this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2024
66 points (90.2% liked)
Games
16731 readers
511 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
Beehaw.org gaming
Lemmy.ml gaming
lemmy.ca pcgaming
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
About fucking time. I started playing battlefield for the destruction and 2042 had less destruction than bad company 2
Pretty much every BF since BC2 has had less destruction than BC2 and for good reason, flattening the entire map makes for very boring gameplay. IMO BF3 and BF4 hit the sweet spot of having enough destruction to have an impact while still maintaining some modicum of level design.
But now I don't even play battlefield and I probably won't return until the destruction is on par with the Finals.
BC2 still flourished with destroyed environments. The level wasn't completely flattened in every match, and it really felt like you were part of some epic battle. It was the perfect amount of "levolution". BF3 was a huge downgrade, and BF4 even more so. The Battlefield series has absolutely lost its way, and needs to stop trying to be both Siege and Call of Duty at the same time.
IDK, The Finals looks pretty fun and they allow complete destruction of the map.