The Mage Tower in World of Warcraft leads to frustration. Blizzard gives you more time to complete the particularly tough challenges.
Currently, there is very little to do in World of Warcraft. New content from Patch 9.2 is still to come. The only silver lining is the Mage Tower, which is currently active during the Timewalking: Legion event. Here, heroes of Azeroth can currently earn special skins and even a cool mount. However, the pressure is on many players. Now there has been some relief from Blizzard.
What is being changed? Actually, the Mage Tower was supposed to disappear on December 22, as the Timewalking: Legion would end then. However, Blizzard has now announced in the official forum that the tower will remain open for much longer than planned. The tower will remain open until January 4, 2022.
This should take some pressure off the players and encourage some people to attempt the tower with a different class.
What is the Mage Tower? In the Mage Tower, you must complete a challenge tailored to your class. This is a quite tough boss fight that originates from the times of Legion. Since your character stats are fixed here, the fight is quite challenging. You are rewarded with a great armor set (Transmog) or even a mount.
Why did Blizzard do this? There hasn’t been a specific explanation from Blizzard. However, it seems likely that the developers are extending the event because numerous problems arose in the first 5 days. For many classes, the Mage Tower seems nearly impossible to complete. Many hotfixes have already reduced some hurdles and adjusted the balancing. However, more adjustments are still appearing daily, as the tuning is simply not optimal yet.
A second reason might be that Blizzard wants to create another incentive to check out World of Warcraft during the holidays with the Mage Tower.
More news about World of Warcraft can be found here:
What about the other events? Although the Mage Tower will be active longer than planned, the other weekly events are not affected by this adjustment. They will now simply overlap with the Mage Tower, meaning that essentially two events will be active simultaneously.
Have you already mastered the Mage Tower and earned the skins? Or are you struggling with the high difficulty and finding it tough to get through?
This is an AI-powered translation. Some inaccuracies might exist.
In Destiny 2 there is a major insider report. A writer from the game reveals how poorly the staff of the story team were treated. She was denied a promotion because she was not good enough at the game. However, her job did not require any special skills in Destiny 2.
Which employee is involved? The US site IGN spoke to current or former employees at Bungie. One woman is named there, Cookie Hiponia. She worked for Bungie since September 2016, first as a freelancer, later joining Bungie full-time and joining the Narrative Team. She remained as Managing Editor until August 2019.
In her position, she was responsible for the in-game text and fulfilled an editorial oversight role. She states that prior to her time, there was little focus on ensuring that the story was coherent and that continuity was maintained.
This led to a lack of professional standards within the team: “There were only a few people writing things and leading the effort,” she told IGN.
No Promotion Because She Was “Not Good Enough at the Game”
The Problem with Promotions was: Hiponia says that the chronically understaffed writing team would have constantly faced criticism. They were told they were “difficult to deal with,” didn’t support their “bosses well enough,” were aggressive, rude, and could not handle criticism.
These arguments would also come up every time promotion discussions took place. Promotion requests were continually denied.
Hiponia said she was specifically told she could not be promoted because she was “not good enough at the game.” However, her job had nothing to do with gameplay design. When she then asked for more time to play to improve, that was also denied.
This is the Discussion: On reddit they are discussing the entire insider report. This point, that a writer was not promoted because she supposedly plays too poorly, causes some bewilderment among the players. Because in their view, almost all Bungie employees seen playing were quite bad at Destiny 2:
“I’ve seen these guys play during presentations and raid-alongs. They play as if it’s the first time they’ve ever touched any game. So to hell with that!”
“If you don’t want to promote someone, you come up with some excuse so that it doesn’t look like you have them in your sights.”
There were also disputes about figures like Hawthorne.
Apparently, Some Female Writers Did Not “Fit” into Bungie’s Culture
What’s Behind It: The continuity problems at Bungie that Hiponia mentions were evident when Luke Smith, the head of Destiny 2, once admitted he had no idea what the “Darkness” actually was, a major concept from Destiny 1.
It was apparently desperately needed for someone to address the very issues for which Hiponia was responsible. But the report makes it clear that the writer and her team had many conflicts with the “elders”. There were said to be cultural conflicts because writers like Hiponia, a writer with roots in the Philippines, struggled with how the Bungie bosses represented women in the game.
The statement: “We can’t promote you because you are too bad at Destiny 2” seems to be a kind of code for saying: “You don’t fit in here – you’re not a gamer.”
This also explains why Bungie’s CEO, Pete Parsons, emphasized in his response to the insider report that the company has significantly focused on women and members of underrepresented groups and that much progress has been made at Bungie in recent years. Because with someone like Cookie Hiponia, the integration into Bungie from 2016 to 2019 apparently did not work at all.
We covered the insider report comprehensively on MeinMMO:
The Twitch streamer Kristina “K1KA” Dukic passed away on Wednesday, December 8. The Serbian was previously a semi-professional player in CS:GO and primarily streamed League of Legends on Twitch. The streamer was only 21 years old.
K1KA as a Twitch streamer:
The Serbian referred to herself as “a semi-professional CS:GO player who is now learning League of Legends.” She participated in 2 matches at the “Copenhagen Games Female” in 2018 and 2019.
On Twitch, she had 44,687 followers, often streaming League of Legends there. On YouTube, she had 745,000 subscribers, and on Instagram, she was followed by 444,000 accounts.
Just on December 1, she completed a nearly four-hour stream of LoL, during which she said goodbye to her viewers. She would be back tomorrow. K1KA said goodbye with air kisses and said she loved her viewers. It was her last stream.
Recommended editorial content
At this point you will find external content from Twitch that complements the article.
I consent to external content being displayed to me. Personal data can be transmitted to third party platforms.
Read more about our privacy policy.
This is how people learned of her death: A message on Instagram announced that “the dear friend and angel” had passed away on the evening of December 8, 2021. Condolences were offered to the family, friends, and fans.
It is said that this is a tough time now, and they want to keep the memory of K1KA alive.
Andrijana, who manages K1KA’s Instagram account, wrote: If you have thoughts of suicide or suffer from depression, you should find someone to talk to. You are not alone.
If dark thoughts trouble you, you can reach out to the helpline at 0800/111 0 111 and 0800/11 0 22 – it’s nationwide and free of charge.
Like many Twitch streamers, K1KA also regularly posted on Instagram. In one of her last posts, she wrote: She said: ‘Where are we going? – I said ‘To the moon.’ The post received ‘131,000 likes.’
