Battlefield 2042 Cannot Be Played Offline Even With Bots, No Sea Warfare Confirmed

EA has confirmed that Battlefield 2042 offline play is not possible even with AI bots! Sea warfare not happening at least at launch.

[Snookies12]

Man, the more I'm hearing about this game the less enticing it is. Not one to judge before a game even comes out, but I just feel like I'm seeing more con's than pro's at this point with every bit of news. Then again, haven't bought a Battlefield game since BF3.

[-Foxtrot]

That's how EA and the like usually do it with these types of games.

Make it seem amazing with the first reveal, that the game is going back to basics, will please old school fans, so on and on then they drip feed the "bad news" up until the games release.

[Nitrowolf2]

This is just insane lol
Like I get it wasn’t everyone cup, but how cna you say this game commanding of air land and sea and not give sea battles.

Didn’t they do this with Battlefront with no space battles at first? I forgot

[gamesftw250]

Leave it up to EA.

[Activemessiah]

HOT mess... They've become incapable of making a Battlefield without it having something wrong with it...

All they literally have to do to have huge sale is make BF bad company 3, offline, multiplayer, no MT... that's it! But no... it's EA.. They'll never learn.

[excaliburps]

Maybe this is something that can be patched post-launch? Or if enough noise is made, maybe they (EA) can make DICE implement an offline mode?

[DJStotty]

Lol, EA listen to fans rather than suits?

More chance of getting the last of us 2 running on Gameboy

[JEECE]

In fairness they'd still have to up the scale of the multiplayer like they are, or at least compared to Bad Company 2. There are a lot of people here who remember that game fondly who would absolutely blast a game that came out today on that scale with only 24 players.

[Teflon02]

You couldn't sell a damn game. Stop this. Sure would love a bad company 3. But it ain't happening. They don't even know what made the first 2 great and don't want to take that go unless they can live up to it.
Online isn't needed seriously. Who buys BF and just plays offline... The game already wasn't for you then. So complaining is pointless. No MT? What game doesn't have it and also they're not mandatory so why does it matter? Also every successful MP game in like the last 5 years have MT if anything that's counterproductive not to have by your logic.. this complaint is like crying about it being a live service like adding new stages and guns for free isn't a good thing...

[Activemessiah]

Broken games with MT are being sold to Idiots... yes it is easy to sell it these days.

[isarai]

Like i said before, i fully expect EA to f@#k it up in some baffling way, and i'm sure this is just the start.

[moriarty1889]

this game sounds worse with every new article. no thanks EA. you can keep your online only obsessed hot garbage.

[JEECE]

Absolute groan. I was willing to give them a pass on the lack of campaign given the ability to play matches with bots (something I'd much rather have in a Battlefield game than a tacked on campaign), but there is no reason I shouldn't be able to play against bots offline. Very stupid.

[spss11]

I miss the old Battlefields. I still play Battlefield 2 with the 64 bot mod. Guess it'll have to do.

[boing1]

Maybe they are using cloud computing for AI? Would make sense to offload it to the server side in a massive multiplayer game. Especially if they are replacing live players with them

[JEECE]

If that's the case they should explain that.

[spss11]

Really sucks seeing many games go online only. Not what I want for the future of gaming. Hard pass as always.

[MIDGETonSTILTS17]

This is a huge letdown. Why no offline bots?

This sounds like a waste of bots.

[MIDGETonSTILTS17]

I’d pay extra for this feature. Some people wanna play against bots sometimes. It doesn’t make me a bad person.

If anything, allowing people to play offline with bots could minimize the amount of people that just snipe in games without taking the objectives seriously. I love headshot hunting too, but that ruins BF games more than anything.

Let us hunt headshots with bots.

[DJStotty]

You would pay to play a game offline?

Let's hope your not the future representation of gaming.

[moriarty1889]

agreed.

[OhReginald]

Not surprised

[aaronaton]

Just more things to add to the long list of negatives. Reports are suggesting that the tornado alone cost over £1million in man hrs to develop, and testers are already saying it needs to be scrapped.

[mch2011uk]

It's like they are trying too put people off buying it.

[Acecalibur]

That's a shame.

