• FiveMacs@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        19 hours ago

        that’s what companies do on the daily. but I understand what you mean.

        I’m sorry if I offended you or anyone else.

    • Romkslrqusz@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      The game is really quite fun, this is one of the first Battlefield launches to be devoid of any major technical issues or controversies

      • hoppolito@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        24 hours ago

        When you say ‘one of the first Battlefield launches’ do you exclusively mean the new-strand of games?

        Cause I can’t really remember that much controversy around Battlefield 1942, Vietnam, 2142, Battlefield 2 or even 3.

        • Megaman_EXE@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          23 hours ago

          Bf3 definitely had a buggy launch but was fixed decently quick if I recall correctly? Faster than bf4 was

          • Quatlicopatlix@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 hours ago

            Bf4 was horrible but they eventually made a good game out of it and the basis was wayyyyy better than bf6.

            All the people who say bf6 is a good bf propably didnt play the older games. Maps are to small vehicles are bad the graphics design decisions are dumb (the modern you are outside and cant look into a house because it is a black void and if you are inside you can look outside bacause everything is to bright).

            I had so many crashes and couldnt play a ehole round…

            The game feels like if you told a cod developer to make a game that is a little like a battlefield.