![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Dedicated servers vs server browser are 2 different things...
As good as BF2 was, I think they peaked with BC2... And it went to shit after that, Medal of Honor 2 was the beginning of the end.
Son they've already done BF2.
I have a feeling the perceived player base will be too small. It doesn't appeal to many outside of the US (maybe a little bit with Australians) and I doubt many Vietnamese have had access to quality internet, at least historically. I don't see why it couldn't be rolled into an overall Cold War era game though. The main game can take place in Europe with the US & NATO Vs USSR, and a DLC can add Vietnam. But it seems like everything is pointing to WWII. Maybe in 2-3 years we'll get lucky...
Precisely, the game is barely 16 months old and struggles to hit 25,000 consecutive players on PC. By comparison, PUBG utterly destroys BF1 in terms of the player base.
Look at GTA V and Skyrim, each have sold 10 million copies alone on PC in large part because of free mods.Free modwont sale 6-10 million copies
Absolutely LOVED the single player campaigns of BC1 and BC2. Tired of all these games focusing everything on multiplayer. I know that's where the money is, but I just wish they would stop sacrificing campaigns. I haven't even bought an FPS since Destiny 1.
Yar, it should be called Battlefield 6.
BF2 up to 3 are my favourite, bf4 was good too but a small step back from bf3. I’m hating the direction these games are going in. Bf1 was terrible, I felt like I was playing COD!
I hated the weapon design thoroughly in BF1. The whole balancing is completely off. The MGs (with minor exceptions) are all designed to be useful as run and gun weapons. We're talking massive water cooled, non-portal MGs being used like they were a tiny carbine. To make them not OP their damage and accuracy is reduced to comical levels. You can put 5 shots into a guy and they'll shrug it off. Anything over 50 meters is pointless, you're not going to hit it. If you see one of those MGs you'll take the chance and just run right in front of it. That is entirely the opposite of how MGs were in WWI. They're horrible suppressive weapons and you can't use them to lock down an area. Kind of makes the class very redundant. Almost pointless to use those when the SMGs do the same thing, and often better. There were a few exceptions, as in only one that I have (I don't have all the weapons) and that is the Chauchat. It is the only MG that kind of works well as a support weapon. I do like two of the new maps but again the vehicles are lame and it is still or more less running around. Feels like TDM (which I like in BF4) in Conquest.BF2 up to 3 are my favourite, bf4 was good too but a small step back from bf3. I’m hating the direction these games are going in. Bf1 was terrible, I felt like I was playing COD!
Completely agree. BF3 was great, BF4 turned great after they fixed it, then BF1 was so dumbed down and simplistic, didn't really enjoy it as much.
Bf1 is a whole lot of fun atm. Intense fights.
I agree.
One of my frikkin fave movies of all time....My Dad, Bro and I can recite every damn line in Kelly's Heroes... " Ahhh take the gas pipe Sargeant, you creep!"Sherman tanks should look sweet though
There is so much untapped potential from Cold War era, and that's before you even include Vietnam. You could have a a set of maps from several Cold War events.
I'd just be happy with a fictional Soviets cross the Rhine in the 80s conflict. Yeah nukes would have been launched, but the same can be said for BF3/4's story. Campaign would be interesting to play from Soviet, American, East German, British ect. perspectives. If they did go with such a theme I would have hoped there would have been a "European NATO" faction with some European vehicles, like the Leopard 2.
Seems to me like they turned it into CoD. Infrantry just zerging one another. I prefer more tactical fights, especially with vehicles.