this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2023
9 points (80.0% liked)
Games
18545 readers
673 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:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No, I'm giving battlefield all the credit it's current incarnation deserves:
It is not as good as a game made by 3 guys on Unreal. I tried it again last week out of curiosity and it's flat out not worth getting when BattleBit exists, in my opinion
And a long history of releasing trash and getting to decent only proves the point, BattleBit actually started as an enjoyable and decently content filled product whereas battlefield you KNOW won't next time it comes around
The point is it's playerbases are in a similar tier in size. Of course its your opinion that battlebit is better (and is mine too), but that doesnt stop the idea that there are plenty of people playing 2042 now (especially vs launch). I have a friend who has both games, but when hes playing alone, he more often boots up battlefield more often then battlebit, and he spends a LOT of time playing those games more tham the rest of his library.