MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Dec 3, 2021, 20:02:
Ugh, are they just trying to kill the franchise or something? There are plenty of shitty "Hero Shooters," BR or otherwise, that I avoid as it is. Stop messing up Battlefield.
Based on EA's previous track record, absolutely yes. Its leadership and the bean counters and whomever else they're listening to (since they're obviously not listening to gamers or the very few good devs remaining) will continue to drive this shipwreck into the ground. They earned a few brownie points when they got rid of lootboxes, but that was mostly because of the amount of legislation and legal attention they were getting: not at all because of gamer/market pressure.
EA only cares about what kind of profit they can wring out of a game/franchise and they don't think about how a good game or good game design can get them that profit. They focus solely on finding the right mix of predatory game mechanics--like battle royales, season/battle passes, sold skins and other microtransactions--to try and milk consumers of every last penny. They don't seem to realize that most of their decently profitable games have been because of brand loyalty, but that the brand loyalty only goes so far. Battlefield, as an example, has been steadily treading downhill since Battlefield 4/I. BF V and the two new SW Battlefronts in the same style and same design demonstrate how that slide has continued downhill. Gamers looked forward to BF2042 because it promised a potential return to the experiences of Battlefield 2/3 and 2142 with its bit of near-modern tint, but the foundational design choices made in 2042 prove that EA's direction is here to stay and that the franchise will only continue to deteriorate.
Specialists, for example, are an engine not just to sell new skins but also new specialists and associated battlepasses for all of it - which is why just using classes won't work, since it's hard to generate interest in buying a new class, and there's only so many classes before you get considerable overlap. But tacking on Specialists, and soon "Heroes" (which is all specialists are in BF2042, since they all feature a unique person and "personality") lets you create "unique" specialists and "heroes" to then advertise and sell. Plus it exponentially increases the amount of skins/reskins you can then tack on top of it all to sell in addition to all of it. So EA would never allow a return to the BF 3/4 class system with some of the more "basic" customization options (soldier skins) if they can see another option. Ironically, they're so stupid they don't realize that they could go with classes and sell players customization options that they'd absolutely buy - Insurgency: Sandstorm, Ghost Recon Wildlands and Breakpoint are all good examples of that. Being a "generic soldier" or "SF operator" and being able to play "dress up" with different camos, outfits, vests, and gear setups is absolutely a thing players would get behind. But that isn't what the market leaders are using, so that isn't what EA is going to consider much if at all.
They'll kill the franchise and DICE (If one can say the DICE of today looks anything like the DICE most Battlefield fans remember), just like they have so many others. The last gasp will be remasters - which is what Portal effectively is - like with Command and Conquer. Battlefield will die a long, slow, ugly, lingering death.
Because these "game" companies prioritize profit at the expense of everything else this won't change, a new competitor will just come along and scoop up the consumers they lost. Companies make games to make money, of course, but it is lost on them that good games can and absolutely do make good money. They have to have a whole mass of marketeers, market analysts, and financial analysts/accountants/etc., parade through and design the game before they let any good devs and good game designers actually do anything to "maximize profit."
The result is something like Battlefield 2042.