a ton of extra development overhead, without necessarily improving gameplay. Could have even become annoying in day to day play once the novelty of the animations wore off.

Personally, I don't hate the idea of no longer having to suicide and respawn just to switch guns or attachments. We'll see.
 
Last edited:
Flogger23m said:
Looks like you can change weapon attachments in real time mid match. Not sure I like that. Having someone instantly go from a close range to long range setup because they come under fire from a sniper? Not a huge fan of that idea. Maybe it is limited to certain modes only.

Grapple hook and other future stuff, not a fan of. But looks like the buildings are even more intractable which can be interesting.
Click to expand...

I kind of agree with you on the attachments feature and perhaps there will be a hardcore mode that disables it.

I just wonder if the array of attachments is going to be as expansive as BF4 was because going by the trailer that specific weapon had 2 attachments each for Optics, Mag, Grip, Barrell.
Those could possibly be presets from a larger selection but it seems reasonable they would cut back on attachments.

Looking at it again it I'm beginning to think its just standardized attachments i.e. Iron Sight / Scope / Red Dot and won't be Iron Sight / Scope 1, 2, 3, 4.../ Red Dot 1, 2, 3, 4.

I'm definitely sold especially after getting back into BF4. Now I just need a good studio to obtain the Tribes IP and get a next gen Tribes.
 
peppergomez said:
It looks exciting but I think I am too old for games like these. It looks overwhelming in terms of the combo of speed and information overload. Unless I was in a squad and had a clear idea of a specific role and objective, I wouldn't even know where to start. And even then I'd still probably die constantly with that many enemies all gunning for me.
Click to expand...
trailers are always chaotic. when they show raw gameplay footage then you'll get an idea of how it actually is. that should come anytime now, and system requirements.
 
DPI said:
One way of looking at it is if everyone has the same advantage, then no one has an advantage. I think the lack of animation on equipping/unequipping attachments was made as a gameplay pacing decision since it's a return to fast-paced, huge MP sandbox. It would have probably also added a ton of extra development overhead, without necessarily improving gameplay. Could have even become annoying in day to day play once the novelty of the animations wore off.

Personally, I don't hate the idea of no longer having to suicide and respawn just to switch guns or attachments. We'll see.
Click to expand...
Back in my day you spawned with what you picked and if you didn't like it you either suicide (which you only did if some n00b crashed a helo in the middle of the ocean) or if you killed a player on the enemy team and hope he has gear that you like :)

 
BurningBeard484 said:
I kind of agree with you on the attachments feature and perhaps there will be a hardcore mode that disables it.

I just wonder if the array of attachments is going to be as expansive as BF4 was because going by the trailer that specific weapon had 2 attachments each for Optics, Mag, Grip, Barrell.
Those could possibly be presets from a larger selection but it seems reasonable they would cut back on attachments.

Looking at it again it I'm beginning to think its just standardized attachments i.e. Iron Sight / Scope / Red Dot and won't be Iron Sight / Scope 1, 2, 3, 4.../ Red Dot 1, 2, 3, 4.

I'm definitely sold especially after getting back into BF4. Now I just need a good studio to obtain the Tribes IP and get a next gen Tribes.
Click to expand...

Personally I hope they continue to do weapon variants like BF4 rather than crazy attachments like Modern Warfare. As an example in BF4 you had multiple Galil ACE rifles, in different calibers with their appropriate barrel lengths. You could of course choose sight options, muzzle devices and the like. Kept things sensible rather than create a bunch of odd kit-bash situations.

Example of BF4.
 
Flogger23m said:
Personally I hope they continue to do weapon variants like BF4 rather than crazy attachments like Modern Warfare. As an example in BF4 you had multiple Galil ACE rifles, in different calibers with their appropriate barrel lengths. You could of course choose sight options, muzzle devices and the like. Kept things sensible rather than create a bunch of odd kit-bash situations.

Example of BF4.
Click to expand...
I sorta skipped BF4 and I've been playing it some recently. Unlocking the attachments and weapons is a grind though. I don't like it. I'd rather get points and be able to spend them to unlock whatever gun and attachment I want.
 
I'm almost positive a free BR is going to come now. watch what shroud says at the end of the trailer. he knows something else is coming. he was testing apex before anyone knew about it.

 
Looking good Battlefield!

Haven't played a game in the series since Battlefield 3, which I loved. Looking forward to getting back in and dying 5 seconds after spawning because my reflexes ain't what they use to be!

Just hope my current PC can play the game because it doesn't look like I'll be getting to upgrade if the current availability and prices remain.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Well, dlss support is in for BF 2042 presumably since the last entry had it, so I doubt that.
Click to expand...
I do expect dlss support, but I also expect it to be highly optimized for AMD just because of the new consoles having rdna2 based gpu’s.
 
