Categorizing this as rumor cause while Tom has been pretty spot on with his insider info, you should still take everything with a grain of salt.
-
If you have been following the news, you should be aware that the people of Lebanon have been under a violent bombardment that has recently escalated. Please consider donating to help them if you can or trying to spread word of the fundraiser.
-
Asheville and Western North Carolina at large are in crisis after Helene, please consider contributing to these local organizations and helping the people whose lives have been destroyed.
Tom Henderson talks about the development and future of Battlefield 2042
- Thread starter Saucycarpdog
- Start date
- Rumor
So essentially 2142 was a battle royale game that was converted into a more traditional Battlefield game part way through development? That would make sense given the specialist, huge maps, and even higher player count.
But if this is all true, I feel really bad for the devs. Having to immediately change direction of a project and then getting hit by the pandemic would hinder anyone's work.
But if this is all true, I feel really bad for the devs. Having to immediately change direction of a project and then getting hit by the pandemic would hinder anyone's work.
So can medal of honor come back and be an actual military shooter since battlefield is now some hero looter battle royale f2p cinematic nft live service UUUniverse?
Kinda weird they intended to have a BF BR coming out and have Battlefield V just sit their as a Battlefield game with no support unless BFV was meant to last through the BFBR2042. Either way seems like Leadership has no fucking idea what they are doing and as a result we got some kinda frankensteined disaster that they called Battlefield.
Cool future sounds shit too. Bye Battlefield hope someone else comes along and fills the gap cause this ain't it. Dumbasses could have just did a hero shooter with MoH the franchise has been dead for years.
Cool future sounds shit too. Bye Battlefield hope someone else comes along and fills the gap cause this ain't it. Dumbasses could have just did a hero shooter with MoH the franchise has been dead for years.
Wasn't that hard to deduce from them literally hiding gameplay. Pretty stark contrast with the rollout BF3 and BF1 got.
It all adds up when you look at the state of the beta and the full release. So many basic features are missing. Stuff that has been in every game since like... Bad Company 1?
What's hilarious (and incredibly sad) is that the hype around 2042's reveal proved that a return to form was exactly what people wanted from Battlefield. But because EA didn't fully back that direction from the start and failed to give them the time needed to reorient the project, the launch was a complete shitshow. And if it underperforms, the lesson that EA will take is "we should have gone with a battle royale or a hero shooter!" instead of "we should have more faith in our developers and we should give them the time that they need to make a finished game!".
Some real brainiacs making the decisions at EA.
What's hilarious (and incredibly sad) is that the hype around 2042's reveal proved that a return to form was exactly what people wanted from Battlefield. But because EA didn't fully back that direction from the start and failed to give them the time needed to reorient the project, the launch was a complete shitshow. And if it underperforms, the lesson that EA will take is "we should have gone with a battle royale or a hero shooter!" instead of "we should have more faith in our developers and we should give them the time that they need to make a finished game!".
I've always said that it felt like, late in BFV's development, EA came to Dice and said, "hey, we love what you do with your thing, but Fortnite is just so hot right now. How about you take this Fortnite stuff and like, mix it in with your Battlefield stuff? I think everyone wins if you do that."
BFV felt so schizophrenic, they were absolute slaves to realism in some ways ('no Garand at launch because we're not doing American forces yet, and it wouldn't be right for other armies to have it'), and then just went batshit crazy in other customisation ways.
BFV felt so schizophrenic, they were absolute slaves to realism in some ways ('no Garand at launch because we're not doing American forces yet, and it wouldn't be right for other armies to have it'), and then just went batshit crazy in other customisation ways.
Any word on a campaign? Was it planned and scrapped or was it just never planned to begin with? Also I'd love to know if Hazard Zone was the one mode they kept, why is it so barebones? Shouldn't it be the most fleshed out mode? It's so boring and there is really no reward except, hey you get to use different weapons and gadgets in the next game! YAY.
The real red flag with BFV was the designers being overridden by someone up the DICE/EA chain about the TTK. Specifically, they changed the TTK of the entire game several times to appeal to holiday sales players in the most sweeping, crude way possible that broke entire categories of guns. It was absolutely insane.
i see this and EA continues to confuse me. how do they green light a Dead Space remake that, as of now, looks incredible. Yet make terrible decisions like this with their other projects.