[DFresh]

Lame.

[XxINFERNUSxX]

💩💩

[smolinsk]

Who cares everyone is online nevertheless.

[Good-Smurf]

Tell that to Air superiority server BF4,I can't unlock UCAV becuase the assignment was tied to a niche mode that most people don't play.
Bots comes handy when you had it with people who won't play the objective or there few cheaters and when servers go down.

[DJStotty]

As much as that is more or less true, for some reason, everyone is against anything always online when it comes to gaming.

Take Xbox one launch for instance, their plan was for the console to be always online, in order to do mass game sharing etc (share games with 5 family members), sharing was the sole need for the 24hr DRM check.

They did not go that route due to backlash (even though the xbox's are always online anyway lmao)

I would say in this day and age, 95% of all consoles sold around the world, are more or less always connected to some form of network.

Mobile phones are always online, not to mention Alexa's, even down to Gas smart meters, but gaming is the only device, where people seem to be against always online, when society is permanently online, whether it be facebook, twitter, youtube, everyone is connected to a mass network 100% of their daily lives.

[CorndogBurglar]

You're missing a couple important points about the Xbox One launch.
1. Up until that point, no, Xboxes were 100% NOT always connected to some network. You could play your Xbox 360 with no problem at all if you had no internet connection. (Sure, certain games required it, but the console itself did not require an internet connection.)

2. It wasn't just the fact of requiring an internet connection that made people mad. That, made people mad, for sure. But the nail in the coffin was the fact that your console needed to check in every 24 hours or else it became a brick and you couldn't play it at all. So if you were having internet issues, you couldn't play any video games on your Xbox at all until those were fixed. Not even games that don't require the internet.

So I understand where you're coming from, but there was definitely more to the Xbone reveal that made people mad besides just the always online aspect.

[DJStotty]

The 24hr check in was only needed though due to the game sharing policy they were trying to push. This was due to having the ability to buy a game, and share it with 5 friends/family members for life, without them ever needing to buy it, in order to do this they had to implement some form of DRM.

If not for that, there would be no need for a check-in.

The confusion was caused, when they were not transparent on why and how this would work, to find out you had to research and dig for the information yourself, which a lot did not do, hence the backlash.

So the points that gamers ended up taking away from the conference was :-

24hr hour check in
can not share/trade-in games

In today's market, over 90% of all consoles will be online.

[ApocalypseShadow]

Ridiculous. An apologist for what Microsoft was going to do. Then, trying to revision what we know they tried to do. Which is why there was a back lash and they got their asses kicked by Sony in almost every way leading them to shut their mouths about sales while making up useless metrics.

Lol. Nice try trying to make DRM 2013 look good. It didn't work. You say everyone is connected online while neglecting silver users that Microsoft won't say how many there are. You just drank their Kool-aid that everyone is connected or plays online. Which isn't true at all.

Battlefield having to be online always is a joke. Don't try and spin it. Oh wait. You did try.

[DJStotty]

@Apocalypseshadow

"An apologist for what Microsoft was going to do."

When did i say what they wanted to do was a good thing? You just knee-jerked, got triggered, and spewed nonsense. I just outlined their always-online model, i never said i agreed with it, but props for attempting to make out i said something i did not.

"Nice try trying to make DRM 2013 look good. It didn't work."

Again, i was not trying anything, simply explaining the reason they had the DRM, again, i never said i agreed with this, nor was it a good idea.

"You say everyone is connected online"

Something else i never said, you really make out like people say things they do not, i said this :-

"I would say in this day and age, 95% of all consoles sold around the world, are more or less always connected to some form of network."

"Battlefield having to be online always is a joke. Don't try and spin it. Oh wait. You did try."

Nope, again i was talking about Xbox one launch DRM, never mentioned Battlefield.

But to answer, an online MP game, is always going to be online, it does not need any spinning, or defense, how cam you play multiplayer offline?

[IRetrouk]

The 24 hour check in wasn't just because of game sharing at all, also it was 10 friends and family that could use a shared library, why would you need drm for the home console though? And why 24 hours? Made no sense, then if you or you share list wanted to use another xbox it had to check every hour, why the two different time allowances for the same thing? Simple, because it had nothing to do with game sharing.

https://www.theverge.com/20...

