It's such a minute detail but the snow, blood and mud gathering on the weapon models in BFV adds a lot to the immersion and grittiness. Wish more games did that.
@@melcorchancla9431 is that portal splits the ortho in graphics I imagined and if you put a little more detail the bf2042 is at another graphic level and it is already noticeable in the maps and in all xd
yep , apart from 128 players , BF V current condition is way better graphics , sound , physics , displacement & moving styles than 2042 (even without RT).
The small things that were included in bf5 were a nice touch that seems to be missing from 2042. Things like your character whimpering in fear when a grenade landed next to you, and the barrel change out using the spent brass ECT. They brought a bit of life to your soldier, instead of them feeling like emotionless drones like most other fps games usually have. I hope we see more of that added to this latest installment. They have a little bit of it at the moment.
Why do we do this every battlefield. All I heard during the lifecycle of bfv was how HORRIBLE the game was and now that there’s a new one I’ve started hearing great things about bfv. We do this every time!
I honestly dont know how its physically possible that battlefield 1, a game from 2016, looks and plays 100x better. They got a bigger studio, started development early, only multiplayer game. Can someone explain how its possible because it literally should be impossible
BFV echoes sounds wider and feels like it's produced by "loud af gunshot" while 2042 feels like it's narrower and not as much impact/crackle to the echoes.
I think that it´s commonly agreed in the Battlefield community that staying at the 64 player count would have been much preferred due to sacrifice in visual quality, map design and overall game flow.
@@thehiddenone470 yeah rockstar is the best, I just love how they keep releasing gta v and milking it, also I love how boring rdr2 online is and lets not forget about how finished the gta remastered trilogy was. Yeah Rockstar is indeed the best... Sarcasm
@@ruok3351 yeah they were going to do much more like d day maps but ea pulled the plug and make 2042 and I am 100% sure they should have just stuck with battlefield 5
The BFV MP Producer tried to but was overuled a lot (like TTK update) and EA cut back on support and then left January 2020. Also a lot of the "community" was listened to on BF 2042 on pulling back on teamplay design and more on a chaotic "sandbox" and the influencers egged on EA & DICE to drop BFV support.
I think its more the communities fault tbh, Battlefield fans are notorious for not knowing what they want and then they got all pissy when the first trailer came out and complained about immersion and all that because a woman with prosthetics was in a multi-player battle. The community should have just got over themselves and tried the game rather than being so preoccupied with the costumes of their soldiers.
@@ChandranPrema123 I think people throw that around a lot for new games. I wouldn't say dlc. Id just say unfinished and made too many sacrifices for 128 players. 64 was good.
IMO, I don’t wanna play portal just to experience the old games, if I wanted to do that, I would rather go play the actual battlefield 3, I bought 2042 primarily for 2042, and I really hope that this game turns out to be one of the best in the series
@@rafifafkaralhafizh787 I've always enjoyed bf5 sincethe day it came out. Pre-orderd it and i absolutelydo kot regret it, I never understood the hate for it.
Yep BFV movement and gunplay after they stopped fucking with it was near perfect, DICE said they would build on BFV movement and when playing the beta it ft like they completely scrapped it
I hate everything about 2042, all they had to do was take the movement, gunplay from Bfv and make a modern battlefield with classes. BOOM it would be a classic
@Who cares 123 Yet you need effects like snow blowing on the ground? It's a little sad to see details becoming less on BF2042 however I'd take 128 players any day over snow blowing on the ground.
@Who cares 123 That's actually against the general consensus. The maps are actually too big for people having 64 players would make the maps seem minute in scale , 128 player option was the right thing to do. I rather take all out Warfare over goddamn slow blowing.
After 30 hours in early access the only feeling I have now is disappointment... I played BF1 again for a month before 2042 launched and it's just so evident how fun Battlefield was when they knew what worked and didn't. Personally I don't enjoy the chaos of 128 players, way too many AA missiles and Sundance grenades but it's the lack of destructable environments that does it for me with 2042. I sincerely hope my money doesn't go to waste and that DICE will make 2042 better ASAP.
A shame isn't it. And if I'd have known doubling the player count would have resulted in other aspects of the game being worse or not being significantly better than previous Battlefields I wouldn't have wanted the player count to increase.
