The gist is that we're "No-Pats," a made-up word for stateless mercenaries who are fighting for the US and Russia across a series of climate change flashpoints. Most of the time I've forgotten that there's a fictional war going on at all, and then a Russian voice will mention Western imperialism and it'll briefly drift into focus. Battlefield 2042 leans hard into its climate disaster mood.Īnd yet the world of 2042 has all the presence of an eye floater. The menu and microtransaction hygiene is largely a good thing, though it comes off a little icy, and the unsettling musical hits-no inspiring horns here, just ominous pings-aren't inviting. The only extra EA is selling right now is a year-long pass that promises four new specialists who'll bring exclusive gadgets and perks to the battle. There are fewer unlockable guns than usual (although I'll still never use some of them), simpler progression systems, and no battle pass. Outside of the granular accessibility and graphics settings, the menus feel sparse. There's a lot to experience in Battlefield 2042, but it feels like Swedish minimalism has won a victory here. This is a bolder Battlefield than we've had in a long time, and I'm having far more fun working through what's good and bad about its extensive changes and sloppy new ideas than I ever did arguing about what Battlefield 5's average time-to-kill should be. The increased acreage isn't an across-the-board improvement to the Battlefield experience, but if it's wrong to make a PC game bigger and more technically complicated without designing for all the possible consequences, then I don't want to be right.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |