Battlefield 2042

I played 64 man breakthrough and it was intense. There is some space be points and it isn't perfect but a lot less of a jog fest than 128. I enjoyed it. Nobody is playing though..I had to enable cross play to get a game going. Game time.was usually around 30 minutes and I went up a level each round. Had about 40+ kills a round on average. So there was plenty of action.
 
Already $39 on Steam directly. The $46 or so I paid ended up being a bad deal. Knew it would drop eventually but assumed paying a few dollars more to get it day 1 was worth it. Little did I know most of my time would be spent waiting in menus. By the time I can actually join games I'm sure the price will be $30.
 
Flogger23m said:
...and still not worth it in my experience. Seems some people are more lucky than me, but a lot of others have the same joining server issues. You can easily accumulate 2+ hours waiting in menus before getting into a game, voiding your return window, so even at $29 I wouldn't recommend it.
Click to expand...
Do you know what your NAT type is? I had issues joining warzone games at one point. if you have warzone installed, or maybe any COD game, open it and check your nat type, if it says strict, your firewall might be the problem
 
Last edited:
de9tWD3.jpg


:D
 
WorldExclusive said:
EA trying to get new people to play the game with the new fixes active..........hoping for positive reviews on Steam.
Click to expand...

Those Reviews will never turn around as I see why developers are publishing on Epic instead first. You need about 100k positive reviews on Steam to negate. Evertytime you see a Battlefield 2042 video and someone sniping from a near impossible distance that is just one pissed customer.
 
Last edited:
WorldExclusive said:
EA trying to get new people to play the game with the new fixes active..........hoping for positive reviews on Steam.
Click to expand...

Yup, feeble attempt to pump the concurrent player numbers which was starting to look really pathetic for a newly released BF game. Battlefield V is dangerously close to overtaking Battlefield 2042, which is really bad optics for EA going into the holiday season given that people will base their buying decisions on which game is more populated.

Gabe3 said:
pretty lame, its only on steam too, wonder why lol
Click to expand...

More anecdotal evidence of why EA blocked stat tracking websites for its MP games in recent years, Steam now serves that defacto purpose and they want to inflate the population numbers for the holiday season.
 
To be fair, this is only the 2nd battlefield game I bought @ retail price (Battlefield 2, I paid MSRP). I got BF3 late in the cycle at a discount (didn't have a rig to handle BC2), but Black Friday of 2013, Battlefield 4 was $30 and Premium was $10 or $15. Battlefield 1 was $40 on Black Friday 2016, Battlefield V was dumped on the console market for $30 a week after launch however, the PC price, only went to $40'ish on black friday. I'm a cheap, cheap bastard when it comes to games, especially during the 2012-2016 drought in good titles, so I wait for a new release I am not certain about.

So, anyone who thinks this is something new from EA dumping the price after launch, you either forgot, or had more disposable income than I did.

Please note, I'm not defending this clusterfuck of a launch, it was indeed, undeniably terrible. However, with the series of patches, I'm seeing improvements in the games. One of my complaints is that the maps are still too damn big for the 64 player modes, and they need work/balancing. Hell, I only grudgingly started to play online, spending most of my time on single player Breakthrough on Renewal with the bots set to "Dumb as Shit" mode, just to rank up weapons. The weapon progression, if done online, is a complete fucking joke. There's a certain level of attachments, sometimes in the 100'ish kills that either turn the weapon around, or you get to the point where you figure out that its just not for you. Half the time, the descriptions on the attachments are just plain wrong from empirical testing.

I'm slowly warming up to the online portion of the game, but squad comms, no leaderboard (you know that dude who wiped your squad 3x with all headshots is sketch), the game makes you feel totally isolated in a franchise which built their game style on PTFO.
 
Last edited:
2142 was $25 by Thanksgiving. Only difference is that all my BF2 buddies were telling me how amazing it was (and they were right). Compare that to 2042 wherein a positive review almost seems like trolling.
 
Seems like I can get into Portal matches. Seems like it is mostly Domination, infantry only. Things still feel too floaty and balancing is just off. At both close and medium range the pistol is superior to any of the rifles. Is Conquest in the main mode simply dead?
 
I fired up BF1 last night for comparison and holy hell what a game that is. Before you even enter a match you're hit with this incredible orchestrated score. The UI is super polished, speedy, and functional. Then you enter a game and the graphics and atmosphere blow your fucking face off. How does a 5 year old game look so much better than 2042? But not just the graphics. The sound. So loud and crisp. And the way gunfire reverberates throughout the environment. It's just incredible. I'm really thankful that there's still a community for this game because it truly is a gem IMO.

I still have fun with 2042 but I feel like it's more of a silly "Just Cause" type of game. Great for generating Battlefield moments, not so much an immersive war experience.
 
TwistedMetalGear said:
I fired up BF1 last night for comparison and holy hell what a game that is. Before you even enter a match you're hit with this incredible orchestrated score. The UI is super polished, speedy, and functional. Then you enter a game and the graphics and atmosphere blow your fucking face off. How does a 5 year old game look so much better than 2042? But not just the graphics. The sound. So loud and crisp. And the way gunfire reverberates throughout the environment. It's just incredible. I'm really thankful that there's still a community for this game because it truly is a gem IMO.