Yes. I would much rather have them focus on 64 players with increased details in other areas not only it's more fun it's more balanced that way and they don't have to make pointless huge maps with filler plain terrains with little to no cover.. I feel exposed at all times no matter how well I try to stay in cover someone will always get to you due to large player counts.. bf1 and bfv maps are so much superior in every way so the flow of the game is much batter and action packed at all times.. guess I will be playing them for a long time so will many other people
DICE is too far invested in removing the specialists having every single gadget available. They really thought the whole 'everyone's an absolute hero' model would work. Can't get into any chopper or plane without 15 sundance nades and 6 handheld AAs targeting you.
I dreamed about 128 players destroying scyxrapers Fellini down and huge pieces Fellini off from them to the ground etc. So sad there are basically nothing like this
all because the trailer had 30 seconds of a woman who wasn't even in the game...like it was just the ww2 version of bf1....almost the same in all ways....but then fans got too cocky, when you don't appreciate the good things you tend to regret losing them
Portal is terrible it has the same boring stale elements from the base game - subpar gunplay/movement/audio/physics etc... If you want to play the old maps they're much more fun on the older games.. I don't know how they managed to mess this one up..
@@Dangerman-zg3ui At this point I don't think they base it on anything. Every game seems to just reinvent everything instead of just working off of what works.
I played waaay to much BF2 I had 30k more kills than deaths because it was honestly only shooter I played because it's like they perfected the formula... But now battlefield is turning into a trash average shooter.
For me battlefield 2042 just doesnt feel like a battlefield anymore. I cant put the finger on it but its just so different than its predecessors. I was never to hyped for a new battlefield and followed every trailer + interviews etc but so far Im disappointed. I really hope dice works on all the bugs, gameplay and all those beautiful details we've seen in BF5.
Even BF1 was hella impressive. Sometimes 2042 looks great but sometimes it’s very underwhelming, depending on the map and sometimes even which part of the maps
Suprised to hear Cyperpunk taught you the lesson to wait when for me it was stuff like Anthem and Fallout 76 and even then I learned better after Battlefield 4 and Halo MCC. just that the first 2 were the homerun nails of keeping expectations for me.
@@TheRealPots You didn't have to burn yourself by buying it. The internet puts up enough evidence of a game's state to not warrant yourself having a personal experience.
@@AndySolid007 Preorder was never a feature, it was a goodwill and gratitude that customer put into a company for releasing good quality product over the years. However, corporate realises they can proliferate from this feature and they start to abuse it by giving free " extra " skins and early access bonus while at the same time releasing unfinished products for these loyal customers to test for them.
@@fim1344 Poor?? Wtf man?? I got low-end pc with rtx 3090 and i9 10900k with samsung g9 and i'm planning to change to i9 12900k and G9 Neo mate Yeah maybe i'm so poor man :))
@@ppcalpha1042 They need to read all these comments and return to develop it, I mean development didn't stop because the community wasn't hungry for it we were very hungry and the pacific content demonstrated that Dice could hit the jackpot, although not as good as halvoy that map was amazing pity it didn't make it into some kind of gamemode in the main game.
I honestly expected them to reuse a lot of assets from bfv especially with the guns since it’s understandable and makes sense since both 1942 and bfv take place at the same time
It's surprising how DICE put so much effort into a game that flopped hard and now it's like they're too scared to go all in despite choosing a setting that people would definitely enjoy. Disappointed that they still decided to release the game as it is instead of pushing it back
When i look at BF 2042 i get this Call of duty feeling. Graphics and playstyle just doesn't look like the good old Battlefield :/ BF V graphics/details also looks better
@@negsterarchive7911 Ye. Sadly they're copying Call of duty and other games instead of sticking to their own thing. There was a reason we played Battlefield instead of CoD but now they're screwing it up. I'd give 2042 a chance but the specialists just keeps me away, the fast that you have unlimited hook is just ridicolous.
@@badderen92 "BF copying Cod" lol I heard that a thousand times since the release of BF 3 in 2011. It's funny that every new release is always copying cod.
@@renaicirculation4143 Guess you have never played Battlefield before :) And i never heard any1 say BF3 and BF4 was copy of cod, they have nothing there xD
Tip- cover some of the vehicle collisions like planes. Battlefield has a history of vehicles blowing up and bouncing when hitting terrain. Does 2042 do this better?
