Hello!

This game is finally revealed and what are your thoughts on this?

"Battlefield 2042 features 128-player battles"

yeah, that's what made me immediately not interested.

Battlefield V had 64 and was not engaging at all for me. I had a similar feeling I had when I played MAG

From the leaks (?)/people who actually are watching a fucking timer for hints:

Sounds cool. Heavy climate change/apocalypse theme (which is kind of needed for 2142...). The 128 player matches is a bit concerning as it is fairly hard to balance that to be "a bunch of skirmishes" rather than "one giant meat grinder" but it is a post-BC2 battlefield so rush will still be an option. And somehow someone will find a way to have 128v128 on the metro equivalent and it will be glorious.

I just hope that this time EA/Dice makes it a proper live game. It always pissed me off that bf3 and bf4 both had their coolest modes (basically arena shooter and 2142-lite) as the final DLC like two months before the next game launched and the entire fanbase (except the most hardcore players) left.

I also hope EA/Dice avoids making nazi war criminal premium skins this time.

At the very least they seem to be embracing the dumb that has historically made Battlefield great.

They put the bf3 RendeZook meme into the cinematic trailer, they finally get the joke, hopefully we can stop this facade that Battlefield is "realistic" hahaha.

That said, I'm pumped for this. I was actually one of the few people that LOVED and played the heck out of Battlefield V. But I've put my time into it and am looking forward to a new grind.

Still kind of bummed it's not just 2143(I know I'm in the minority), but bigger maps, more weather effects, hopefully new gadgets and stuff to play with. I'm in. I do worry about performance though. Batlefield games have always had issues and doubling the player count and adding more environment effects sounds like trouble.

@reap3r160: Toss one more hat into the ring of wanting 2143. GIVE ME MECHS

@reap3r160: Duder, I LOVE 2142 it's my favorite game in the series (and yes I also played BFV a shit ton) and while I would have also loved it if they just did 2143 - we're finally getting SOMETHING related to 2142 at least. I mean it's a prequel so it's better than nothing I suppose. And the fact they are bringing back Rush apparently has me hopeful we may see some form of Titan mode also (Hazard Zone sounds interesting though I hope it's not the BR mode).

And yeah, I'd be giggling like a schoolgirl if there were mechs in 2042 but it's unlikely at best. The robo doggo and maybe some tweaked tanks but that's about it.

That was certainly an entertaining sizzle reel. I particularly loved the dumb moment when the dude ejected from his plane, shot the other plane with a handheld rocket, and then got back into his own plane. Oh, and the part at 1:20 where the dude flags all four of his team members. Extremely realistic. Good job.

Fucking what?!

Damn, now this is how you put together a trailer.

Getting strong Battlefield 4 vibes here which is a good thing. I'm impressed. Didn't think it possible, but they've made me care about Battlefield again. Or at the very least curious about it. And I think it's a smart move focusing entirely on multiplayer.

I'm in. Well played, EA.

@bladeofcreation: I forget the specifics (think it was a polygon article?) but basically some of their prestige skins/specialists/whatever for BF5 were blatantly evil looking SS mother fuckers. And at least in one case it seemed to be very clearly based on a historical figure (who ironically was a polish freedom fighter?)

Was a mix of funny, aneurysm inducing, and "what the fuck?" but also just rubbed me the REALLY wrong way that, best case scenario, we are playing fantasy SS ubermensches and ea/dice were explicitly targeting the groups who would want to with RMTs. Like, any WW2 game gets really messy since there were war crimes all over the place. But generally the rule of thumb is that if you are gonna play the axis powers you emphasize 'they are just soldiers" rather than "Yo, this mother fucker was part of the most evil mother fuckers of all the evil mother fuckers".

-----

As for the BFwhatever pre-rendered teaser trailer: Skipped through but looks fun and reminds me a lot of Frontlines in terms of aesthetic. I frigging loved how everyone lost their shit when the super tornado appeared (and found the ethics of carjacking a taxi to speed past your fleeing comrades to be an interesting though) and conceptually love the idea of wingsuiting around like Rico. But... that was some major whiplash and you either pick the "woo, yeah, surf the tornado" or the "oh god, we are all going to die" montage. Not both. Both gets weird.

@bladeofcreation: The reveal trailer has little easter eggs/nods back to older games - the jet thing is from a famous BF3/4 clip from years ago where a guy jumped out of his jet, shot another jet with a rocket launcher then got back into his jet. So, yeah lol

Certainly a great trailer. As everybody else I wish they would just do another 2142, but this seems to expand on the stuff in BF4 that were fun and hopefully cuts down on the stuff that wasn't, but that's too early to tell.

Kinda baffled anybody would be against 128 player modes though, loved MAG and Planetside 2, and military shooters without playercounts approaching them just don't do a whole lot for me.

@fisk0: I wouldn't say I am against 128 player modes but it is more the implications of what that means for game design.

Battlefield (barring BC1 and 2) has always been a big game where you need to sprint to the vehicles to catch a ride before someone runs off (that has gotten a lot better with spawn on squad and even in vehicle, but more on that). With 2x as big maps that is even more jogging from spawn point to combat and that is a good way to feed the snipers as it were.

And keeping that map entertaining is similarly hard. You either have everyone clustered around the same objectives (at which point it is stupid chaotic which is only fun for so long), everyone wandering around aimlessly with random squad engagements, or it is basically planetside and whichever team can get more squads in one location will win every encounter and, as a player, it just feels like I am a piece of gristle in a meat grinder.