[DJStotty]

@Iretrouk

DRM was to stop cloning of the games and multiple distribution. The check in was simply to check the licenses of the games on the console.

This has been common practice on the PC since the 90's, the way they should have done it is with product keys like they did years ago.

[sourOG]

It’s clear they are playing to their strengths. Putting resources where they feel it matters. Offline and single player content isn’t included in that apparently, it is what it is. I’ll consider it when it’s deep in the bargain bin. Not because of this though, I’m just not much of a battlefield player.

It does seem odd they are charging 80 bucks for a MP only game when other franchises are releasing their MP portion as a free to play. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

[Kaii]

Just want to play the public beta at this point and get the overall feel/vibe of this game.

*Snipers overall health could be reduced to 70/100 or have hardcap like In chivalry 2
Cause imho snipers+vehicles were/are op In BF1 People with 900+ hrs play In BF1 and sit infront of spawn with their vehicle irritates me on multiple lvls

[SPEAKxTHExTRUTH]

Umm it's a multiplayer only game so why would some of you people complaining expect any different in this day and age? My god some of you and cry babies...

[JEECE]

I mean, in the absence of a campaign I wouldn't have expected an offline mode, except they announced that you could play matches entirely with bots. Naturally many of us assumed that since we wouldn't be playing with anyone online for such matches, we wouldn't need to be online. If they didn't want us to think we could play offline, they shouldn't have told us we could play matches entirely with bots.

[SPEAKxTHExTRUTH]

Exactly who buys an online multiplayer ONLY game to play with bots? Come on now...

[JEECE]

Sigh. It isn't online multiplayer only. In DICE's Q&A that just came out, they specifically talk about "Solo" mode where you play entirely against AI.
https://answers.ea.com/t5/B...

Stop saying things that aren't true.

[SPEAKxTHExTRUTH]

It's a multiplayer ONLY game. There is no single player campaign. The idea of someone buying a multiplayer online game for solo play is absurd. You people make a issue where there isn't one. Who the hell is going to buy an online multiplayer shooter to play with bots? Not only that but let's be real here, who really has a last/current gen console not connected to the internet?

[ApocalypseShadow]

Jeece, you have to remember that some of these guys were all for DRM 2013 that Microsoft tried to pull. Battlefield being online for all modes is nothing to them. They welcome it because they were told it's great. And, they welcome the loss of a single player campaign but pay the same high price for a game. I mean, some of them were paying for online to play F2P games. Lol.

Good look trying to reason with gamers who support stuff like that as "pro consumer." I don't think they know what that is.

[DJStotty]

@ApocalypseShadow

You really do come up with some corkers.

No one was for the Xbox One being always online at the launch, your just making that up.

In today's day and age (2021 if you forgot the year) consoles are always online, but there is no need for DRM, because there is no longer game sharing. (Even though DRM is present on all consoles with digital purchases, even the beloved Sony playstation) The Series X is always online, as soon as i disconnect from my broadband, nothing loads.

Your fud pieces on here are doing nothing to add to the discussion, but are an attempt to cause some kind of measuring contest from 8 years ago.

For your information, i am not buying Battlefield 2042, you want to know why?

1 - No single player campaign
2 - The over inflated cost for a MP mode

Bots or no bots, online or offline, the game is an overpriced piece of MP cash cow, that in no way i am going to condone or support.

[IRetrouk]

There are plenty of threads with plenty of people sticking up for the drm policy's, I can't believe you would actually try and say there wasn't, would you like links?

Also the 24 hour check in was not because of game sharing, home console had a 24 hour check, any other console you used needed an hourly check, if game sharing was the issue, why the two different allowances of time? They wanted more control, simple as that.

Oh and you can still gameshare on xbox, only with one person instead of 10.

[BlaqMagiq1]

Absolutely unacceptable. There is ZERO reason to be online when you're playing by yourself in ANY game. Ever.

[FunAndGun]

It's a multiplayer only game. This is not the first game to do this. Glad they are not wasting time on offline bots as offline bots are not doing anything to improve a multiplayer only game.

