First of all I believe that BF:V will fail to capture the audience that BF1942 did. I think that is a given. You can argue about it all you like but that is the premise of what is to follow.
So what will happen in the future? EA/Dice will develop a new engine for BF and develop a game with a ww2 theme. They will attempt to expand the capabilities of what BF delivered with an emphasis on multiplayer. They will develop a game with enhanced graphics and sound but the emphasis will be on the multiplayer BF platform and it will deliver the following:
- Maps 2-3 times as big as BF - 2-3 times more vehicles as BF - 2-3 times more players per server than BF
I expect to see this in a 12-18 months and when it comes I will weep with joy.
you mean go back and do it correctly this time? haha fat chance. even if they did, its going to be longer then 18 months, try atleast 3 yrs. incompetence ahead, you also have to remember that EA (Evil Arts) is their publisher, and EA is going force Dice to release something for the bf series atleast every 12 months, whether that be an xpack for bfv or bf42.
Heinrich BlotgrasseFirst of all I believe that BF:V will fail to capture the audience that BF1942 did. I think that is a given. You can argue about it all you like but that is the premise of what is to follow.
Lol , you should visit others forums and read the news. ;)
there is an endless supply of sheep and EA knows that.
striderx2048there is an unendless supply of sheep
Right so , they'll buy anything thats new , just look at the sheeps "upgrading" their GC to a new , less performant model. Lol , like buying a FX 5200 to exchange a GF4200. ;) Sheeps assumption : "It has a higher number so it's faster "
plus bfv is only 34.99, that is low enough for someone to take a gamble since its not being marketed as an xpack but a full game. normal full games are 49.99. and EA only needs to buy it once, they dont care if you like it or not, or it if is is good or bad.
sempai(be)Lol , you should visit others forums and read the news. ;)
Meaning...? Link please?? I wish they'd get off this 64 player limit for multiplayer games - I'd love to play in a battle with hundreds of players.. Maybe ww2online does this? I don't have time to keep up with everything changing all the time..! :uhm: Had some good games last night - some servers/maps(?) were quite laggy, but found a couple that weren't. Dunno if it's an issue or not - maybe my connection to some servers. Played Lib of Caen last night - first time - what's with the bridge missing and the floating machine gun nest(?). Anyway, as has been said I'd think BFV will not capture the imagination as much as BF1942 did - most people who like the 'nam era have probably been playing EoD or whatever - BFV won't capture people's imagination as much either IMO.
Still, i agree with Heinrich if DICE were to be any smart, they would do as he suggested.
There would be not one bf1942 player the would not trade it in for a newer WWII game with double size maps, more vehicles, better graphics, more gamefeatures.....
But BFV will do better then Heinrich suggested i think.......the maps are very small and action packed. Since most bf players are infantry bunnyhoppers, small action packed levels is just what they want/need.
Look how many severs rotate Atlantic.....and that isn't because it "lags"
And DICE/EA knows it.....
Yep , there not into the "niche" market. As if they care to satisfy a minority of gamers wanting to play "realism" WWII games.
Just look at the servers.
EA is a company , a company's sole purpose is to generate return for it's shareholders.
educate your local sheep