Was Battlefield 2042 a Success? No – Here‘s Why

As a passionate gamer and content creator who analyzes gaming industry trends, I can definitively say Battlefield 2042 was not a success. It failed to meet sales expectations, received poor critic and user reviews, and lost player trust – which may have long-term implications for the franchise.

Battlefield 2042‘s Launch – A Disaster by the Numbers

Battlefield 2042 was one of the most anticipated games of 2021. As a long-time Battlefield fan, I had high hopes. But the launch was a disaster by almost every metric:

• 4.23 million copies sold in first week – Seems high, but was below expectations according to industry analyst reports
• 33% lower sales than 2018‘s Battlefield V in the same period
• All-time low critic reviews – Metacritic score of 72 on PC, compared to 87, 89, 88 for previous entries
• 0.19% player share on Steam – Out of all Steam players, less than 0.2% are playing BF2042 currently

These numbers indicate major problems. Next I‘ll analyze the root causes behind why players, myself included, felt so let down.

An Unfocused Vision Led to Disliked Design Decisions

As a content creator fortunate enough to get early Battlefield 2042 access, I could tell many of the changes diverged from what makes Battlefield iconic:

Removal of Classes

Replacing classes with generic Specialists worsened teamwork and class differentiation. I lost the sense of playing a specialized, complementary role. Understanding player intentions through appearance also suffered.

Bigger Isn‘t Always Better

The new maps emphasized giant open spaces unlike classic Battlefield maps. Traveling these sparse areas with little action doesn‘t showcase what makes all-out-warfare fun. The 128 player count also contributed to a chaotic, disconnected feel compared to the refined flow of 64 player modes.

Unfinished Content

The game only launched with 22 weapons – extremely limited for a AAA FPS title. Battlefield 3 from 2011 had 93 weapons at launch for comparison! The lack of content and features was very noticeable.

This led to an identity crisis – Battlefield 2042 didn‘t play like a classic Battlefield game, nor did it cater to new trends like Hero Shooters as perhaps intended.

What Players Really Wanted – A Reflection on the Battlefield Formula

Analyzing reception and conversations amongst the Battlefield community on my channel, veteran players like myself wanted:

• Classic class archetypes promoting teamwork
• Large maps focused around infantry funnels and vehicles working in harmony
• A wide arsenal of weapons across eras that fit faction themes
• The ability to get straight into the signature sandbox action

These pillars shaped the most acclaimed Battlefield entries and keep players engaged for thousands of hours. Battlefield 2042 diverged too far on all fronts.

Can Battlefield 2042 Be Saved? My Insights on the Road Ahead

In subsequent updates, EA DICE has been making positive changes reacting to player feedback:

• Bringing back smaller player count 64 player modes
• Adding a persistent scoreboard
• Balancing vehicles to be less dominant

But is it too little too late? Player numbers continue dwindling to all-time franchise lows. Personally however, I feel if more legacy features return the tides can be turned over the long-term.

As of now though, excitement has shifted to what comes next for Battlefield. Industry rumors indicate EA may take Battlefield back to a modern or near-future setting – one clearly defined by familiar factions. This self-awareness would be most welcome!

There are lessons to be learned all-around from Battlefield 2042. The potential still exists to enrich the sandbox war fantasy that first captivated me many titles ago. I remain optimistic on what the future holds.

Let me know your thoughts on this breakdown – could Battlefield 2042 have succeeded if things panned out differently? Which direction should EA DICE take moving forward? I welcome any discussion in the comments!