[BlaqMagiq1]

No it's not. If you're playing by yourself it's SINGLE PLAYER. That's why it's called SOLO mode. As in you're not playing with anyone else. Therefore no connection should be required.

[badboyz09]

Buy the season pass everyone

signed EA

[Donjune]

Don't buy it! Stop crying and spend your coins elsewhere.

[Aussieguy]

Well it is a multilayer game isnt it, or does it have single player also ?

[DJStotty]

I'm with you, there is no SP campaign, it is a multiplayer only online game, so not sure why the push for an offline mode..... then that would be a SP campaign....

[JEECE]

In Star Wars Battlefront (2004), the game is primarily designed around multiplayer. However, I can (and do) still pull out my PS2 and play matches against bots, even though it's been 15+ years since I've connected my PS2 online. If Battlefield 2042 is going to go to the trouble of allowing me to play matches entirely with bots (something not every Battlefield has had), I should be able to access them offline. This isn't a difficult concept to grasp.

[DJStotty]

@JEECE

"I should be able to access them offline. This isn't a difficult concept to grasp."

Your right it is not, but you need to be online to get the story missions, how can you do that if your offline?

From DICE themselves :-

"Specifics about how this is going to manifest weren’t shared, but the developer said the story of the game’s world will evolve with every new season."

Good luck with downloading new season data offline.

[DOMination-]

Frostbite 3, Mirrors Edge Catalyst, Battlefront 1&2, Battlefield 1,3,4,5 and now this.

DICE have churned out a LOT in the last ~decade. It's amazing that for the most part the games have been decent to good still. Unfortunately when they made BF3, EA saw the chance to make bi-annual games to compete with COD. Personally, this is one title that could benefit from an extra year or two development and then be a 10 year live service. I know people hate those words but I do think its a better approach for this franchise than churning out what is essentially the same game but just different maps and in this case.. less features.. ever couple of years.

[philm87]

I'm going to pass on this online multiplayer game because I can't play offline.......................

[JEECE]

The thing is, it isn't multiplayer only. If it was, there would be no issue with it being always online (multiplayer only games usually are by definition). The issue here is that they advertised the ability to play matches against bots. So if my internet is screwing up or the servers go down, I could have played full matches against bots. Now I can't do that.

[glenn1979]

And people will still buy this game🤦‍♂️ im gonna chek world war 3 when its out say the trailer yesterday and the dev saying what they improve etc etc looks very promising and its free to play

[JEECE]

It would be nice if that game ends up being good. It in the absence of that, unfortunately, the problem is that especially with everything so focused on the BR fad right now, even a mediocre Battlefield game is a better option than anything else.

[CrimsonWing69]

Can you play games like Apex Legends or Fortnite offline? I’m just legit asking since I don’t play those kinds of games, but I assumed all the MP only games were online only.

[JEECE]

Those games didn't advertise that you can play matches entirely filled with bots.

[mkjeezy]

I can't wait

[mkjeezy]

This is actually what am expecting to see

[Rainbowcookie]

The death of gaming, halfbaked games with dlc to fill the gaps, lootboxes, always online. ... was excited to hear bots , but what's the use now. edit add...no campaign

[DaniMacYo]

If everyone is upset about Multiplayer only. Blame the big time Youtubers. When BFV released single player was all they were blaming it on. They made plenty of videos about how BF should focus on Multiplayer only so it doesn’t suffer at launch for the next game. I personally wish we got some offline stuff later, well after release but that won’t happen. I’m not naming the YouTubers. But they spoke to EADICE plenty of times and always gave their two cents about SP holding back MP.

At least Black Ops Cold War put SP back in. I was hoping we could fight bots offline for practice like I can in Black Ops 4 and Modern Warfare. Since COVID-19 lockdown online play has been difficult for me it’s often lagging because so many people are using the internet more and company’s where I live only wanna do maintenance and not improve the infrastructure.

[Sieg]

The core of the game is multiplayer but giving owner option to play with bots offline when servers are down is a good option.

I can see this as a piracy mitigation tactic but it is just harmful in the long run. If EA servers or service goes down after an amount of time. The game is rendered useless. Such as the life of GaaS.