-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Battlefield 2042 won't have a single player campaign
- Thread starter Kolx
- Start date
The worst kind of story in games likely all out of game cinematics just used to advertise the Battle Passes.
Well to be honest, the leaks/rumors seem to have suggested that this game would get a BR mode as well and it would be F2P, so really it's a bit similar in terms of strategy between what Cod is doing and what Battlefield is.
Difference is just you could argue that the Call of Duty game you buy for 70 dollars has a lot more in it than whatever this will, and I think that's a fair assessment.
You can't do paid seasons in a full price game. That's a F2P monetization model in a full price game.
you might be right. This is a new environment that they haven't successfully tested against yet.
We can dream!
I just hope they create better cosmetics. BFV had some of the worst cosmetics that I've seen in a game. Same for the gun camos. But seeing as they are selling specialists, I assume they'll have to step up in that regard .
Could care less about the lack of campaign.
Could care less about the lack of campaign.
I don't really like how everyone is chasing the Fortnite crowd with battle royale modes and battle passes and so many paid cosmetics and different currencies for this and for that. It's like everyone is in a race to see who can scrape the bottom of the barrel first, preying on children and short attention spans rather than providing a robust multiplayer experience that can stand on its own two feet.
If you're gonna charge full price for the game and then say it's multiplayer only and has a battle pass and presumably other content will have to be bought separately too, the least you could do is say that anyone who buys the game brand new gets a code that gives them the next year's worth of battle passes for free.
Otherwise, what point is there in buying the new Battlefield when Apex Legends or other free titles exist?
Yes OMG the BFV and even BF1 cosmetics have been so boring lol. The screenshots of cosmetics so far look interesting though, I think the new setting will help with that.
Typically (outside of BO4) you get multiplayer, some sort of co-op and a full fledged campaign with every Call of Duty.
Yup. GAAS or Battlepasses just soak up way too much time if you want all the rewards, and when you're paying for the chance the grind you WANT your monies worth so you put all the time into that one game (or alternatively put all your time in to see if you'll make it to cap, THEN buy the pass or not based on progress).
Plus that stuff in a full price paid for game...
I understand them in F2P games and it makes sense. Let people play the game and lock all (or most) cosmetics etc behind battle passes to subsidise development etc. But in a full price game it's not good. I could see a place where the full price game comes with a battle pass to keep players grinding away that is free and included in the cost, but not buying a game and paying more on top every few months.
For as much as I agree with this, I think that battle was lost long ago.
the net positive I'll take from it is that the DLC maps are free and you can ignore the monetization entirely, especially if it's cosmetics.
Wait ...so I won't be able to play against my Xbox one friends is the 128 player mode a next gen exclusive?
I think the point is that the majority of the player base just doesn't care about the campaign and they know it. So why waste time and resources on something that only a fraction of your player base will even bother playing? Especially when you could turn around and put all of that wasted effort back into the multiplayer which is what the real draw is.
What they are doing here is extremely smart on their part. It shows they are listening.
I pay for the 'season passes' in Rock Band, just because it's all the DLC for a discount. But that's clearly an exception since outside of the random clothing, which doesn't matter, the DLC itself never goes away.
It doesn't seem like DICE plans to release another Battlefield game in a few years, so it makes complete sense that there is a battle pass and season pass. From my perspective, this monetization method for full-price games is not polarizing to the majority of consumers.
It's clear that DICE is listening to its player base and fans of FPS.
It's clear that DICE is listening to its player base and fans of FPS.
Ah sorry dunno how I missed that. I'll sub for a bit to EA Play in a few months to give it a go.
This decision killed Titanfall right out of the gate.
Massively underestimating the popularity of campaign modes. As a 34 year old with a busy career, wife, and 1 year old, I don't have the time to dedicate to MP modes in shooters to get to the point where they're enjoyable and I'm not just free XP for everyone else. I want a single player campaign for all that visual goodness on my own terms, where I can pause the game when the baby wakes up.
God damn, this is such a shame. Already killed my interest entirely.
Massively underestimating the popularity of campaign modes. As a 34 year old with a busy career, wife, and 1 year old, I don't have the time to dedicate to MP modes in shooters to get to the point where they're enjoyable and I'm not just free XP for everyone else. I want a single player campaign for all that visual goodness on my own terms, where I can pause the game when the baby wakes up.