Reactions: The death of the young streamer has shocked many users on Twitter: Under her last post on Twitter, announcing a live stream on Twitch, numerous tweets with “Rest in Peace” can be found, and a virtual candle is lit.
On Twitch, people are clipping previous streams of K1KA and posting them under the title “Miss u” – “I miss you.”
The CS:GO analyst Janko Paunovic expressed his deep sorrow over the death of K1KA and called for more mindfulness: One must remember that the words typed on the keyboard reach a person who reads it all (via twitter). No one knows what is going on in the lives of others and the problems they struggle with every day.
Mental health, depression, and coping are important, indeed vital topics – especially among content creators.
With the Pacific update, Call of Duty: Warzone has been thoroughly revised. In addition to a new map, the weapons from CoD: Vanguard have made their way into the game. However, they come with what is known as Bloom. This causes bullets to land in a different place than the one you are actually aiming at. Although Bloom has been reduced with the latest update, it is still active in a weaker form in Warzone.
What is the problem with Bloom? The bullets from the CoD: Vanguard weapons have a large spread. This means they do not necessarily hit the place you are currently aiming at, but deviate from it with a certain spread. The so-called Bloom has now found its way into Warzone through the Pacific update.
There, the weapons are usually quite accurate. Only at longer distances or with certain weapons does a larger spread become noticeable.
The problems with the new weapons in CoD Warzone were so significant that a hotfix was introduced immediately with the first patch. This not only increased the damage for all Vanguard weapons but also reduced the spread. However, the developers did not completely eliminate it.
But that is expected to come in the future.
Bullet spread of over 172 pixels
How bad was Bloom before the patch? The spread of the weapons was analyzed in detail on the YouTube channel TrueGameData. For this, a distance of 57 meters was chosen and shots were fired consistently at the same position with 10, sometimes 11, shots:
Some weapons reached a spread of over 100 pixels
The largest Bloom effect was with the PPSH-41 at 172 pixels
For comparison: Characters in Warzone are about 150 pixels tall at this distance
The sniper rifles from Vanguard, however, were said to have hit quite precisely
Recommended editorial content
At this point you will find external content from YouTube that complements the article.
I consent to external content being displayed to me. Personal data can be transmitted to third party platforms.
Read more about our privacy policy.
The Bloom was not well received by the players. They felt cheated out of their skill, as it was purely a matter of chance whether they hit an enemy or not.
How is it after the patch? The patch notes state that “Bloom has been drastically reduced for all Vanguard weapons”. Note that these changes only apply to Warzone, not to Vanguard itself.
However, many players are still complaining on reddit that the spread is still too large.
On Saturday evening, for example, user Sorby420 complained on reddit and asked: “Is this the new Bloom mechanic or are these just bad servers? It feels like this happens in every Gulag.”
In a related context, he showed a video where he was unable to hit his opponent in the Gulag, even though he was shooting directly at the head.
Bloom will be completely removed from Warzone, but that takes time
What do the developers say about removing Bloom? In the patch notes, they stated that they are currently working on an adjustment. However, this takes time and must be tested, as the balance of the weapons is linked to the respective Bloom:
In the future, we will completely remove Bloom from Vanguard weapons. This process will take some time, as we need to identify appropriate disadvantages to compensate for the removal of Bloom, which depend on each individual weapon and the type of attachments.
When exactly the change will be made is still unknown.
For those who want to be very active in Warzone right now, you can check out the best weapons with setups here:
Michael “shroud” Grzesiek is one of the most successful streamers on Twitch. In one of his streams, he revealed that he has no desire to work. He does not consider streaming itself to be work.
What did shroud say? Shroud was watching a Valorant tournament live on stream and commenting on it when he was asked a question in the chat. A viewer wanted to know if shroud could imagine playing as an e-sports player again.
Shroud declined and explained: “You must understand, I don’t like to work. That’s why I stream. I don’t like work, work is crap. So if there’s something that requires work and effort, I probably won’t do it.”
The chat kept asking and wondered if streaming wasn’t work. He replied: “Is streaming work? No, it’s not work, it’s a damn joke. Look, I’m sitting here doing nothing, I’m literally doing nothing.”
In fact, shroud mostly sat in this livestream and commented on the work of others – the players in the Valorant tournament.
Recommended editorial content
At this point you will find external content from Twitch that complements the article.
I consent to external content being displayed to me. Personal data can be transmitted to third party platforms.
Read more about our privacy policy.
Almost anyone can earn money on Twitch, but very few can live off it
Is streaming really not work? Later in the stream, shroud explains that he previously worked in construction. That was real work for him and he could only stand it for about two weeks. From this perspective, streaming shouldn’t be physically demanding work at all.
However, streaming comes with some aspects that can definitely cause stress and work:
There is a constant pressure to be relevant, which is why many streamers hardly take breaks or longer vacations. If you are not there, you lose viewers, subscribers, and thus money. Ninja, who was once number 1 on Twitch, said that he lived like a “slave to the stream” for a while.
75% of all streamers earned less than 120 dollars by November 2021. Twitch also only pays out money starting at 100 dollars.
Only 0.06% of Twitch streamers reach an income of more than 67,521 dollars, which corresponds to the average household income in America (via WSJ).
The top 1% of streamers earned 529 million dollars. The remaining 99% of streamers received a total of 360 million.
Who is shroud? Shroud started his career as a professional CS:GO player. In 2018, he left the Cloud9 team and dedicated himself full-time to his streaming career. In October 2019, he switched to the streaming service Mixer and is said to have earned really well there. After the end of Mixer, he returned to Twitch.
On Twitch, he is one of the most successful streamers ever. With over 6.7 million watched hours, he ranks 8th in the last 30 days (via Sullygnome). He has over 10 million followers on Twitch.
What applies to shroud does not have to apply to everyone
What else should be considered? One must be aware that shroud is in a completely different situation than most streamers who started on Twitch after him.
Shroud began his career on Twitch in November 2012, when there was little competition and he had a significant head start due to his CS:GO background. Furthermore, he is a gifted shooter player and made a name for himself early on.
It seemed relatively easy for him to be successful on Twitch “without putting in much work”.
If shroud were to start streaming on Twitch today, he might perceive the “hard climb up” to make a living from Twitch as more of a job than he does today, where he has had a loyal fan base for ages and resides on the Twitch throne.
What do you think about shroud’s statement that streaming is not work at all? Would you agree or disagree? Feel free to write it in the comments.