I still have fun with 2042 but I feel like it's more of a silly "Just Cause" type of game. Great for generating Battlefield moments, not so much an immersive war experience.
Click to expand...
Turn off the hud, play on St. Quentin maxed out, turn up the surround to 11 war tapes and it's the best experience in Battlefield ever.
 
TwistedMetalGear said:
I fired up BF1 last night for comparison and holy hell what a game that is. Before you even enter a match you're hit with this incredible orchestrated score. The UI is super polished, speedy, and functional. Then you enter a game and the graphics and atmosphere blow your fucking face off. How does a 5 year old game look so much better than 2042? But not just the graphics. The sound. So loud and crisp. And the way gunfire reverberates throughout the environment. It's just incredible. I'm really thankful that there's still a community for this game because it truly is a gem IMO.

I still have fun with 2042 but I feel like it's more of a silly "Just Cause" type of game. Great for generating Battlefield moments, not so much an immersive war experience.
Click to expand...
Alot of people on this forum love to shit on bf1 but I honestly loved it. The maps were fun, the modes were good and I really enjoyed the progression system of it. Like you mentioned the audio was incredible, I played it on my Atmos 5.1.2 setup and couldn't believe how good it sounded.

BF V never really clicked.with me like BF1 did unfortunatly and so far BF 2042 is the same.
 
BF1 was kind of lame, IMO. It started the move to match making over servers and what we see in 2042. But it wasn't that bad. BFV was more of the same.

I'm going to try again tonight. I was able to get into actual Portal games but it seemed a little laggy.
 
Ragenrok said:
Alot of people on this forum love to shit on bf1 but I honestly loved it. The maps were fun, the modes were good and I really enjoyed the progression system of it. Like you mentioned the audio was incredible, I played it on my Atmos 5.1.2 setup and couldn't believe how good it sounded.

BF V never really clicked.with me like BF1 did unfortunatly and so far BF 2042 is the same.
Click to expand...
I loved BF1, the only thing that made me stop playing was the garbage weapons available to Medics, which was the only class I ever play. Otherwise it's on a different planet to 2042 in every aspect. How they went from BF1 to the dumpster fire of 2042 in just a few years is astonishing.
 
Finally getting into games through Portal. Finally got a tank. Was doing fairly good, shot down an enemy attack heli. Was finally having some fun despite the quirks of everything. Then it lags, and exits to the menu.

"Error: Player has been destroyed"

... I'm assuming this meant the host exited the game and the Portal server ends instantly? If so, epic fail.
 
TwistedMetalGear said:
I fired up BF1 last night for comparison and holy hell what a game that is. Before you even enter a match you're hit with this incredible orchestrated score. The UI is super polished, speedy, and functional. Then you enter a game and the graphics and atmosphere blow your fucking face off. How does a 5 year old game look so much better than 2042? But not just the graphics. The sound. So loud and crisp. And the way gunfire reverberates throughout the environment. It's just incredible. I'm really thankful that there's still a community for this game because it truly is a gem IMO.

I still have fun with 2042 but I feel like it's more of a silly "Just Cause" type of game. Great for generating Battlefield moments, not so much an immersive war experience.
Click to expand...
6 months ago I would have said that BF1 was the worst Battelfield game in the history of the franchise, by a LONG shot. But compared to BF2042? That dumpster fire of a game was an absolute masterpiece.

Also, comparing BF2042 to Just Cause is a disgusting insult to the JC series.
 
CaptainClueless said:
Also, comparing BF2042 to Just Cause is a disgusting insult to the JC series.
Click to expand...

To be fair, the last Just Cause was an alpha build that shipped 1+ year before development was done. Even after all the patches when I replayed it you can tell it is still an unfinished game that they had to polish up at the last minute. It is now playable, but gameplay concepts were absolutely not finished. It was still in the tinkering and experimental phase. They just fixed the most glaring incomplete aspects and made it not CTD every 30 minutes.
 
dethred1 said:
I loved BF1, the only thing that made me stop playing was the garbage weapons available to Medics, which was the only class I ever play. Otherwise it's on a different planet to 2042 in every aspect. How they went from BF1 to the dumpster fire of 2042 in just a few years is astonishing.
Click to expand...
The Medic guns made me quit the game early. Haven't bought another BF since. But BF1 felt like real war.
 
Trolling Heli's with SOFLAM + M5. Some amazing sniper shots in here as well.

 
Last edited:
DPI said:
Trolling Heli's with SOFLAM + M5. Some amazing sniper shots in here as well.

Click to expand...

In a properly made BF game, most of those sniper shots would require more drop compensation and the towers would be destructible to prevent camping.
Also one infantry rocket on a heli is more deadly than multiple rockets from a heli on infantry. The balance in this game will never be found.
 
Last edited:
Yea...this game is pretty much dead for me. I find no incentive to level up anything or play. I've tried some of the 64 player and rush/conquest lists and its fun for about 1 or 2 games, then im just done. Dont get the same feeling as I had in 3 or 4 where I could play for hours and lose myself. Game had potential, moneygrab for sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top