But EA don't want Battlefield, they want COD. It's no coincidence that they recently put one of the creators of COD in charge of Battlefield.
So they want to kill this series like they do with all their games and studios?
EA never changes.
EA never changes.
This puts a lot of blame on EA, but, after so many botched launches, gotta imagine some of the management at DICE also sucks.
Dice is getting hosed and EA has no real unique vision for the franchise. BF1942 was my high and I've lost more and more interest with each subsequent title except for a bump with BC2 and BF1. Just gonna have to accept the suits see BF not as the unique MP experience that millions of fans faithfully pay to return to every iteration, but rather as a vehicle to chase after [unattainable] heights of CoD audience (and OW and other one hit wonders).
It's a pity, strip out the shitty BR-first map design and rework specialists/classes, and 2042 could be a decent BF4 successor.
It's a pity, strip out the shitty BR-first map design and rework specialists/classes, and 2042 could be a decent BF4 successor.
The last hope is that EA allows Ripple Effect to continue improving/updating Portal, to the point where it will be sold as a standalone game. DICE will probably have to do whatever EA tells them to, which pretty much confirms that we'll hardly see games like BF2, 3, 4 and BC again.
Say what you want, but if they had followed the model that Activison has been doing since the release of Warzone, I think it would have worked: A F2P game (probably Battle Royale) to earn money with skins etc and make a classic paid BF, but with progression linked with the F2P game.
Say what you want, but if they had followed the model that Activison has been doing since the release of Warzone, I think it would have worked: A F2P game (probably Battle Royale) to earn money with skins etc and make a classic paid BF, but with progression linked with the F2P game.
I was never that interested in this game and haven't been into the series since BC2, but a focus on classic BF roles has always been a big draw to the series and I loved that about BC2 so much The specialist system is a huge turn off.
At some point, EA is gonna have to go the CoD route and put dedicated support studios to help DICE if they really want Battlefield to reach these seemingly unattainable heights they have for the franchise.
This is so dam depressing… this all just sounds like anthem levels of sh*t.
Hopefully it won't meet the same ultimate faith as that, though looking at the supposed future, it really doesn't fill me with any hope.
They didn't build upon or followed what bf had done before, nor did they innovate, they just followed trends 😔
Hopefully it won't meet the same ultimate faith as that, though looking at the supposed future, it really doesn't fill me with any hope.
They didn't build upon or followed what bf had done before, nor did they innovate, they just followed trends 😔
Activision is shit, but at least they know what COD fans want; more COD.
EA knows Battlefield fans want more Battlefield and instead they are giving them whatever Battlefield 2042 is and whatever this rumored hero shooter is. Battlefield in name only.
EA knows Battlefield fans want more Battlefield and instead they are giving them whatever Battlefield 2042 is and whatever this rumored hero shooter is. Battlefield in name only.
It all sounds so terrible I'm inclined to believe all of it. Because the suits are just chasing what they think will make them the most money (microtransactions)
EA loves pitting its shooter IPs against each other, remember Titanfall 2's release date? 🙂
That actually wasn't on EA.
Respawn legit thought they could compete with Infinite Warfare so they pushed for that date. Then BF had to be delayed and then it landed right before Titanfall 2.
So that made an already bad decision even worse.
Felt so good to glide in Tribes back in those days the future seemed so bright for gaming. Now here we are- both BF2042 and Halo Infinite (f2p mp) both are not really doing it for many fps fans. Both lost a lot of players (according to steam)
Didn't EA basically just take Battlefield away from DICE recently?
I thought part of that was that Ripple Effect and Marcus Lehto's studio were going to be making the series now.
I know a wild thought :(
Fuck all I wanted was battlefield 3 / 4 updated with destruction and classes :(
The boss of the studio that was taken away from DICE and renamed even before this? The boss that isn't based in Europe? Plus another studio (Seattle) joining? DICE isn't the lead on Battlefield anymore
I don't think a Battle Royale Battlefield would compete with Apex. Apex doesn't have the user base focused on military shooters that BF and COD do.
What? The new boss was the one of the IW guys that left to make Respawn. Then only a year or so again moved over to what is now Ripple. But he was never at DICE proper.
However EA never said that DICE was off BF or no longer making the main line games. That is pure speculation.