A beautiful story around Twitch occurred recently with streamer ThirdArtifact. After 2 years of absence, a viewer returned to her and brought her to tears:
Those who play the “Eternity’s Trials” in Destiny 2 are likely farming the strangest and most unusual ship in the game called “Xuriversal Passenger.” The flying space rock looks like a paracausal nut, and the players’ desire to own it is skyrocketing.
Through the “Eternity’s Trials” activity from the “30 Years of Bungie” package, Destiny 2 players currently have access to various cosmetic treasures. Xur’s treasure chamber in Eternity is full of them.
You can earn equipment and gear for all three classes there.
There is a Sparrow treasure chest for reputation rank 16 and 5 treasure keys.
Additionally, there is a Ghost shell treasure chest for reputation rank 16 and 3 treasure keys.
Inside the hardest chest lies the strange and unusual exotic jump ship “Xuriversal Passenger” with the flair of an asteroid.
This is what Xuriversal Passenger, the flying asteroid, looks like in Destiny 2.
Players must continually increase their “Strange Favor” rank with the mysterious merchant Xur and farm more treasure keys if they want all the treasures from the chests or want to focus specifically on a reward.
How do you get “Xuriversal Passenger”?: The “Eternity’s Trials” are freely accessible to all players during the “30 Years of Bungie” anniversary. To specifically open the chest containing the ship, you need a “Strange Favor” rank of 16 with Xur, plus 7 treasure keys.
This means that many runs of the 6-player activity “Eternity’s Trials” need to be completed. You get +75 points progression on both Normal and Legend. Consecutive completions also give you a streak bonus.
You need “Strange Favor” rank 16 and 7 treasure keys for the ship.
Xur’s reputation system works just like Lord Shaxx’s in the Crucible or Commander Zavala’s in the Strike playlist. You earn points by completing activities. For “Strange Favor” rank 16, you need 9,000 points. Once you reach 10,000 points, or reputation rank 17, you can reset.
These items can currently also be earned for free in Destiny 2:
The propulsion effect makes the space look perfect: The ship has a matching effect in hyperspace. It leaves a colorful comet tail behind during flight and landing. This uniqueness is also what fascinates players about this unusual flying object and makes them forget the grind.
Recommended editorial content
At this point you will find external content from YouTube that complements the article.
I consent to external content being displayed to me. Personal data can be transmitted to third party platforms.
Read more about our privacy policy.
Could this be Xur’s jump ship? In the same thread on reddit players wondered if this could be Xur’s jump ship. Does he travel to the Destiny universe every Friday with it? It would at least be a possibility that cannot be ruled out.
Do you also think it is Xur’s jump ship? What do you think of the quirky and unusual ship? Will you take on the grind and earn it? Or do you perhaps have entirely different treasures in focus during the 30th anniversary that interest you more? Like the exotic rocket launcher Gjallarhorn?
This is an AI-powered translation. Some inaccuracies might exist.
Women at Activision Blizzard are complaining that their concerns have gone unheard at the executive level. An example of discrimination is the treatment of breastfeeding mothers at Blizzard (WoW, Overwatch, Diablo). The issue has long been neglected. The conditions were reportedly so poor that even breast milk was stolen from the refrigerator.
The lawsuit has continued to expand over the last 5 months: the President of Blizzard had to resign, and even the resignation of CEO Bobby Kotick was demanded by employees. NPCs disappeared from World of Warcraft, a character in Overwatch received a new name, and the company issued new policies.
What was the problem for breastfeeding Jessica Gonzalez worked at Blizzard in Irvine as a test analyst from 2019 to 2021. Gonzalez is the founder of the “ABetterABK” group, which advocates for improvements at Activision Blizzard.
She shares on Twitter that breastfeeding mothers at Blizzard faced a variety of issues (via twitter):
The chairs were wobbly and could not be adjusted to a suitable breastfeeding position. Many women reportedly sat on the floor to pump milk.
The tables were made of wood and so porous that breast milk pooled and clumped in the cracks of the tables.
The technical facilities of the rooms were too poor. There was no way to set up laptops so mothers could work or watch shows while pumping milk. There were too few outlets in the room, which were then occupied by lamps and pumps. The situation was also dangerous for fire safety reasons.
Insufficient storage space was provided, with no lockable containers available to securely store the pumps. Women had to carry the pumps across campus multiple times a day.
The refrigerators for breast milk had curtain locks that were accessible to other staff. Some used the refrigerators to keep their beers cold. The curtain locks were only installed because breast milk had reportedly been stolen.
The rooms were not maintained in good sanitary condition. It did not appear that the rooms for breastfeeding mothers were maintained by the cleaning staff in the same way as other areas.
Recommended editorial content
At this point you will find external content from Twitter that complements the article.
I consent to external content being displayed to me. Personal data can be transmitted to third party platforms.
Read more about our privacy policy.
A former producer shares her experience as a breastfeeding mother.
Breast milk suddenly went missing – devastating experience
Another former employee of Blizzard, Stephnaie Krutsick, also recounts that her breast milk suddenly went missing. There were no other mothers present at the time, and only a few women worked in the departments then. Only her milk was stolen; other items in the refrigerator were still there.
She says someone must have either thrown the milk away or stolen it for “creepy reasons.” For her, it was a devastating experience.
She felt discriminated against because the male supervisors did not understand that she could not always be physically present. As a result, she lost some tasks.
We have examined the escalating situation surrounding Activision Blizzard and CEO Bobby Kotick with MeinMMO:
Recommended editorial content
At this point you will find external content from Spotify that complements the article.
I consent to external content being displayed to me. Personal data can be transmitted to third party platforms.
Read more about our privacy policy.
What follows from this? For the women at Blizzard, the situation of breastfeeding mothers is an example of the culture at Blizzard, which is so male-dominated that the concerns of women are disregarded. Change is necessary.
As an example of a step that Activision Blizzard has already taken, the games from Blizzard have been examined for content that is no longer deemed appropriate:
Depths of Erendorn is a new MMORPG for PC that has been in development since 2016. It recently transitioned to Unreal Engine 5 and has some interesting approaches. There are turn-based battles and a Free2Play model that does not resort to Pay2Win or even “Pay to Convenience”.
What kind of game is this? Depths of Erendorn is inspired by classic role-playing games and is set to take place in a huge, open fantasy world. You will face dangers and, above all, randomly generated dungeons.
One notable feature is the various races you can choose from. They include:
Humans
Wood Folk
Elves
Dwarves
Water Creatures
Two-Legged Eagles
Spider Folk
Overall, 15 character classes are planned. Each class is automatically bound to a race. The Wood Folk are Druids, the Eagles are Astromancers, and the Spider Folk are Illusionists. There are said to be “thousands of skills” in total.
