- Joined
- Aug 17, 2018
2042 has no voice chat at launch. What multiplayer only game doesn't have voice chat? Besides Nintendo.
Battlefield General - Discuss the series here
- Thread starter Nazi vegeta
- Start date
-
⚙️ Performance issue identified and being addressed.
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2020
That's barely an issue compared to the rest of the game. It still feels like a soulless version of BF4
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2020
I mean you can't even see your match stats apparently. Guess voice chat and kill death ratios are toxic in 2021.
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2015
Riot Games tried their hardest to not include voice chat in-game in League of Legends, citing the "toxicity" reason, and I think the voice chat feature can only be used if you are in a Group, so you can't use it in Solo Queue. (I think)
And speaking of the other games, with 2042 out, do the older Battlefield games still have players?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2020
Aliens Fireteam launched with no voice chat, no text chat, and no matchmaking. It died in three weeks.
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2019
Gaming really is going backwards isn't it? First they killed off LAN which was standard feature any game with multiplayer was expected to have now they also want to get rid of voice chat?
If snowflakes can't handle basic shit talking why not just give them an opt out?
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2015
As someone that tried the 10 hour trial on GamePass (I'm not preordering this after BFV and that awful beta), I think it's the closest thing the game will ever feel like a proper Battlefield title. I enjoyed the 1942 and BF3 maps on offer, and the guns felt way better than the ones in the main game. The only downside to them is that they're still 64 players on Conquest, these maps might benefit from having 128 players more than the main game maps.
If DICE is smart, they should dedicate their post launch support to Portal and add way more maps from past games. The main game is an unfocused mess with weak weapons, lack of cohesion amongst players (barely anyone uses medkits or ammo crates when they could have missile launchers instead), far too big maps, piss poor visibility, and more bugs than the Portal mode (too many times I couldn't make it into a match, and one time I couldn't even respawn just like it can happen in BFV).
If there's any reason to give this game a shot (at a discount), it'll be Portal and how DICE chooses to support it.
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2020
BF2142 is pretty dead with around 16 players on average. But despite the EA shutdown, Battlefield 2 still has a small player base with a few full servers, yeah. If you use a program called BF2hub you can access the servers.
Also, the modding community is pretty active even in fucking 2021. There's Project Reality, Forgotten Hope 2, and many more fairly recent mods.
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2018
BlueDrake showed a video a couple of months ago about a mod for BF2 that brings the weapons and aesthetic of BF3, it seemed to run like crap but it was impressive.
I wish more people would play Venice Unleashed.
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2013
Only one opt-out they should be taking really:
Attachments
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2018
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2020
Even the BF twitter is jumping ship. 
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2018
They KNOW they lost. I told you.
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2019
it's still a shit deal considering you could simply play that game (and the others) instead of buying another game + tip.
which was exactly the reason bf3 ended up in the state it's been because EA wanted to push out another battlefield after 2 years (joke's on them, dice is so incompetent the launch was a disaster costing more in dollars and PR than supporting bf3 would've been).
the smart play would be to pull an arma and just sell your own AAA content for people to mod, you won't make the big bucks of microtransactions but at the same time keep people from playing you competitor games and you can gauge interest to base future content and games on from the data you can mine. it's probably gonna take another 10 years for them to figure out all the heavy hitter genres these days were originally mods...
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2018
Bold take: Battlefield is just CoD with squad gimmicks and bullet drop.
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2019
gameplay-wise nu-battlefield is, which isn't surprising since ea/dice pandered hard to get the cod audience which is just the fps version of ea's fifa audience (aka retarded paypiggies).
there's still a wide gap between something like bf3 which tried to cater to both old and new fans and shit like 2042 tho.
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2015
Angry Joe goes off about BF2042:
What I wonder about this game is the lore, given that there's no campaign for the game. And if there was one, given the state of the World in this Battlefield game (MUH CLIMATE CHANGE), would DICE have forced down the climate change messages down people's throats, during the said campaign?
What I wonder about this game is the lore, given that there's no campaign for the game. And if there was one, given the state of the World in this Battlefield game (MUH CLIMATE CHANGE), would DICE have forced down the climate change messages down people's throats, during the said campaign?
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2018
It's an interesting concept for a game to have the elements affect gameplay. But, 2042 turns it into a gimmick at best, a distraction at worst.
Screamer
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2021
I'm just confused as to how on earth something like BF 2042 is developed to be in such a mess on launch.
There's no way they were testing the game with that horrible and broken UI system. It feels like it was cobbled together at the last moment. Setting up your gun attachments would get you an F if you did that for a college project on UI design.
I don't even think modes like BC2 in Portal were tested. It's a partial implementation of BC2. Did anyone who had played the original test it? Despite missing features. Core gameplay mechanic changes aren't there. The gun balance is completely broken. I don't think it could have been tested.
The game feels like effort was put into the maps. Then how it all comes together into the UI, servers how to be an actual game is rushed and half-arsed. To the point it is detrimental to gameplay.
The game on PC runs like arse. Graphics settings seem to barely impact performance if at all. It seems it's just a console port to PC without any PC performance optimisation. I can't even fully judge the game play because I can't get a high and smooth FPS rate. Servers seem to stutter. Hit reg issues etc.
Disbanding lobbies, wtf? I am rank 20 something and some of the maps I have only played once. It's the same couple of maps over and over again.
It just feels like someone directing from the top got a lot of places to do different parts of the game. Then how it all comes together into a final, workable product is botched. It feels like an alpha or a beta. With a UI that is a placeholder just so people can play.
I said effort was put into the maps. There are design issues with the 2042 maps. Way too much vehicle dominance and open spaces. I've had matches were basically you can barely do anything for large sections of the map. There's too many angles to cover. Always a sniper or a vehicle ready to shoot you.
There's no way they were testing the game with that horrible and broken UI system. It feels like it was cobbled together at the last moment. Setting up your gun attachments would get you an F if you did that for a college project on UI design.
I don't even think modes like BC2 in Portal were tested. It's a partial implementation of BC2. Did anyone who had played the original test it? Despite missing features. Core gameplay mechanic changes aren't there. The gun balance is completely broken. I don't think it could have been tested.
The game feels like effort was put into the maps. Then how it all comes together into the UI, servers how to be an actual game is rushed and half-arsed. To the point it is detrimental to gameplay.
The game on PC runs like arse. Graphics settings seem to barely impact performance if at all. It seems it's just a console port to PC without any PC performance optimisation. I can't even fully judge the game play because I can't get a high and smooth FPS rate. Servers seem to stutter. Hit reg issues etc.
Disbanding lobbies, wtf? I am rank 20 something and some of the maps I have only played once. It's the same couple of maps over and over again.
It just feels like someone directing from the top got a lot of places to do different parts of the game. Then how it all comes together into a final, workable product is botched. It feels like an alpha or a beta. With a UI that is a placeholder just so people can play.
I said effort was put into the maps. There are design issues with the 2042 maps. Way too much vehicle dominance and open spaces. I've had matches were basically you can barely do anything for large sections of the map. There's too many angles to cover. Always a sniper or a vehicle ready to shoot you.