Battlefield 2042

Stone Deaf 4evr

I'll reserve judgement until I see them in action, and how much of a cheating swine they are.
Pubg currently has bots that are like the terminator, in that they can melt you from miles away and regardless whether or not you were hiding in a bush / behind cover.

Titanfall's AI units weren't the worst, but still leant to serve more as fodder to help you bring your titan in early.

dreamers75

BF3 Mod has bots and they vary from the extreme T1000 to the not so smart T1

Dont play BF to play with bots tho and have intentions of getting a server once its not direct tru EA with minimal controls.

Varik

It all really depends on what DICE are trying to do.

Are the bots meant to be actual opponents or are they background actors to fill in the scene. Might be interesting if even if the AI aren't good on an individual level they can move as a group, some BF1 games were just a bunch of snipers with only a few players actually trying to push and hold position. Having AI at least look like they're playing the objective.

BF games have always had a balance issue, you'd people quitting losing teams or changing to the winning side. No one wants to be moved, and most quitting punishments are pointless regardless of severity. Bots are varying difficulty could at least make it not the 64

Dcully

Are the bots meant to be actual opponents or are they background actors to fill in the scene

They will be taking place of players for servers not full, its a joke if they are going to be on live servers which it looks like.
No issues with them for offline practice or co-op etc.

iColdFusion

Varik wrote: »

It all really depends on what DICE are trying to do.

Are the bots meant to be actual opponents or are they background actors to fill in the scene. Might be interesting if even if the AI aren't good on an individual level they can move as a group, some BF1 games were just a bunch of snipers with only a few players actually trying to push and hold position. Having AI at least look like they're playing the objective.

BF games have always had a balance issue, you'd people quitting losing teams or changing to the winning side. No one wants to be moved, and most quitting punishments are pointless regardless of severity. Bots are varying difficulty could at least make it not the 64

Could be an issue if it encourages people to sniper camp a capture point to rake in easy kills of bots not taking cover though!

Ill give it the benefit of the doubt, played a bit of Enlisted and found the bot squad mates handy as you can swap to them when you die which keeps the pace of the game fast enough.

Varik

iColdFusion wrote: »

Could be an issue if it encourages people to sniper camp a capture point to rake in easy kills of bots not taking cover though!

I doubt killing them will give much if any xp/points/progress for anything or even reduce tickets.

The bush snipers will be even more useless and sadder than normal.

Dcully wrote: »

They will be taking place of players for servers not full, its a joke if they are going to be on live servers which it looks like.
No issues with them for offline practice or co-op etc.

I know that I mean is will they be something like Titanfall or Enlisted, or something like pretty much any other bot in a FPS.

Stone Deaf 4evr

A thought just occured to me - one way bots could be implemented in a way that would have a lesser impact on gameplay, would be by forcing human players together dynamically.

For example, on conquest, you have the capture points A-F, depending on how many human players are on Point A, distribute the bots out to point F. so that it makes the battlefield at least feel alive by having explosions / gunfights going on in the distance. It'd prevent the empty feeling that you'd get on servers that have only 16 out of 64 players on.

Dcully

I simply wont be playing on servers with bots.

Atleast in Titanfall you could farm them for getting your titan so they were an integral part of the game which is fine but bots to replace human players no thanks.

Varik

There's bot vs co op modes from the sound of it but the main thing is the bots are there to fill in when players leave or at the start of a game before they join on normal servers.

A normally fullish server isn't going to change much, people probably won't notice the fact that when a player or 2 leaves the game replaces them and then those bots get replaced quickly as new players join in on the very active server.

The main advantage I see is on the more empty servers, the BF server list is always full of empty servers at the end and everyone generally tries to jump into the same few at the top. Setting up games usually takes a long while (your own server or just a decent sized group trying to join an active one) unless you've a very large group to join then you'd not see many randoms joining so your 20/64 game stays about that for the duration. You're left with a sparsely packed map and messing around as you can't play a proper game.

Those 24/7 Metro rush games at some point were 1 guy setting it up and just running back and forth, and eventually a few other players join and then as it's pointless they leave but eventually some groups joined and then some individuals and then that server is almost full 24/7.

Grumpypants

If you make your own server it is next to impossible to get people into it to start the match with 64 players. Imagine 128. People won't sit and wait for a server to fill.

Fill it with bots, spin it up and then have real players fill in.

Also low population locations can get games. Modes with low player numbers previously just died but now can live on.

Sounds great.

The bots in Battlefront are great. People usually don't even realize it has them.

Wizard!

Varik wrote: »

BF games have always had a balance issue, you'd people quitting losing teams or changing to the winning side. No one wants to be moved, and most quitting punishments are pointless regardless of severity. Bots are varying difficulty could at least make it not the 64

Personally I haven't experience that in BC2 & BF3. This started from BF4 and got worse on BF1 & BF-V. In BF3 we also had our own servers/admin tools and there were several plugins available to re-balance the teams of people were leaving in the middle of the game. DICE tried a similar solution later on, when private servers were non-existent, but failed. I had been moved to the losing team, 2 minutes before the round ended while I was top scorer in mine... :mad:

In maps such as Metro, Grand Bazaar, Seine Crossing, where the situation tended to be one sided, some servers even had "nuke", where all players from the winning side were killed, to give a chance to losing team to get out of CAP.