Also noteworthy is the combat system. The MMORPG features turn-based battles, similar to Atlantica Online. Players in a group can plan and execute their turn simultaneously. The developers promise fast rounds and a lot of strategy.
What is known about the release? Depths of Erendorn has been developed by a European indie studio since August 2016 and was initially developed in Unity. The game has since moved to Unreal Engine 5.
A Kickstarter campaign and a first playable alpha are planned for 2022. A beta is scheduled for 2023 and the release is planned for 2024.
You can watch a first pre-alpha trailer here. The developers say it contains only real gameplay:
Recommended editorial content
At this point you will find external content from YouTube that complements the article.
I consent to external content being displayed to me. Personal data can be transmitted to third party platforms.
Read more about our privacy policy.
Focus on Groups and Dungeons in Endgame, Free2Play without Pay2Win
What are the developers planning for the endgame? Depths of Erendorn is set to focus on competition and group play. The emphasis is clearly on PvE.
The developers talk about thousands of events and countless randomly generated dungeons where you should face the “greatest challenges”.
There is talk of seasons and leaderboards where players and groups can place themselves. However, it has not been revealed what exactly this will look like.
How is the MMORPG financed? The developers emphasize repeatedly in the FAQ and on the website that they are focusing on “Free2Play without the Trash”. For them this means:
No Pay2Win
No boosters
No convenience items – this includes additional bank or inventory slots
Instead, the shop is supposed to offer cosmetic skins and “options”. However, these “options” are not meant to influence gameplay.
This is what the interface and combat phase in Depths of Erendorn looks like.
Praise for “fresh wind” in the genre
How is the game being received? Under the trailer and under the video by YouTuber KiraTV, especially the diverse races and combat system are praised. The turn-based battles are described as “a fresh wind for the genre” and some are looking forward to it because they are simply overwhelmed by action battles.
However, some argue that a co-op mode would have sufficed for a turn-based RPG and that they do not need a full MMORPG for that. The graphics also receive criticism and are referred to as “generic Unreal Engine game”.
In response to the criticism about the graphics, however, some users point out that there are still 3 years until the release and much can change by then.
What do you think of the current concepts of Depths of Erendorn? Do the various races and combat systems appeal to you? Or are you waiting for a classic MMORPG with active combat?
One of these MMORPGs in development is Ashes of Creation. However, that is also still a few years away from release:
Matt Firor, Director at ZeniMax Online, looks back in a letter to the community on The Elder Scrolls Online in 2021 and gives a brief outlook on 2022. Political intrigues and one of the playable races are set to be the focus. Additionally, there will be an update of the data center.
How was 2021 for ESO? 2021 was a difficult year for the MMORPG, as Firor admits. One reason for this is the Corona pandemic, which is said to have taken its toll on the employees.
The Director also explained that the upgrading of ESO’s hardware has been delayed due to a lack of computer hardware. This was actually a fixed plan for 2021. Nevertheless, the launch of Blackwood went better than it did in 2020 with Greymoor. Back then, there were many technical problems and server crashes.
Firor is also satisfied with the general output of content. He emphasizes in the letter that “millions of new players” found their way to ESO in 2021. As a highlight, the Director pointed out the new companions, which are particularly useful for newcomers.
What exactly changed for ESO in 2021 and how players perceive the year has been summarized here:
2022 is not supposed to focus on “the end of the world”, but on a playable race
What does Firor reveal about 2022? In the new year, the developers want to move away from stories like “The End of the World”. This has revolved around the base game with the Daedra Molag Bal and most recently Blackwood with the fight against Mehrunes Dagon.
Instead, they want to focus on a traditional “Elder Scrolls” intrigue. Fans point out the story of Wrothgar, which has managed without such a large scenario.
2022 should be about politics and rivalry between the factions. The focus should be on one of the playable races of ESO, which have not yet been adequately highlighted culturally and historically. Players suspect that this is about the Rothwardons, who have not received enough attention and at the same time offer room for new areas in their region.
Updates will continue to be released quarterly as usual. Fans can therefore expect 3 DLCs and a major expansion in the summer.
Additionally, work will continue on the hardware and performance of the MMORPG in 2022. However, Firor points out that the team is dependent on the current hardware market.
When will we learn more about the content of 2022? In January, there will be a traditional reveal event. There, the overarching story for the entire year and the rough outline of the expansion in the summer will be presented.
Until then, feel free to speculate: What can we expect in ESO in 2022? Which areas would you like to visit, and what should be the big feature of the expansion? Please share it in the comments.
ESO is a Buy2Play game. You only need to buy it once and can theoretically play endlessly. Which other MMORPGs are in this category and which are particularly worthwhile, we will reveal here:
Star Wars: The Old Republic and Corepunk were supposed to round off the year for MMORPGs in December. However, the new expansion and the start of the beta were unexpectedly postponed this week. What else has happened is revealed by MeinMMO in our weekly review.
The discussion of the week: Scot Lane, the head of New World, commented on the declining player numbers on Steam. You discussed reasons, rescue measures, and similar matters hotly:
Gamigo has a new MMORPG in the pipeline, but no one knows exactly what it is. A timer is running on the website, which ends on December 15 (via uncertainfolder).
This was the news of the week from the world of MMORPGs at a glance. What was your personal highlight? Did you experience anything exciting this week? Or did we forget something important? Let us know in the comments here at MeinMMO and discuss with us.
This is an AI-powered translation. Some inaccuracies might exist.
Final Fantasy XIV released its new expansion Endwalker on December 7th. In this episode of the MeinMMO-Podcast, we discuss the beginnings of the MMORPG, the expansion, and the possible causes for the sudden influx of new players in 2021.
This is the topic: The now 11-year-old Final Fantasy XIV seems to be thriving at the moment. Just recently, it released its latest expansion Endwalker and the servers were overwhelmed by players. Long queues quickly formed and developers had to apologize for the server issues because they could not handle the massive influx.
In this episode of the MeinMMO-Podcast, we look at the MMORPG from the perspectives of a long-time veteran player and a newcomer. We examine the beginnings of the game, the current state, and what makes it attractive to so many gamers. However, we also address the problems and weaknesses.
For whom is it worth taking a look at FFXIV? Why are so many gamers currently trying out the game? Find out in our podcast.
This time, joining us are editor-in-chief Leya Jankowski and the dynamic community manager duo Irina Moritz (MeinMMO) and Marylin Marx (GameStar).
Here you can listen:
Recommended editorial content
At this point you will find external content from Spotify that complements the article.
