A deep dive into the game EA calls the ‘definitive’ Star Wars flight experience.
Blizzard mentions: “The notion that you’ve missed four seasons, the only thing you’ve missed is us continuing to learn and iterate”
Agreed. I just put in 50 hours of it because I was told to just push through but I think I’m over it.
A shame because I had so much fun with Diablo 3. I bought it twice. Putting 100 of hours into both.
Diablo 3 on the switch saved me from going crazy on a deployment. Oh well hopefully next Diablo will be better.
As long as I keep my gamepass sub I won’t miss a thing
diablo 4 is actually a pretty good game now, the launch was just terrible, but honestly it was worse for D3 at launch. Farming inferno for 10 hours just to get a bunch of yellows that weren't for your class or 10 levels lower, combined with the rubberbanding and Hydra getting double the bonusses that it should have and the real money auction house. Hardcore was unplayable in D3, in D4 it was fine for me at least. Combined with not being able to log at launch or just getting kicked out. D3 was definitely way worse than D4 at launch, took them 2.5-3 years to turn it around.
If you played D3 once rifts were out, then there was actually some content, but that was YEARS into the game.
Have people just forgotten how terrible D3 was at the start? Real Money Auction House? Absolutely abysmal gear drops with stats that make no sense whatsoever?
Look at BG3. Great story, online co-op, couch co-op no micro transactions, no unnecessary seasons. Once you've finished the game you can play again and make different choices that will change the story. What happened to diablo?
We wouldn't feel like we're missing anything if you made it so people could go back and play through each season rather than miss out on it entirely. But that's not your goal. You want people to feel like they are missing out on things and force them to play when you want them to, regularly each season, rather than just make a game that is more enjoyable to play and with better content.
Battlefield franchise boss thinks Battlefield "absolutely can" outsell Call of Duty, but says they're not targeting that with the next entry.
Feel like if that were true, we would have seen it during the BF3/4 era. Just focus first on releasing a Battlefield that's actually feature complete, well put together, that people actually want to play right out of the gate. Hoping Zampella can make this happen.
The best opportunity was BF1 vs. Infinite Warfare. I've never actually seen a worldwide sales comparison so I'm not convinced BF1 didn't eventually win, but I do know COD sold better in the US at launch, because it was the NPD #1 that year, while BF was #2.
The best opportunity was with BC2 and BF3. BF4 dropped the ball with a short campaign and bugged multiplayer at launch
Release a decent game and let the mouth to eat do the rest.. you choose to release another BF4 then blame yourselves for it
@SonyStyled
Definitely not BC2. I love the Bad Company games (even though everyone always pretends the first one didn't exist), but even though BC2 has achieved great respect in hindsight, at the time it came out a lot of casuals who bought COD every year either didn't know of Battlefield's existence or saw it as a knockoff of COD. Plus coming out in spring 2010 it was competing against MW2 (the original one) which came out the prior fall.
I mean, the title of the game doesn't have a lot to do with how it sells. The next game is not going to change things but Zampella course change the course of the series towards something that's more on track with that those big player numbers.
With that said, battlefield fans might not want that. To acquire the wider audience they would probably need to betray a lot of the series design principles. Call of Duty is as popular as it is because it is as simple as it is.
In his defense, BF2042 did turn things around eventually though still falls short of franchise expectations if you based it on BF4, BF3, BF1.
Hated it at lunch, came back a two years after and it was an absolute blast. Not sure how it did sales wise to be called failure or success but BF2042 is a pretty good game .
We don't need more games ruined. It's like that company puts water on their bread before they eat it.
Here we go again with rubbing mouths. BF has been a flop consistently since BF4, and I mean flop as in disappointing to the fan base due to the technical issues each has had and the gameplay changes needlessly made. Shut up and make a good BF before hyping up another potential disappointment.
Bro gave one pretty decent interview and answered the questions he was asked. Not really his fault if people want to cherry pick quotes for "content".
Stick to reading source https://www.ign.com/article...
I don't mind them claiming BF2042 wasn't a failure so long as they learned from it and use that experience moving forward into the new game, it was terrible at launch but towards the end it got a bit better. I don't want to see the same thing play out with the new BF though because the ones who are still interested in the franchise have been pretty vocal with what they want and don't want from Battlefield.
Does Tim Morten think we'll ever see interest from major publishers in making AAA RTS games again?
