I am not sure if tfc (team fortress classic) still has servers running in any capacity, but it was one of the forefathers of role based, team shooters. It’s influence and by proxy TF2’s is still huge in competitive gaming.
The question is, does the responsibility fall on you to choose games that fit your skill level or the developer to compromise their vision to accomodate a broader audience? Would we take the same stance with other art? I find a lot of Foreign Arthouse Films to be slow paced and unenjoyable. Should the writers and directors be required to make an alternate cut to accomodate my preferences?
It’s weird that you make that comparison. I have been an avid 2fort fan since og TF and feel like that map at least had some breathing room to get away from the constant grenades spam and chaos. It might not have been much but there was at least a chance to stop for a split second and figure out what the hell is going on.
I think being able to choose whether I wanted to jump into a 24/7 2fort server or not also helped with the feeling of “this map is trash why are we even here” less than it does in modern games where you only have skill-based matchmaking and voting based upon randos.
I love a good 2fort battle with people I know and have been playing with for years.
Yeah that might be the thing that isn’t jiving well with me. It just feels like chaos. There’s nothing tactical about mashing the fire button and spinning in a circle. Definitely a skill issue.
I get that for some users. In my case, 90% of what’s in the catalog that I’d be interested in I already own. I know this isn’t the standards, but it’s what happens when you’re an avid Steam Gamer with a Humble Sub and a collecting problem.
I joined Game pass to have Xbox live to play with my console buddies and for day one exclusive access. At this point, I’ve moved most of them on to PC and Xbox has done nada with my 5 or so years of subscription.
It not being the same 8 ball that Bushnell and those Atari guys consulted back in the day may be the greatest failure.
But in all honesty, I think that’s a great analogy. There’s no harm in bringing in competent consultation, but you have to choose wisely. This is more akin to a movie screening. It just so happened to be a test audience that has traditional been compensated for their opinions…
I think the counter arguments from the reddit threads are pretty big points.
Good Battlefield plays like something different than the other major offerings. BF2, BC2 and BF4 are all modern military shooters but they “feel” way different than a CoD or Counterstrike or anything else.
The scale is important but so is the struggle of a tight pitched rush push with limited tickets left. Sure, a good pilot is a pain in the ass, but it’s part of what makes Battlefield work. Same with tanks. Man, Golmud and the fucking tanks…
Anyways, just because someone is paid to do something doesn’t mean they’re an expert in all the relative disciplines. I don’t really follow any streamers, but I do work in a pretty specialized industry and know that just because a peer and I are technically in the same field, what we bring to the table, how we approach problems and the way we implement solutions can be wildly different.
Don’t ask him the best strats for Quake 3 and don’t ask me anything about Counterstrike. Otherwise, you’ll be sadly disappointed and end up with a worse experience overall.
I’d like to believe Dice made the best call here, despite what a shit show BF2042’s launch was (even if basically every BF launch from 3 on has been fucked). They set the standard for rough launches years ago and yet every new release comes with doomsayers predicting the studio being closed and the game dying. Yet the reality is, they almost always, eventually get their shit together and patch things up to the way it should of been at launch. Just like most other major devs at this point.