I consent to external content being displayed to me. Personal data can be transmitted to third party platforms.
Read more about our privacy policy.
Here’s how you can contribute: You can actively participate in improving the podcast. If you have feedback such as suggestions or criticisms or just want to submit a cool topic suggestion that should be discussed urgently, then check out our Discord server.
Alternatively, you can also directly email us at [email protected] and share your thoughts with us. Share your opinion and discuss with us!
This is an AI-powered translation. Some inaccuracies might exist.
Genre: Asymmetric Multiplayer, Survival-Coop | Developer: DIMPS | Platform: PC, PS4, Xbox One, Nintendo Switch, PS5 and Xbox Series X/S are compatible | Release: 2022
MeinMMO author Lena had the opportunity to fight for survival in the closed beta of the survival multiplayer Dragon Ball: The Breakers for several hours. What started as frustration and boredom eventually turned into fun. In this article, you’ll find out if Dragon Ball: The Breakers is worth your time.
Filled with a heavy dose of nostalgia and bouncing in my chair, I eagerly awaited my closed beta key and the corresponding 4-hour time window during which I could finally test Dragon Ball: The Breakers.
What kind of game is this? Dragon Ball: The Breakers is an asymmetric survival multiplayer that strongly resembles games like Dead by Daylight or Friday the 13th: The Game.
One player takes on the role of the Raider, while 7 others fight for survival.
Both parties have different goals during a match:
The Survivors: Escape from and/or defeat the Raider.
The Raider: Kill all Survivors and prevent their escape.
Other features of the game:
Simple character creation for male and female survivors.
In-game shop with cosmetics, accessories, emoticons… (available for purchase via premium currency or regular currency).
“Spirit Extractors” as Gacha mechanics.
Gacha means that you need to invest in-game currency or often real money to receive random heroes. It’s still unknown if you can spend money in Dragon Ball: The Breakers.
Possible strengthening of Survivor skills through training.
Survivors can disguise themselves as objects and use other gadgets to escape from the Raider.
Dragon Ball: The Breakers functions completely differently from its predecessors Budokai Tenkaichi 3 or Dragon Ball Xenoverse 2, which are more considered fighting games.
Nonetheless, The Breakers is set in the Xenoverse universe, and you can transfer your save from Xenoverse 2 to the cooperative survival game.
What exactly will be transferred, I cannot tell you yet, but I suspect that your character from Xenoverse 2 will act as a Survivor in The Breakers – so you might not have to create a new character.
About the author Lena: Since Dragon Ball aired on RTL 2, I have been a fan of the series. I am now 28 years old and practically grew up with it. The Cell saga with Kid Gohan is simply the highlight of Dragon Ball (Z) for me. So I was even more pleased to see Cell as the Raider in the closed beta.
I have hardly any experience with asymmetric survival games that put a player instead of an NPC against you. Therefore, Dragon Ball: The Breakers was a real new experience for me.
My entrance into the game – Preparing for the massacre
When I started the beta of Dragon Ball: The Breakers, all settings related to graphics, controls, and sound overwhelmed me. Unfortunately, I couldn’t select a German voiceover – I secretly hoped for the classic RTL-2 voice: Tommy Morgenstern as Son Goku. Well, had to settle for the original broadcast, that is, Japanese with German subtitles.
Then came the character creation menu, which was kept very simple. However, there was still plenty of choice among the characteristically Dragon Ball hairstyles and eyes. Unfortunately, I was only allowed to choose between two outfits: half-naked or sporty dressed.
Although I usually spend what feels like hours on character creation, this time I finished in about 4 minutes. This was mainly because I set a limit for myself; you couldn’t stay in the beta forever, only 4 hours per time slot.
You can choose from 5 different voices for your character.
Then the game threw me into a tutorial window that I had at least partially… skimmed through. That would come back to haunt me later. After that, I found my character on a small map with various people and buildings:
Familiar faces like Trunks, Bulma, and the pig Oolong.
The Room of Spirit and Time (training for my characters’ skills).
The in-game shop.
A hairdresser (allows you to completely rework your character).
A mailbox.
The Spirit Extractor to obtain new characters via Gacha mechanics.
What do you need new and other characters for, besides your Survivor? Just to give you a rough idea: You can increase your Dragon Transformation level using a so-called transformation power and borrow the appearance and skills of a well-known character from Dragon Ball. This allows you to fight more effectively and move better because you can fly.
After carefully inspecting the manageable map and perhaps spending a minute or two in the Gacha system, I plunged into battle.
Overview of the small map before a match.
Catastrophic start – “What am I even doing here?”
In my first game, I played a Survivor. Then, for about three games, I didn’t realize that I could set my preference to Raider. Nonetheless, I happily waved to my teammates in the lobby, which was possible through the available gestures. I didn’t know what horror awaited me in “Highland River” (the map name).
I started with two other players in a deserted environment. Desperately, I followed one of them because I had no idea what exactly to do. He had probably played several games and quickly took off. “Co-op probably isn’t encouraged after all,” I thought to myself and tried to manage alone.
Relatively quickly, I discovered that I could shoot with a weapon to destroy certain objects. A few crates were opened before I encountered a civilian in need of help. You just had to hold down a button to rescue the arms. As a thank you, she dropped transformation power.
Then I found a radar with which I could have located a valuable key, but the unheeded tutorial came back to bite me: I had no idea how to use the radar. In general, I still did not really know what my task as a Survivor was, other than fleeing.
Shortly thereafter, I was found by Cell, the Raider, and defeated with just a few blows. I survived for less than 2 minutes. That was really bitter.
Do you think my teammates came to my rescue? Oh, please. The other players actually have 60 seconds to revive their buddies and bring them back into the game.
A kind soul did want to help me single-handedly, but unfortunately Cell was still nearby and easily took him down.
Looking back, I realized that this is a really unfair advantage for the Raider: He waits near a corpse, hoping that a Survivor comes to revive the corpse. In the subsequent rounds, there were also some Raiders who shamelessly exploited this disadvantage, almost exterminating the entire group of Survivors.
Cell indulging in my corpse.
The Aha moment: “Oh, so that’s how you play!”
After my head was properly washed in the first round, I decided to read the tutorial and play more rounds until I slowly figured out how the game actually works and what the purpose of the Survivors is.
There are a total of 3 phases:
Phase one, which I affectionately call, “Please Cell, don’t discover and kill me while I collect important power keys”
The defense phase
The escape phase, if the defense phase fails.