DPI said:
(be sure to switch quality to 4K!)
Click to expand...


As I expected, in-game graphics look nothing like the reveal trailer despite them prefacing the reveal as "GAME ENGINE FOOTAGE". Typical EA bullshit, but obviously worth it given the numpties who will pre-order on that basis alone.

Graphically I am not seeing much of an improvement over BF V.....buuuuuuuuuut (a huge but) I would be okay with that trade off if they can actually get the game to run well with 128 players.
 
DPI said:
Mother of god. So many players on screen when they roll out. Looks like Battlefield is back.

(be sure to switch quality to 4K!)
Click to expand...

1623678911215.png


Crossplay?
Brackle said:
I do expect dlss support, but I also expect it to be highly optimized for AMD just because of the new consoles having rdna2 based gpu’s.
Click to expand...
The GPU in Gen 8 was GCN 1.1, which was brand new at the time they were released. The only games I can think of off the top of my head that ran better on AMD compared to the NVIDIA equivalent with the PC version were the DiRT series.
Blade-Runner said:
As I expected, in-game graphics look nothing like the reveal trailer despite them prefacing the reveal as "GAME ENGINE FOOTAGE". Typical EA bullshit, but obviously worth it given the numpties who will pre-order on that basis alone.

Graphically I am not seeing much of an improvement over BF V.....buuuuuuuuuut (a huge but) I would be okay with that trade off if they can actually get the game to run well with 128 players.
Click to expand...
"In Engine" literally means a CG movie made using the game's engine. The industry has been using this verbiage for more than a decade now, so anybody who was expecting anything different are, quite frankly, an idiot.
 
Blade-Runner said:
prefacing the reveal as "GAME ENGINE FOOTAGE".
Click to expand...
I thought by now everyone would know that "game engine footage" is code for "rendered in the game engine", the same way hollywood CGI films can spend hours rendering one frame. That phrase is there on marketing materials to protect them from fraud/false advertising claims.

Most game engines nowadays allow you to render content similarly to 3D content creation applications, so technically/legally they are not wrong, it's 'game engine footage'. Just not real time. Content for a game trailer isn't anywhere as heavy as a hollywood movie though, I'd guess anywhere from 30 seconds to a couple minutes for one frame is enough, after all they don't want to make it too obvious its a render.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Well, dlss support is in for BF 2042 presumably since the last entry had it, so I doubt that.
Click to expand...
Nvidia, we have a problem:D
Amd graphics always work better when it comes to BF, who plays BF that buys amd gpu, so it's always been.
Amd doesn't have dlss or raytracing but that doesn't mean that nvidia is better with dlls, dlss additionally processes the image and amd doesn't, amd rx6000 is more pure gaming graphics and rtx 3000 is more for gpu mining and other things.
Here is the proof that rx 6800xt is stronger than rtx 3080 and so 99% will be in bf 2042, the difference can only be bigger in favor of amd.


Or here, the difference is smaller at a higher resolution but still, these are old tests and probably the current difference is even bigger in favor of amd gpu.
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6700-xt/7.html
There is no reason to doubt that it will be the same with bf 2042
 
Last edited:
pt1c4 said:
Nvidia, we have a problem:D
Amd graphics always work better when it comes to BF, who plays BF that buys amd gpu, so it's always been.
Amd doesn't have dlss or raytracing but that doesn't mean that nvidia is better with dlls, dlss additionally processes the image and amd doesn't, amd rx6000 is more pure gaming graphics and rtx 3000 is more for gpu mining and other things.
Here is the proof that rx 6800xt is stronger than rtx 3080 and so 99% will be in bf 2042, the difference can only be bigger in favor of amd.
Click to expand...

I doubt either party will have a bad time running this game. DICE are pretty good at optimizing their games.
 
pt1c4 said:
Nvidia, we have a problem:D
Amd graphics always work better when it comes to BF, who plays BF that buys amd gpu, so it's always been.
Amd doesn't have dlss or raytracing but that doesn't mean that nvidia is better with dlls, dlss additionally processes the image and amd doesn't, amd rx6000 is more pure gaming graphics and rtx 3000 is more for gpu mining and other things.
Here is the proof that rx 6800xt is stronger than rtx 3080 and so 99% will be in bf 2042, the difference can only be bigger in favor of amd.


Or here, the difference is smaller at a higher resolution but still, these are old tests and probably the current difference is even bigger in favor of amd gpu.
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6700-xt/7.html
There is no reason to doubt that it will be the same with bf 2042
Click to expand...

RDNA 2.0 has ray tracing capability and AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution (DLSS competitor coming soon). You can also mine on it and use it for other GPGPU tasks like literally every other video card on the market today. No video card released today is "pure gaming graphics."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top