BFV has been pretty solid for a while. Pretty much by the time the game's update cycle was over it was a proper battlefield game. Hardline was fun, but I doubt you'll really find games for it. Here are the player numbers for each active battle field from least populated over 24 hours to most, this is with the bump in popularity that BF6's beta has given the games as well as the sale. I'd recommend V or 1 if anything
I agree, I'm just saying that you can tell that DICE needed 2042 to succeed since they bent over backwards for two years to try and fix the game. BFV was fine by the time it's final update came out and would have benefited heavily from another year of content.
I will have to take your word for it, cause they look extremely overrated, mid at best. BF1 especially is just a modern day BF game with a very poorly applied WW1 paintjob and yet plays nothing like a WW1 game. Why even bother at this point? COD does a better job pretending they make historical games and they have fucking Snoop Dogg in Vanguard. It would be one thing if BF1 played like a proper WW1 military shooter, but for that I can just play Isonzo.
People said the same thing about Black Ops 4, and yet I have over a thousand hours in that game and it is arguably the last fun COD ever made. Opinions on MW2019 are mixed but what can't be argued is how fast the franchise fell off the cliff shortly after it's "comeback", and that started even before the next game came out. BO4 tried something different, just like 2042, and despite many people not liking it, I found it fantastic and maybe 2042 could potentially be my jam. I say "potentially" since I am never giving EA or DICE a single cent, but at least there is a chance I could enjoy it, vs the world's most inaccurate WW1 game in name only or the world's most generic WW2 shooter that hates it's fanbase. Did I mention Battlefield 1942 exists if I ever want to play a WW2 Battlefield game for any reason? There was 1943 too but I think that one is lost media by now for years(even before it was removed from the storefronts the servers shut down, if I recall correctly).
lmao it's like 3 dollars get over it. I will agree with you that DICE treats their fans like shit, but I will also point out that COD's devs have been doing the same thing for a while, like i'm suprised at how quickly you just forgot that Vanguard existed.
If I was told to pay 3 dollars to get shit in my mouth, I still wouldn't do it, but I can't stop anyone else. It just boggles the mind people go for that piece of shit when, once again, 1942 exists and the game doesn't hate it's fanbase every step of the way.
What was wrong with Battlefield 1 (from your experience?) I cannot speak for PC; I know EA doesn't maintain their own PC titles after their lifecycle has passed. I thought it was a great Battlefield title in its own regard, when it was active. Yes, it takes creative liberties with its WW1 setting for preserving its gameplay loop (anarchistic automatic weapons available in multiplayer, that female cover art for its premium edition) but DICE executed its authenticity well for a oft-forgotten world war to blend it into Battlefield.
If V wasn't buggy, I'd say it was a good, not GREAT Battlefield title. That fortification gimmick to build, not destroy, added a wrinkle of depth to the Battlefield formula. That Pacific War update added some life to it, but EA/DICE still stuck with their historical inaccuracies from their comically loud Japanese infantry and operator bundles.
Like I said, by the end of their lifespans, they were fine, not great, but fun.
BF3's console servers have been axed a while back, so most you'll have is the campaign. (Well, unless you have a PS3, I believe somebody is working on a revival project for that title as well.)
