• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Vince Zampella thinks EA ‘strayed too far from what Battlefield is’ with 2042

Dr.Morris79

Member
When you fuck up this badly you got back to your roots. The people will come, you'll be good again. Will they do that? Fuck no.

lt3S186.jpg
 

EDMIX

Writes a lot, says very little
When you fuck up this badly you got back to your roots. The people will come, you'll be good again. Will they do that? Fuck no.

lt3S186.jpg

lol i mean, their comments are literally talking about straying too far from those core roots, but....ok.
 
Make another bad company game. I enjoyed those quite a bit back in the day.
Same here, Bad Company 2 is still my favorite BF game of all time. I know PC exclusive players always put that game down but as someone who only ever played the series on console it was by far the most fun IMO. Regardless they need to get back to player caused destruction and get away from this stupid levolution style nonsense or big set pieces that trigger during matches, just let the players destroy everything.
 

YOU PC BRO?!

Gold Member
Inadvertently, Star Wars Battlefront caused Dice's problems. Appealing to a broader audience turns out to be very profitable. Genre and existing consumer market be damned. EA is in fact in the money making business.

Philosophically, management changed the definition of success soon after the launch of Battlefront. It was no longer about cornering a particular market but about appealing to a broader audience. To achieve this the franchise had to be redesigned. Simplified and streamlined systems. Weapon modification and UI cut down to only the bare essentials. This trend continued until even scoreboard death tally's were stripped. Who really cares when there's money to be had right? We all know that all games should appeal to everyone. An idea somewhat at odds considering the genre and consumer market typically associated with a Battlefield simulation. With this rational in crept a streak of identity politics. Evident in the Battlefield One disabled face paint girl marketing and subsequent releases.

Yet another franchise that gained success and adoration by a fanbase of men being co-opted by revisionist proponents of social justice. Facilitated by a management obsessed with broadening the audience as a means to increase profit. The original fanbase whose only desire is a great game now left in the cold awaiting a return to form that will never come. Alas, we are where we are. I hope the decline of the franchise was worth it.
 
Last edited:

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Creator said years ago he is done with Titanfall after he realised that nobody cares about COD rip off with mechs
True.

But TF games felt like COD, so I think people enjoyed it. TF1 was a good game, TF2 MP was shit. It wasnt even the COD-ish gameplay that was bad IMO. I liked that. It was the awful perks and OP sniping. The maps were so big and open, snipers had a field day picking people off. That xray vision perk everyone spammed was stupid too.

But I agree with mechs. If this was maybe 1999 and people playing PC mech games, maybe it'd be a hit to go with sci fi doom and quake. But in modern day, how many MP gamers want to play as giant robots?

The game would probably be more successful it they just boots to the ground gunplay only with some of that sci fi thrown in like wall running. The games already have a COD feel to the guns and ADS and people love COD. They had half the battle already won.
 
Last edited:

Puscifer

Member
That's the problem with games where the first bullet point to promote is bigger is better. No other shooter promotes bigger maps and bigger player counts like EA does with BF. When the key point is bigger is best, they got to force themselves to scale up everything even if they cant handle it.

Ya, I know COD has giant Warzone maps for BR mode, but their tried and true MP is still focused on classic 6 vs 6. Yes they got the adjustable 8 vs 8 or 10 vs 10 option, but most people still stick to classic map sizes and 12 people matches. I dont think the average size of these maps have changed in 10 years (they were definitely smaller in the COD4/WAW days).

I'm sure Activision could had forced COD over time to be mandatory 12 vs 12 or 16 vs 16 by now. But they havent.
I still thought it was shocking they upped it from 64, by their own admission they've said in the past balance and fun go out the window with Battlefield when they do large scale battles like that yet here we are. The beta made me lose all interest whatsoever in the title and I used my refund for Battlefield 4 on steam so I wouldn't have to deal with origin anymore
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Good, Vince. Fix it up first, then we'll see. Have a great single player element too with the Medal of Honor styled resources.
 

NickFire

Member
Good, Vince. Fix it up first, then we'll see. Have a great single player element too with the Medal of Honor styled resources.
They have fixed it quite a bit. I haven't played a ton (got hooked by Days Gone after finishing Cyberpunk right before the patch), but I have given it another shot after the last update. Huge improvement to the game that launched in 2022. Not having as much fun as I am with Vanguard though (I know it looks like trash, but 120 FPS rocks and gunplay still the same).
 

kiphalfton

Member
EA should do some old fashioned market research, check why the popular games in series did and what the general consensus among fans of said games is.
They like Activision got suckered into doing "innovation" nobody wanted.

They'd tap into the "wrong market" (you know who I'm talking about) and the game would suck even worse.
 
Top Bottom