In phase one, I frantically wandered around with strangers to collect helpful items, the 7 Dragon Balls, the so-called “Super Time Machine power keys” and place them in their rightful locations.
Because the entire map has areas labeled A to E in the alphabet. Thus, a total of 5 areas each need a power key to charge up a “Start System device” that could defeat Cell.
If you run quickly from A to E and place all the keys, phase two begins. This was by far the most stressful part for me. All players usually gather in the special area “Z” to speed up the charging of the Start System device.
Of course, Cell didn’t take this lightly, as it was his job in this phase to destroy the device and the Survivors.Usually, a chaotic fight broke out in this phase among all who had survived so far.
The more games I played, the better I got at it and could even come up with a plan for phase two.
Living as a vase is nice.
The crates in the game.
Radars are very useful items.
My first placed power key!
The chaos in the special area “Z”.
Various impressions from the closed beta of Dragon Ball: The Breakers.
This is how I prepared for the battle against Cell in the special area: Initially, I gathered a lot of transformation power to raise my “Dragon transformation level” and thus be allowed to borrow the powers of super warriors.
The type of Dragon transformation depends on the level you first achieved through transformation power. The higher the level, the stronger you become.
The appearance and skill of the transformation depend on the characters you have equipped before. Each hero is ranked 1, 2, or 3. Thus, if you reach level 2, you borrow the skills and appearance of the character ranked 2.
If you actually play cooperatively with others, you can also try to find the 7 Dragon Balls together and place them in their intended device. After that, you can summon the dragon Shenron, who either allows you to reach Dragon transformation level 4 or increases the level of all team members.
Dragon transformation level 4 is power-wise equivalent to the Raider’s maximum form.
Unfortunately, I personally never got to experience placing 7 Dragon Balls on the altar because everyone in the beta was doing their own thing. It’s probably much easier to achieve in a fixed group with agreements – especially if someone has a Dragon Ball radar that shows a survivor where the valuable orbs are hiding.
If you were strong enough, you could defeat Cell just through pure fighting and emerge victorious: No keys or time machines needed.
What then is the 3rd phase for? The escape phase begins when Cell has destroyed the Start System device. In each area, there are then signal lights that allow survivors to summon a single escape time machine. This enables all survivors to escape at the last moment, as long as Cell does not kill them first.
What is it like to play as the Raider?
While I know Cell’s sequence and skills, unfortunately, I never had the chance to play as the Raider. After about 3 matches, I did change my wish in the group search to “Raider”, but I still always ended up as a Survivor. Maybe I was just unlucky – I don’t know.
There is an indicator at the bottom left of the screen showing “Priority” and a number before it. The more often I became a Survivor when I wanted to play as a Raider, the higher the number went. When the beta time ended, I had played about 11 games and the priority was at 8. Unfortunately, I don’t know when one is guaranteed to play as a Raider.
What else does the Raider do and what can he do? As Cell, you must find and eliminate as many Survivors as possible. This makes you stronger and allows you to achieve new forms (a maximum of 4). Once the Raider reaches a new form, he gets an attack that destroys an entire area. Additionally, Cell has the ability to detect nearby Survivors.
This is what the waiting room with “Priority” looks like.
Dragon Ball: The Breakers is completely Dragon Ball
Whether it’s the small sound effects when you teleport or the characters in the typical Dragon Ball style, everything gave me a tiny nostalgia hiccup.
Even the circular houses in the city area or the spaceship that resembled the Namek saga with Freeza made my fan heart race. I was constantly exclaiming: “Aww, this is just like in the anime back then!”
The forms that the Raider Cell could achieve were also perfectly modeled based on the anime. He started as a disgusting little larva and could grow into a perfect form by consuming humans. I think this is precisely why Cell is perfect as a villain.
From images, we have already seen Boo and Freeza as additional Raiders. They also fit perfectly into the survival game. Both villains also had several forms in the anime until they reached their full power.
As Survivors, we only had the choice between our character and the pig Oolong in the beta. However, I’m almost certain that iconic figures like Bulma, Chichi, or the Ox King could follow as playable heroes.
More opinion articles from other authors on MeinMMO
Maybe my fear is unfounded, but the mere inclusion of Gacha in Dragon Ball: The Breakers surprised and somewhat unsettled me… Now the question arises: Is the game coming out for free and is financed through (unfair) Gacha, or will it be paid and feature fair, affordable Gacha?
It would be a shame to destroy a game with such great potential through such a system. I sincerely hope that the Gacha aspect offers only minimal bonuses and does not become decisive for gameplay. In the closed beta, I pulled 6 times for heroes from the Dragon Ball universe: this resulted in 2x 4-star heroes and 4x 3-star heroes.
These characters have not only different rarities but also possess varying attack strengths and outfits that you can use during Dragon transformation. The rarer a hero is, the more useful their attack seems to be.
You need 15,000 Zeni or 150 TP tokens to pull once from the banner. Depending on how well you play in a match, you earn a corresponding amount of Zeni. For instance, you can earn about 4,500 Zeni if you complete a game perfectly. TP tokens are exclusively obtained through level-ups of your character, and you only get 3 at a time.
Standard interface of the Gacha system.
The chances of pulling different heroes.
I had luck and pulled Son Goku – the main character of the anime.
Overview of the Gacha system.
What I noticed negatively:
The controls are somewhat cumbersome and take some getting used to.
Frequent disconnects to the host (the Raider). The game then ends immediately, and the Survivors win.
The camera is too close to your character. This restricts your field of view somewhat.
Survivors take too long to revive companions (about 20 seconds).
The Start System device takes too long to charge (about 2 minutes but can take longer, depending on how many keys have been placed beforehand and how many Survivors are helping).
Some negative points might stem from the fact that I didn’t have fixed teammates and was with strangers in the lobby. We couldn’t properly coordinate and strategize against the Raider.
Conclusion after the closed beta: Is it worth your time?
Definitely! Once you get the hang of different approaches, Dragon Ball: The Breakers is incredibly fun despite its flaws. Initially, I was really frustrated about dying so quickly and just not getting into the game. I almost wanted to quit and sighed that I had no more motivation, but I wanted to persevere to give you an impression, and because I simply love Dragon Ball.
Then suddenly it went click and I somehow got the hang of it. Each round flew by quickly. Every time we won, my smile grew wider. You could sometimes sense how some of the other beta testers were also slowly understanding how the game works.
I believe that with a cool team or people who know how survival co-op works, it can be even more fun.
You should definitely give it a try if you like survival games and/or Dragon Ball and have the opportunity.