Watched a guy giving his review on the game and he was flying one of the jets. Literally flew straight into a building top speed and just bounced off and flew the other way lmfao
I really hope they add content from Battlefield 1 and 5, yeah 5 had it´s problems, but man do i enjoy those maps and weapons they have. the Argonne Forest was one of my favorite maps from 1 and pretty much all the Pacific maps from 5.
@@Nan01987 It wont be fixed by then, no battlefield in the past has been fixed that fast. Lets also not forget most of the devs that worked on past battlefields are gone, leaving a new team of devs with less experience with the franchise and the frostbite engine. They had 3 years with 4 dev teams working on this game and it still released like this, keep your expectations low and you wont be disappointed. Keeping them high will only make you frustrated.
Love how the sniper rifle in 2042 has an added crack/bang sound after being fired vs BFV which sounds like a steady bang fading out. Goes for most of the guns I notice.
BFV definitly looks and feels better. BF2042 graphics and animations are weird. They feel off and not polished. Texture is too flat and seems like alpha graphics or something. They definately needed more time to finish the game.
BFV in its current state, in my opinion is the most solid Battlefield experience you can get ATM. I never played it before the launch of 2042, but I played around ~6K hours of previous Battlefield titles and I can really say that BFV is fantastic gameplay wise. Glad to jump into it after it lost support. 2042 isn't even Battlefield.
@@gamingeuphoria7928 thats such an old excuse at this point. BFV at this point had become very promising and well liked, bf2042 at this point is absolute trash and already dead. Literally has less players than bfv already
@@dopaminedreams1122 well no one owns next Gen consoles and 2042 is a next Gen game downgraded on last gen so no wonder bfv has more players.. 90% of people play on last gen and bf 2042 is trash on last gen sooooooooooo
Coming from someone, who really only got into bf heavily as of bf1 and V. I really feel like the quality of gameplay, realism and emulation is much lower in 2042
When I want to be entertained, I watch Angry Joe, AVGN, etc. When I want to be informed and entertained, RU-vidrs like Nick prove their worth, that they’re just as valuable as the really hilarious ones.
I mean I think something to keep in mind that this is Battlefield 1942 and not 5 in portal, so I think sound design wise they went for more of a remastered classic approach (I think they should’ve just recycled weapons/sounds and animations from 5 like they did with the German soldier models but I digress.)
BFV is definitely more fun. You could play anyway you wanted and love it whereas 2042 doesn't feel like that imo. The maps are also vehicle based whereas BFV, it's a nice mix for infantry and vehicles.
@@damn6039 The menus weren't responsive, people kept getting killed around corners, vehicles kept glitching out and not letting you get in them, servers were fucked with constant rubberbanding, blind admiration before the game even launched and led to unnecessary disappointment from expecting too much, complained about not enough content at launch, ghost bullets, getting stuck running in place because of invisible walls, inability to spawn on squads when you should be able to, people thought tanks were overpowered, class level system was bugged, people would spawn in without weapons and have to die to get them back, complaints about challenge menu accessibility, complaints about the leveling and weapon unlock system, complaints about not enough weapons or customization at launch, did not like the RNG for unlocking skins, people wanted soldier customization. These are all quoted from people who played at launch. So no, not everyone loved the game at launch and future battlefield games will continue to have launch issues.
Thank heavens for RU-vidrs like you who describe and discuss the flaws, drawbacks And merits of both games you’re comparing. Even the latest one that everybody’s pissed about at the time…😏
I disagree, especially when what you're looking at is a small bit of essentially bonus or custom-game content slapped together in a minute. That's to be expected. You aren't meant to go to 2042 to get the ultimate BF WWII experience.
I have an idea for comparison. Battlefield 3 or 4 vs modern fps games. I played BF 3 and for me the graphics still look very good and the destruction of the environment as in that game is still not visible in many titles today.
I personally don't think they should have doubled the player count. It just adds too many downsides without really adding that much benefit, you just get shot more from random directions and have to deal with more people tightly clustered together now
Every battlefield game has impressed me graphically until 2042. And now we know why this game is such a slap in the face to BF fans, the game was originally going to be a Battle Royale until they realized that was a bad idea. EA is so out of touch.