It is a game ffs, we need to have fun. Gamers nowdays tend to take it very seriously and winning is the only option...

dreamers75

2042 has shown up in my Origin library, did we link origin and steam accounts at some point?

Pre ordered it on Steam

Dcully

I wonder will it launch from origin?

Wizard!

dreamers75 wrote: »

2042 has shown up in my Origin library, did we link origin and steam accounts at some point?

Pre ordered it on Steam

Yes, only if you have linked the accounts, you can see it there.

Dcully wrote: »

I wonder will it launch from origin?

Yes. I bough BF3 for a 2nd time, while I was trying to run it from Steam under Proton in Linux, and now I have 2 in Origin.

Varik

So whether you think he is now or has always been full of ****, that henderson lad dropped some "leaks".
The 3rd mode according to him, is a hub world sandbox type thing with remastered old stuff including vehicles. So Tigers vs Abrams vs Mark Vs

Varik

Dice saying that cross play is all or nothing, if you want PlayStation and Xbox to play together then you've to invite PC too.

dreamers75

Not according to this:

Varik

Two of the community managers were answering questions after that posted.

https://youtube.com/clip/UgzSrrvdWPwCSbrtN6V4AaABCQ

twitter sources

https://twitter.com/BFBulletin/status/1416326796241481728?s=20

Reddit complaining about it.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Battlefield/comments/omk15a/why_cant_we_exclude_them/

Shlippery

Let's assume we don't know about the leak

Big details due to be revealed now at EA Play. V exciting.

https://www.twitch.tv/ea

TheValeyard

BF Portal looks like great fun

Varik

They listed a bunch of stuff that's in the BF portal and among a long list was B17 bombers.

It'll be mad if the best battlefield WW2 game was now a mode on 2042, with Russians.

Although I'd assume no player controlled large ships, especially considering the maps and what they've said about the main modes before. But who knows maybe in time we'd get Wake Island again and then the ships.

Glico Man

"Love letter to the fans", certainly sounds like it. Portal seems absolutely mad with the amount of tweaks and custom options and sliders you can add and change. A whole other game really. With updates, I can see zombie survival modes, and can envisage endless giant battle royale style matches. From what JackFrags was saying in his video you can even change the rate of healing, TTK and bullet velocity. Soldier movement can be changed as well if you want to go back to BC2 or BF3 style movement. It really goes into an insane level of detail you can edit to your hearts content.

Great to see Arica Harbour back as it was one of my favourite maps from the BF series. Shame they skipped on the BF2 maps, but after reading/hearing the whole system can be bypassed for patches and they can add things as they like, I can imagine they're going to be filling it with more content as soon as they can and as demand for new content grows.

Really looking forward to the game now, Open Beta in September as well.

dreamers75

Portal looks brilliant WW2 Russians vs Vietnam Viet Cong etc

With the logic editor its technically in game modding but without adding any files.

Varik

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117648876#Comment_117648876

That was something I was thinking about, would this include any Vietnam assets from the BC2 dlc.

dreamers75

Seems you cant create new logic only edit whats there.... shame, a 128 man game with only the squad leaders allowed to put down beacons (Squad like) would have been cool.

Shlippery

The logic editor is wild though - it's an incredibly ambitious project but looked great from the trailer.

https://www.ea.com/games/battlefield/battlefield-2042/news/battlefield-briefing-exploring-battlefield-portal

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4qWMcQfOCc

And it's only 1942/BF3/BC2 at launch, surely it leaves them room to add in tons from the other games if it takes off.

Very excited for it all and I'm someone who reluctantly drifted to COD after BFV died a death, so really looking forward to getting stuck into the Battlefield world again.

dreamers75

Irony is lost most Reddit users who whinged when there was a woman in WW1 but C4 Launch a WW2 Jeep at an Osprey is cool.

Varik

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJVCfhLEYdo&ab_channel=Battlefield

More coming between now and the 12th when they drop something bigger

Homelander

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117655690#Comment_117655690

Well in fairness that first one was people being disappointed that something being pitched as an authentic WW2 game had women in the frontlines in all theatres and looked more like Fortnite than Battlefield.

The other is a wacky game-mode that from the very beginning was pitched as a sand-box that throws factions from all points in time together.

People need to let go of this "gamers don't want women in their games" stuff. It really was nothing to do with that and never was and everything to do with what a dev was promising and what they almost delivered (Let's not forget the initial trailer with the war-painted female cyborg).

Other visually-authentic WW2 shooters like Hell Let Loose or Enlisted don't have women. I don't think anyone would claim it's because they are sexist developers. If they were suddenly added some people would voice the same criticisms and/or disappointment.

EA know they messed up with how DICE marketed BFV as a WW2 shooter and that it wasn't "sexism".

When it was released it ended up being way pared back from what the initial trailers showed (thankfully) but still a really weak WW2 game. Then when the Pacific War expansion came that was way more like what was promised/what people expected but too little too late.

I felt the same about COD WW2. I thought we would be returning to the glory days of COD2 or World at War. Instead I got black women in Wehrmacht uniforms, people running around dressed like revolutionaries/chefs/leprechauns, purple weapons, etc.

Varik

Beta sign up is live if you got the email but it's completely broken from the traffic.