Lena
Freelance author at MeinMMO
Pro
Runs without bugs and lags
“Dragon Ball” fans get their money’s worth
Strengthening of one’s character is possible
Strategic thinking and close collaboration with team members
Great music, voice acting, and sound effects
Contra
No spectacular graphics
The entry could be difficult, especially against seasoned opponents
Monotonous combat system
Possibly costly Pay2Win (must wait for release or further information)
What do you think? Will you take a peek into Dragon Ball: The Breakers, or is that not your cup of tea? Feel free to share in the comments.
This is an AI-powered translation. Some inaccuracies might exist.
The new MMO New World is facing criticism from players. It is said that New World was released unfinished and needed more time for development. The head of the game, Scot Lane, comments on this in an interview.
What does he say about the launch delay? Lane is confronted with fans’ criticism that New World should have been delayed once more to address the many issues that arose after the launch, especially regarding the bugs and the dupe exploits.
Lane says:
“It’s difficult, we have been discussing this a lot internally lately. The thing is: We didn’t know about the exploit and the issues with dupes until after the launch. A delay wouldn’t have helped here.”
Scot Lane
New World promises more content in 2022 – focus on mid and endgame
Isn’t there a lack of content as well? Regarding the criticism of insufficient content, Lane says that progress was made in 2021.
In 2022, they aim to improve storytelling and bring more content for mid and endgame.
Players will soon see new types of quests; there are plans to invest more resources here. Lane also mentions that they have a lot in store for PvP players and is looking forward to showing more of that.
Team works so hard on problems that burnout is looming
What was the big problem? Lane states that the biggest issue was the scale of the launch. The surge of players in New World was so immense that they were overwhelmed. Testing at this level of players was not feasible prior.
This raised issues that the team wanted to address as quickly as possible. And in the rush to tackle the new problems, mistakes occurred.
The team was so excited to see so many players that they felt driven to respond quickly, enabling players to refocus on having fun.
A significant challenge was to find the right pace and to be more methodical in testing and reviewing updates. The team is working hard: they are currently looking to distribute the workload so that no one gets overworked.
The team is so committed that everyone wanted to work around the clock to solve problems, but that’s not sustainable. They want to prevent the team from burning out.
“A major lesson for us is: Even though we had an alpha for a year and a preview event and a public test – once you go live and have so many players for a long time, new issues will arise.”
Scot Lane
The problems Lane describes are reminiscent of statements made by the former face of WildStar, Stephan Frost, who once explained why every MMO launches with too little endgame content and too many bugs. And that the team is particularly in acute danger of burning out at release:
The absolute top cards in FIFA 22 cost a lot of coins. However, you can also grab a few great players for smaller amounts. Here are 5 examples of affordable strikers and wingers that can improve your attack.
Do you know that feeling? You just invested a lot of coins in a striker and hope for a lot of goals – but somehow he just doesn’t perform? Then you regret putting so many coins into a player, especially when the price has also dropped in no time due to the crazy market.
Fortunately, there is also exactly the opposite case: you invest a few coins and suddenly have a player who performs significantly better than you would expect for the price. Here are 5 examples of such strikers whose price for their abilities is actually far too low.
We start with the particularly cheap ones and then work our way up the coin ladder.
Ousmane Dembélé – Gold
Market crashes also hit the Dembélé card
Price: approx. 3,300 coins
This is what makes Dembélé special: Yes, Dembélé is not a direct central striker as a RF, but he definitely belongs in this list of dangerous scorers who are currently available for a great price. The Frenchman costs just over 3,000 coins and can shine with 5-star skills and a weak foot.
He has great dribbling skills and extremely dangerous speed. Even in teams with higher-rated players, the 83-rated card does not stand out negatively. Dembélé is and will likely remain a very useful card for your offense – only now he is significantly cheaper than just a few weeks ago.
Timo Werner – Gold
Price: approx. 4,100 coins
Timo Werner is currently at a price level of around 3,000 to 4,000 coins and yes, he has now been overtaken by some other striker cards. But this has also significantly reduced his price, and you can still get a lot of goals from the Chelsea striker. No wonder he is still feared in the FIFA community despite his comparatively low overall rating.
Werner has the necessary speed to compete against fast defenders. His shooting and dribbling stats are also decent, and somehow the striker always seems to be in the right place to score a cold finish. Only in terms of skill moves does he have weaknesses (only 3 stars). Werner is thus primarily suitable for direct attacks without much trickery. But if that is your playing style, you can make a real bargain with him.
Marko Arnautovic – Rulebreaker
Arnautovic is a strong card but difficult to link
Price: approx. 12,000 coins
This is what makes Arnautovic special: In the FIFA community, the Rulebreakers card of Arnautovic is often mentioned when the question arises about the best striker in terms of price/performance ratio.
Arnautovic is an absolute machine in front of goal, capable of converting chances from various positions. The fact that Arnautovic is so cheap is likely mainly due to his hard-to-link nationality and the Serie A factor. One thing is for sure: it’s not due to his stats.
Paulo Dybala – Gold
The striker is also suitable for an Arnautovic link
Price: approx. 18,500 coins
This is what makes Dybala special: If you decide to add Arnautovic to your team, you can theoretically also equip yourself with another Serie A player who comes at a comparatively affordable price: Paulo Dybala.
Dybala currently costs about 18,500 coins and is thus cheaper than strikers like Haaland, Kane, or Lukaku, but distinguishes himself from these attackers through his agility.
The Argentinian is tricky and strong in finishing; his left foot is a real weapon. Both from distance and in crowded penalty areas, Dybala can pose a threat to the opposing goal. Additionally, he is also useful as a passer and preparer – if you’re looking for a controller for your midfield, he can fulfill that role as well. With Dybala, you get a comparatively cost-effective all-purpose weapon in attack.
Mario Gomez – Hero
Gomez is one of the Bundesliga heroes
Price: approx. 26,500
Now let’s take a look at the Bundesliga. And here you quickly end up with a striker who actually isn’t there anymore: Mario Gomez, in the Hero variant.
The price of the striker has been dropping for weeks, currently he has reached just over 20,000. For the price, Gomez offers an extremely useful package: especially, Gomez shines with his finishing ability, although his speed can be criticized. However, with an Engine or Hunter style, this can be quickly remedied. However, the same applies as with Werner: you don’t need to unpack skill moves with Gomez.
A bonus is his Hero status, which allows you to build strong chemistry links in your Bundesliga teams. For the current price, Gomez is definitely worth acquiring!
Shadowlands will go down in the history of World of Warcraft as a “filler”. MeinMMO demon Cortyn believes: This is the best solution.