God damn, this is such a shame. Already killed my interest entirely.
As much as I agree with this that battle was lost a VERY long time ago. CoD has been doing this same exact thing for years to great effect.
And if this game is even HALF as good as BF 3 or 4 there will be fans lining up to throw their money at Dice for doing it. And I will be one of them.
I guess I'm talking out of my ass since I don't really play games like Battlefield/CoD but what full price multiplayer games have had full paid battle passes recently, I know Battlefront 2 had a bunch of bullshit that people got riled up about and was eventually removed but that's all that comes to mind for me. I assume Warzone has it, but that's F2P. Does regular CoD multiplayer have a battle pass?
Really hope the netcode is up for 128 players running, flying and driving around all at the same time alongside destruction, tornados and such...
I really don't mind about the lack of a campaign. I will say that I do enjoy them probably more than most folks, but I think I'd always rather they put those resources into the mutliplayer. I have zero interest in paid seasons if I'm paying full price for a title, however, and I'll really have to wait and see how this plays out and is implemented.
It's been ages but how much was Premium before? I remember it was around $50 for 4, but I might be mistaken.
Yes, and so does Destiny 2. I think those might be the biggest paid FPS out on the market right now.
I agree with both of you. Only thing I can do is vote with my wallet, which I intend to do. Plenty of other video games and hobbies in general to throw money where there is more value the money (for me at least).
If that structure is what is wanted by the fan base at large, I honestly hope it is an amazing experience for them.
No Campaign and paid maps, fuckin A. Elenarie must have been listening. Nobody truly gives a shit about the campaign mode. Full focus on multiplayer with ideally lots of maps on the way, is the best news possible for Battlefield. DICE knows their audience and is def catering to it. Don't like it? Don't play it.
I didn't understand specialists. Hopefully it's nothing skill / performance based since I don't plan on paying anything other than base game. If it's also extra Loadout saving, not a huge deal. Anyone understand it? Tnx.
Good thing. The campaign was always just tacked on anyways, and they never reached the level of Call of Duty. None of the past BF campaigns have been particularly good.
I don't understand why this forum in particular seems to think that MP only games are somehow "lesser". Them putting the budget and the team that'd usually have worked on the campaign onto the actual meat of the game is the best possible news.
I don't understand why this forum in particular seems to think that MP only games are somehow "lesser". Them putting the budget and the team that'd usually have worked on the campaign onto the actual meat of the game is the best possible news.
Then I'm glad I largely stick to F2P multiplayer games then. Battle passes are fine by me so long as the game is free.
Whether its a F2P or full price game every Live Service game has Battle Passes or Season Passes they basically replaced the Lootboxes when those became to controversial to touch.
OP really missing some crucial info about these Passes.
Free Passes have all relevant new stuff that impacts gameplay and Paid Passes are for cosmetics.
Basically you can just buy game for 60 and be done with it, but still get new maps and guns etc. for free.
Free Passes have all relevant new stuff that impacts gameplay and Paid Passes are for cosmetics.
Basically you can just buy game for 60 and be done with it, but still get new maps and guns etc. for free.
Store page says that it's "xbox generation crossplay" so you will be able to play with them but only on the 64 players maps. 128 players maps will only be on next gen consoles (and full cross play with other consoles or PC is stil TBC)
I'm fine with this. Battlefield campaigns have been mediocre for over a decade. Now those resources can go into the multiplayer instead.
And the future maps being free is excellent, especially since there will be so few at launch.
And the future maps being free is excellent, especially since there will be so few at launch.
No. All gameplay related stuff is free.
Battlepass is just cosmetics and probably getting stuff quicker.
I'm actually kinda amazed to see so many people give a fuck about cosmetics.
My issue is I want to pay for what I play and I think cosmetics are utterly pointless so why would I pay for them?
yep. I'm glad they aren't trying to just chase the mainstream and just check boxes off.
It's shocking how bad they were in those games haha. The uniforms in the reveal trailer gives me a glimmer of hope.
To me, this is a good thing. I'd much rather a multiplayer focused game focused entirely on multiplayer (and singleplayer focused games focus entirely on singleplayer).
I'm sure they will be visual customized. I take it that the specialist are the new classes. And I like that there is a one per squad limit. No more all sniper squads.