Not surprised. They released a beta build which wasn't even content complete. An extra year probably would have done the job.
Respawn boss Vince Zampella is taking over DICE LA to head up work on a new game
The plan is to expand the studio, 'probably' rebrand it, and start work on a new, original game.
DICE LA was renamed and given new leadership (Zampella) largely as a response to Battlefront 2 and Battlefield V. Now Zampella is the head of all Battlefield, and a 3rd studio in the same timezone/region as Ripple Effect will also be working on Battlefield. That certainly looks like DICE is no longer the lead studio on the franchise.
It helps when you realize the relevant DICE, as we knew it, have all left for other studios. The current DICE is just in name only. Momentum is not with them.
I'd love to see them get to make a Battlefield game one day, from pre-production all the way through full production and to release. Just focus on what makes Battlefield such a strong and loved IP, and deliver on that for a change.
Wild thought, I know.
Wild thought, I know.
I mean if you as company try to do things differently and fail multiple times one would thought that next logical step would be going back to what worked and improving that instead trying to do something new again.
And honestly I wouldn't even mind companies trying something new and failing if they were capable of admitting that it is their mistake and now and then releasing classic experiences related to the franchise and not canceling projects and constantly trying something new and chasing trends.
This is not just EA issue but issue for multiple big publishers out there. Between refusing to make games where ROI is not like x100 and chasing trends that results more failed projects there really isn't that many good games from big publishers these days (at least 3rd party publishers). Look at Ubisoft for example, they are willing to try and fail multiple times to enter F2P space, they are ready to make games that have nothing to do with core of the franchises and fail multiple times, but they simply refuse to make something like classic Splinter Cell game because of reasons (aka they can't find a way to monetize it to hell and back and make it so people are "engaged" for multiple years so they can sell MTX).
having a hard time giving a shit about a new one when they put one out a subpar as 2142. Not interested in any of their games unless they are going to give the the time they deserve. putting out shit like 2142 is not good for anyone involved. c'mon dice!
from my experience this is a huge part of the issue. big publishers have no interest in making 1-5 million dollar games that make 20-30. they want to make 100-500 million dollar games that churn back billions. I really wish they would have some smaller divisions that exclusively worked on riskier but smaller budget stuff - this is more often than not where we get big new blockbusters that make the billions to begin with. Everything is so safe these days and not only has it led to an incredibly BLAND landscape, half the time the games arent even any fucking good even if they are mostly carbon copies of their past games - only worse.
I think part of me wants to blame consumers too but hell if I know how to articulate it beyond: your favorite franchise once didn't exist, so don't bitch when creatives try to make a new IP instead of pokemon, call of duty, or final fantasy 78. Whenever I see a big sense of disappointment about a new release, like part of me gets it, but the other part of me just cant help but think of it like this. New franchise might become your new favorite thing, give it a chance!
dex3108 said:
from my experience this is a huge part of the issue. big publishers have no interest in making 1-5 million dollar games that make 20-30. they want to make 100-500 million dollar games that churn back billions. I really wish they would have some smaller divisions that exclusively worked on riskier but smaller budget stuff - this is more often than not where we get big new blockbusters that make the billions to begin with. Everything is so safe these days and not only has it led to an incredibly BLAND landscape, half the time the games arent even any fucking good even if they are mostly carbon copies of their past games - only worse.
I think part of me wants to blame consumers too but hell if I know how to articulate it beyond: your favorite franchise once didn't exist, so don't bitch when creatives try to make a new IP instead of pokemon, call of duty, or final fantasy 78. Whenever I see a big sense of disappointment about a new release, like part of me gets it, but the other part of me just cant help but think of it like this. New franchise might become your new favorite thing, give it a chance!
Last edited:
Interesting watch. Sad that the game came out in this state and will continue to become something that isn't BF. I am not sure why they couldn't just do their hero shooter under a different title name. Hopefully someone comes out and addresses this mess before the game is dead.
EA doesn't know what to do with the battlefield franchise and it shows.
Could you guys please just remaster Bad Company 2 at the very least?
Could you guys please just remaster Bad Company 2 at the very least?
I read the title as "Tom Hiddleston talks about the development and future of Battlefield 2042" and for a second I was confused as fuck.
Ah, I see you're a man of culture as well.
Ah, I see you're a man of culture as well.