Do you have an estimated percentage on how much DICE actually implements suggestions you’ve made for the game? Like maybe for every 10 suggestions you make, maybe 1-2 will actually be considered or implemented? And do you relay all suggestions made by a significant number of forumites, or do you usually just relay suggestions that you, in your years of experience working back and forth with DICE, know that the devs will be interested in implementing into the game?
This is what I was talking about earlier in the thread ,and now low and behold they stopped all fixes on the game that needed to be fixed which other Hardline players know what I’m talking about.
Essentially that is the point, to gather feedback from people who play their games. In the end, we all play Battlefield, and there are more hardcore players than others who put hundreds or thousands of hours in these games. While I don’t have the time I used to, I still put 700+ hours into their games, and have since 1942. And why wouldn’t any company want to tap into their hardcore fanbase for feedback? Seems like good business to me. Also, a note I forgot to add, there are WAYYY more game changers than big youtubers. While they may not specifically get sent to studios for feedback, there are opportunities for feedback at any level
Its not only youtubers that help out. I know that competitive players went to DICE and tried out Hardline. Im not sure how much they could do about its development but you dont have to be a big youtuber to at least try it and say what you think about it before its released to everyone.
It’s not like huge YouTubers and Streamers are the ones dictating what is and isn’t changed in the game. I specifically remember in your video saying that there are close to or over 500 Gamechangers? That’s significantly more people than there are even prominent BF youtubers or streamers in existence.
I know a lot of youtubers who actually enjoy Hardline. I was part of that, and I still think this was one of the better infantry focused fast paced Battlefield games that came out. Sadly, the community hated the theme and faster paced action, and shunned it
You’re right, that was uncalled for. I thought you were playing the sjw role. I don’t care about the color of a person on the cover or the gender of a voice over. I just want good gameplay and good graphics.
People talking about immersion breaking are silly. Take bf4, in what world would our military send troops into a place that is SOLELY occupied by enemy combatants. That why we have the BUFF lol. Like your video said authenticity > realism for this game.
I think the sentiment comes from some of us who have been around since bf1942 and see some more visible people calling for more infantry based gameplay. The same ones who refer to bc2 as “the old days”. I started fps’s with wolf3d and online with quake 2 so battlefield got me because it wasn’t an arena shooter there was so much more going on. I love the idea of a game developer reaching out for feedback, just cringe when it seems most of the voices being heard are focused so much on infantry. Not even mentioning the divide between normal and hardcore mode. Need more people giving input who are bf traditionalists. That being said, enjoying the alpha a lot.
I have played the game since 1942 came out, however, the game has evolved, and in its evolution has changed a lot since 1942 was released. People playing since BC2 still have enough insight on where the franchise is going as someone who has played since 1942.
I was just making a point, although I may have used two points that were pointing towards that whole sjw thing, but they are honestly the easiest to pick out right now int he forums