Caporegime
As long as each class has some sort of extra ability / weapon allowance I really don't see the issue, it's just a skin at the end of the day
*** The Official Battlefield 2042 thread***
- Thread starter jonneymendoza
- Start date
As long as each class has some sort of extra ability / weapon allowance I really don't see the issue, it's just a skin at the end of the day
Permabanned
Had a few games of conquest, found it extremely boring. Used to quite like conquest on BF4. 
Caporegime
Had a few games of conquest, found it extremely boring. Used to quite like conquest on BF4.
For me the map felt too big with very little cover. A little bit like Caspian Border in size but Caspian Border had plenty of foliage for infantry around capture points.
Map design has really gone down hill over the past few years. I cannot really remember any maps from BF1 and V but I could reel lots of classics from 3 and before. 3 had 9 launch maps. I think 2042 will only have 7 original.
I enjoyed it, dont know if I would label it "really good" , I'd probably describe it as good with the potential to be really good when I get to play the release.
The way I look at it is pretty simple, I do not for any reason play a game that I do not like , for a significant length of time. Why would I, why would anyone, I mean I would have to be a masochist to spend time in life voluntarily doing something I dont like right? I play a game for a few hours if I like it I continue to play, if I dont like it I cease playing (the same method I also apply to tv shows, films and books), additionally to that I base the worth of the games I have bought on a £ per hour system, if I pay 35 quid for a game and get 35 hours out of it then I deem that to be good value for my money etc.
Which brings me to the BF2042 beta, now I played this beta for a smidgeon under 20 hours, which tells me that clearly I was liking it as I didnt stop after a few hours as previously mentioned above. So, question 1 in my mind, do I like it, yes logically I do or I wouldnt spend 20 hours on it.
Question 2 in my mind, will it meet my £ per hour system for being value for my money. Well, I got circa 20 hours from the beta, which would have equated to a cost of £20. That would seem to suggest that yes I will pretty comfortably hit the 40 hours required to be equivalent to a price of £40 and thus, yes its looking likely that I will hit a minimum £ per hour. All which results in question 1 being yes and question 2 being yes, which = buy.
Simples
Caporegime
I enjoyed it, dont know if I would label it "really good" , I'd probably describe it as good with the potential to be really good when I get to play the release.
The way I look at it is pretty simple, I do not for any reason play a game that I do not like , for a significant length of time. Why would I, why would anyone, I mean I would have to be a masochist to spend time in life voluntarily doing something I dont like right? I play a game for a few hours if I like it I continue to play, if I dont like it I cease playing (the same method I also apply to tv shows, films and books), additionally to that I base the worth of the games I have bought on a £ per hour system, if I pay 35 quid for a game and get 35 hours out of it then I deem that to be good value for my money etc.
Which brings me to the BF2042 beta, now I played this beta for a smidgeon under 20 hours, which tells me that clearly I was liking it as I didnt stop after a few hours as previously mentioned above. So, question 1 in my mind, do I like it, yes logically I do or I wouldnt spend 20 hours on it.
Question 2 in my mind, will it meet my £ per hour system for being value for my money. Well, I got circa 20 hours from the beta, which would have equated to a cost of £20. That would seem to suggest that yes I will pretty comfortably hit the 40 hours required to be equivalent to a price of £40 and thus, yes its looking likely that I will hit a minimum £ per hour. All which results in question 1 being yes and question 2 being yes, which = buy.
Simples
Aye, I didn't do 20 hours but put a fair whack in it. I'll buy the standard but I'm not forking out extra just for a few skins ...they'll no doubt release bloody expansion packs as well which will do my nut in
Soldato
Indeed. The map was big but more than manageable on foot, zip lines, sliding and parachuting. Mental people are saying it's too big! This is BF!!
Associate
- Joined
- 24 Aug 2015
- Posts
- 268
Its big but boring af, its like planet coaster when you start a new park and are given just a massive blank field but instead of rides they added a rocket some warehouses and called it a day lmao
Associate
For me it wasn't that the map was too big, it was just felt a bit empty and most of what buildings there were felt a bit small and too one dimensional. The whole map design seem's lazy, even the rocket taking off or exploding didn't hold much purpose apart from a visual - which after you have seen it once... was near it several times during both situations and didn't die as I would have expected to (same for tornado).
Honestly don't know what to think about it all, been waiting for something new for so long after the arse that is Cold War and what Warzone quickly became...
Honestly don't know what to think about it all, been waiting for something new for so long after the arse that is Cold War and what Warzone quickly became...
Caporegime
Tried it, didn’t expect to enjoy it and I didn’t, had a game of BFBC2 straight afterwards and really enjoyed it….
Until EA remaster Battlefield 1942 or indeed Battlefield 2, I’m not bothering with another in the Battlefield franchise.
Until EA remaster Battlefield 1942 or indeed Battlefield 2, I’m not bothering with another in the Battlefield franchise.
Same, played bc2 and bf4. My god bfbc2 is still amazing, the map design and hite reg are so damn good. Best game of the franchise easily.
Soldato
Problem for me is I think BF Portal is probably where I'd spend most of my time. I had this feeling before trying the beta. Find a nice server in Portal with old school rules and classes.
I their current implementation Specialists seem to take away the team work aspect. Hardly anyone was using ammo and med packs and why would you when you can take something else that will benefit you more. Med packs are pretty pointless now anyway. Get shot, hide for a few seconds and wait for health to regen....
I their current implementation Specialists seem to take away the team work aspect. Hardly anyone was using ammo and med packs and why would you when you can take something else that will benefit you more. Med packs are pretty pointless now anyway. Get shot, hide for a few seconds and wait for health to regen....
Med packs are pretty pointless now anyway. Get shot, hide for a few seconds and wait for health to regen....
Same with vehicles, they regen to 100% now. They started this regen gimmick with vehicles in bf3 but it was a limited amount, bfv had no vehicle regen, now all of a sudden they go full retard on regen across the board.
I actually agree with this, I think that conquest will actually be the weakest of the three modes, Hazard Zone and Portal is where most people will play imo. The conquest mechanic is showing its age somewhat but Hazard Mode and Portal both sound very interesting and I could see those two modes getting quite the following.
Soldato
Yeah exactly, or just conquest with classic rules that needs more teamwork. Meant to say in previous post is that the problem I have right now is I wasn't a big fan of the beta but could see myself playing Portal if I find a server I like but I don't want to pay full price for the game and find this isn't the case.