And as for the spawn on squad: That has similar issues. I forget if all the BFs have disabled people spawning while "in combat" but you either don't and can never take a control point or you do and now the much larger battles means everyone is spawning at other CPs and trying to carpool anyway.

I am cautiously optimistic because dice have demonstrated they are pretty good at funneling people in the past. But I can see a lot of ways this goes really wrong (mostly in the form of games where it did).

It's super fun that they put the rendezook into the trailer, but I always found the whole "Battlefield Moments™" thing to be really hammy/desperate.

I've been perfectly content with BF3/4 (although my heart belongs to Bad Company and 2142), and I all I really need in my life is a more polished version of BF3/4. If this game turns out to be just that, then I'm happy.

I enjoyed popping in and out of diving aircrafts in the past, so I'm on board with what I'm seeing so far. I'm on board with the increased player count, but I wonder if this eliminates the tension you get in the past where you find yourself practically alone in pockets of inactive spaces, sneaking around to either ambush or simply survive.

I dunno it’s a trailer. I’m a little tired of dividing these things into cinematic reveal/gameplay reveal. I want to see the hud, I want to see how it plays. These were all fun moments but I wanted to you know, see the game, I already know Frostbite looks nice. So tentatively I’m curious because BF2 was a hell of a good time back in the day and after a long break from this series I wouldn’t mind jumping back in, but as far as wow factor goes this really didn’t do much for me.

@giant_gamer: Battlefield has had 64 players since the original game back in 2002. Whatever your reasons for disliking V, it feels weird to focus on the series staple.

I got halfway through the trailer until I realized that there's not going to be any game play in it, and that's probably going to be true for most of the E3 trailers.

I'm sure the game will be fine when it launches.

@apewins: Did you make it through the other half of the trailer where they said gameplay's coming in a couple days? lol

All this trailer did is make me want a sequel to 2142 more.

Reading up on how they're doing classes/specialists has me wary.

BFV had really good (barring the Nazi war crimes outfits mentioned above) character customization and I don't want to lose that for Siege characters.

The year is 2042. It's been over 20 years since the US army got kicked off of twitch. Now, we finally get our revenge...

Only multiplayer... Yaaaaaay. I could tell by the trailer that it was showing 'this is what multiplayer will be like!' It was doing the crazy things you could see players doing in previous ones, like jumping out of a jet and getting back in it. I don't care about it.

The trailer was very much fan service, its a good indication that fun is back and the dull self serious tone from BFV is dead.

I hope the addition of 128 players leads to better maps, the five flag symmetrical layout meat grinder middle flag or giant obstacle killing map flow, or worse both has been a chore over the last few.

The 128 players should eliminate the need for lopsided themed maps of either infranty or vehicles only and actually have some combined arms.

Pre-made specialists locked to class is probably the right way to go, readability in BFV got really confusing with never knowing what kit the guy had opposite.

Customization came with a significant cost in BFV regarding readability and the specialists were probably the only thing people were willing to pay for anyway, with the wacky COD skins being a non-starter in the BF community.

BF3 was amazing and i really enjoyed it, BF4 was more of the same and being shot by and shooting at pixels in the distance was getting old, so i focused on closer range shooters to avoid the frustrating parts.
I was actually really excited about Hardline because police vs criminals might change the dynamics but it really didn't, for the most part it was more of the same, then i was excited for BF1 because of the massive difference in firearms a hundred years ago but everyone had assault rifles and excellent sniper rifles anyway, same with BF5, more of the same.
From the first teaser suggesting some kind of space travel i was very interested, we could have unique mechanics like 2142 did, boarding the Titans and blowing them up from the inside etc, mech battles, maybe finally a change to the infantry combat... no, it just looks like BF4, even worse now with bigger player counts, even more pixels in the distance.
The new teaser (i consider pre rendered trailers to be teasers) shows a load of fun loving solders having a jolly old time, is this the Fortnite effect? Start with a laugh and let the colourful dlc skins flow, i think that's what they wanted to do with BF5 until everyone reminded them WW2 wasn't a joke, it's really not what i'm after.
I'm not a Battlefield fan so of course there's a high chance it's not for me, i want to see them take their solid gameplay and make a single player campaign or change it so it's not just more BF3, what does a Battlefield with muskets look like? Surely there's no way they could put assault rifles in the civil war right?

I'll reserve judgment until I see actual gameplay, though I was looking at their website and it sounds maybe a little thin on content?

7 maps sounds on the low side for a multiplayer-only shooter. And 10 specialists based on the 4 core classes in Battlefield is strange, 12 would make more sense - so there was equal specialists per class...

As someone who was never good at sniping, I got tired real fast of squinting at the screen to figure out if I was looking at a rock or a player. Decided to get lethal with shotguns and never went back.

Yeah, that trailer certainly evokes the Battlefield vibes of DUN-DUN DUN DUN-DUN.

I would definitely prefer Battlefield over Call Of Duty.

Very very suss on them removing classes for heroes with set faces and personalities. I always found the elites DICE made extremely lame. Disappointing that if I want to use the gadget I have to use their face and backstory.

The notion of this being good for readability that some people above have suggested is false because you can dress them up pretty freely. You see a bunch of different skins in the trailer of the same person. And the preorder bonus are more skins than don't mention professional restrictions.

Not to mention the balance issues they'll going to have to overcome now that everything except the hero gadget perk is unrestricted.

Annoying because everything else sounds pretty wicked.

Edit: time to be an angry old man and say the loopzook is from BF1942 and much older than some youtubers BF3 video. Kids these days.