If I'd have known doubling the player count would have resulted in other aspects of the game being worse or not being significantly better than previous Battlefields I wouldn't have wanted the player count to increase.
Despite its issues the sound design and graphics of bf5 are amazing. Don't have 2042 yet but it doesn't seem like much of an upgrade. But I will get it once they optimize PC playability... If people with 3090s get 100fps, I'm screwed with my setup
I’m glad you mentioned the player count increases but you can’t forget the sheer size of the maps as well which adds a lot more assests that make it more difficult to do those things as well. However I wish they still stuck with some of the small details over other things more
I loved battlefield V, this new 2042 is awesome but that change on the classes is a huge miss for me🥺😔 is not what battlefield is about... i bought it nonetheless 😛
I loved 5 also even though I really started late. Like super late. But there are just to many people and vehicles on the maps in the new one. 5 felt balanced and pace was good. 2042 is beyond bf chaotic to the point of aggravation.
@@georgiamann06 I had it when it launched, it had it's bugs but i enjoyed a lot, even on a base ps4, I've been playing a lot now on ps5 and it's amazing. I will miss a lot the way squads works on BFV now with BF2042
As games become better and better, it becames harder to improve upon them. You cant always improve upon something thats already good. Thats what happened here i guess: they just couldnt.
The ricochet mechanic in bf5 was so overlooked. I knew how to angle my armour and I could easily take on 3 Sherman’s at once and I was hoping it would be in portal but unfortunately nah.
The way I see it, in order to create a game that could accumulate 128 players, some major sacrifices had to be made. It sucks, but I’m hoping it was just a case of it being necessary.
Having 128 players hurt the game more than it benefitted it, I hoped they would make 64 player maps a different experience where all these sacrifices wouldn't have to be made including destruction but we only got same maps/physics but smaller
I just have to give some respect to how much time you put into these videos, like I can’t imagine how long it takes to complete these projects and as a person who has sat down a couple times to see how editing works, I have only a small fraction of the feeling of how hard it is to edit for hours on end 🙏🏽
the first year after BFV launch was bad,strange ww2 background,strange uniform,lack of maps ,bugs.. but after the release of pacific war dlc it plays like solid battlefield game and loads of fun.
What people often don't realise is that these graphical cut backs are to try support the 128 player mode which is very demanding and to be honest, Frostbite isn't really cut out for it.
Lol this community is laughable. Literally called this before 2042 released. BfV was so hated on that when the new bf releases everyone is going to go back to bf5 saying it’s the last good battlefield. Predictable.
@@user-xg6tv5hl6s Creating a second world war game without mentionning the nazis (the word is even sensored) and putting instead female soldiers just ruined the 2WW dark and historic feel. The atmosphere was much better in games like CoD World at War or Battlefield 1942. Yes the graphics looked good, yes the gameplay was nice but overall it was certainly not a masterpiece.
Bfv was a dissapointment for me after BF1, but I do not understand how a game on schedule and multiple veteran studios working on it can be outplayed by a older game like BFV in many technical areas.
I dont know what it is about how you compare games, it's really great but the way you explain things and use certain words is so oddly satisfying.. it's unique👌🏻, i only started watching your vidoes last week and i have atleast 25 to 30 of them watched haha
BF4 > BF1 > BFV > BF2042 The games are getting worse because EA knows people will buy anything with "Battlefield" on it, no matter how broken and unfinished it is. And by the way Its not Battlefield 5, its Battlefield V. The "V" stands for the allied "Victory" in WW2. BFV is not the 5th Battlefield game, It doesn't take place after Battlefield 4, and EA has been EXTREMELY CLEAR that Battlefield V IS NOT Battlefield 5.
the effects are lower because the game was rushed out. Even portal maps on 64 players need more hardware power than bf5 did on 64. A good Comparison is that you can run BF5 on 4k and get the same frames with BF2042 on 1080p, its just unoptimized.
"Chill out, it s just the beta version boomers idiot cod fans, it s not even released"-they saied few months ago, and now it s sounds like an excuse, I will always remember those words, and now look at it, bugs, gliches, unbalanced weapons operators, no story/singleplayer mode, glad that I bought BFV with this winter sale, love it, no regrets!😊