By now, the last person should have noticed that WoW: Shadowlands wasn’t received as well by players as originally thought. While the expansion was initially considered “good” by many, that opinion dropped rapidly. By the time of Patch 9.1, only a few players were still interested. Even improvements from Patch 9.1.5 provided little relief.
So the developers are pulling the emergency brake and preparing to give Shadowlands a rather swift, but also shameful, end.
Spoiler warning: This article also discusses datamining and purported content from Patch 9.2. You have been warned.
Sylvanas’ development will be one of the few points remembered from Shadowlands.
What is a filler-addon? Similar to “filler episodes” in TV series, filler addons also serve a simple purpose in World of Warcraft: Something is supposed to happen just for the sake of it. A filler addon has a coherent storyline, but once the filler content is completed, the situation is basically the same as before. Only a few details have changed.
And honestly, Shadowlands has also offered itself for this from the very beginning. The whole concept of the “afterlife” with its various realms, where different versions of the afterlife exist, is so unreal and detached from the rest of the Warcraft cosmos that one can just easily put a lid on it. Just like back in the day with “Warlords of Draenor,” you can simply say: The connection to the Shadowlands has now been cut off again; story-wise, you are no longer in connection with these creatures.
However, I find the decision good.
Sure, I enjoyed the new areas. Because everything was so new and unfamiliar, the developers could really let their creativity run free. I still find Ardenweald breathtaking, and I also remember Revendreth fondly.
Blizzard could have also tried to steer the story of Shadowlands in a different direction to capture the players they lost. A Patch 9.3 and a Jailer that persists through other expansions – that could have been an option.
The Jailer will likely be forgotten. But that’s for the best.
From the first information about Patch 9.2, it is now revealed that the Jailer is ultimately defeated and destroyed. Completely, nothing remains of him. Pelagos will be appointed as the new Arbiter and will take on the role of sending all souls to their corresponding afterlives. He presumably gains this power through the First Forge.
That the Jailer is defeated in the end and presumably destroyed for good is a good thing. He was a “filler-boss” introduced in Patch 9.0 and will already disappear from the scene with Patch 9.2. Sure, they somehow “burned” him – but at the same time, it allows for a clean break to try something new or to pick up the old, tried-and-true story again.
Shadowlands thus becomes a small – more or less – self-contained story.
A restart after Shadowlands – the best thing one could do in the current situation.
Of course, it’s also worth mentioning: So far, most of the information about Patch 9.2 is only datamined. It is quite possible that Blizzard might reveal a major twist in the final cinematic and the Jailer is not quite as dead as one might have thought.
The only slight downside is that Blizzard tried to give Shadowlands significantly more importance than was actually necessary. That the Jailer was essentially behind all the major events of the past 20 years of Warcraft could have been a cool plot point, but was unfortunately not well implemented.
This reason will surely cause the story team to chew on it for several years. Because if the “big boss” who has been pulling the strings of fate for millennia turns out to be a boring character that nobody can relate to, then that is a damage from which Warcraft will only slowly recover.
More news about World of Warcraft can be found here:
However, I want to be optimistic. World of Warcraft has delivered exciting and interesting stories over many years – and that was often the case in Shadowlands as well, albeit often hidden in the side quests. If Blizzard can build on that with 10.0, give its adversaries more profile, and create a Warcraft that doesn’t get tangled up in more and more parallel dimensions … then I hope that the next addon will excite us again.
Because if that’s not the case, it’s looking really bleak for World of Warcraft. And that would be a shame.
This is an AI-powered translation. Some inaccuracies might exist.
For more than 10 years, Bungie has evidently faced serious issues with workplace culture, as reported by IGN. While working on Destiny 1, the story team was led by a boss who had a tendency to have outbursts and apparently suffered from burnout. At one point, he threw a chair out of a window. Things did not improve with Destiny 2.
Where dothe information come from? The site IGN spoke with 26 current and former employees at Bungie. 25 wish to remain anonymous, but one team author, Cookie Hiponia, is willing to be named.
A multi-page insider report has emerged, providing many insights into Bungie’s work processes and repeatedly pointing out deep-seated, alarming issues within the story team.
“I laughed when I read Bungie’s response to Activision Blizzard”
Why is the report coming out now? Bungie publicly addressed the sexism scandal surrounding Activision Blizzard in September and announced its own measures to create a safe workplace. Bungie was praised for being “transparent.”
However, it seems that some current or former employees felt that this was “too little, too late” and were ready to talk about the team’s problems.
A former employee is quoted as saying:
“When I read Bungie’s response to Activision Blizzard, I had to laugh. That is not my experience there. They have a core value that says they do not tolerate assholes, even if they are rock stars, but that is exactly what they do. […] They have values they want to achieve, but they do not implement them at all.”
Anonymous source from IGN
That’s what makes the insider report so special: Normally, such things do not happen at Bungie. While other employees are willing to go public with their issues to the media, like at Activision Blizzard or EA, almost nothing gets out about Bungie.
Harold Ryan was the head of Bungie until 2016. He took some people with him to his new studio.
Burnout led to outbursts from the story lead
What was going on with Destiny 1? An important part of the insider report focuses on the narrative team of Destiny 1. It states:
In Destiny 1, there was a narrative lead who was determined to implement his vision for the game but was completely overwhelmed and suffered from burnout. He reportedly freaked out so regularly and yelled that a whiteboard was used to keep track of how long it had been since his last outburst.
The man stayed at the studio for years, left, but then returned for Destiny 2 to do contract work. In this role, he frequently acted as if he were still responsible for the story and regularly yelled at Destiny 2 authors – at one point it was so bad that a female employee cried and then refused to speak to him alone on the phone.
What happened next: The other bosses in the story team were reportedly just as difficult. They spoke of egotistical rock stars who regularly tormented their teams. Women in particular were said to have suffered under the toxic work culture:
As a result, people in the story team constantly left and changed.
The team was apparently constantly overwhelmed and did not get the staff they requested. They wanted to convert freelancers to full-time positions, but the studio rejected requests. Contracts were not renewed but were allowed to expire. This led to months of periods where the department remained understaffed.
The male lead writers allegedly portrayed female characters in Destiny in “demeaning, sexist ways.” They had clashes with other writers, especially female authors. It is said that men on the team drew characters in shocking, unrecognizable ways while the women were forced to watch.
She was apparently supposed to get stories that “reinforced harmful stereotypes”: Suraya Hawthorne.
Two male bosses of the story team are described as “authoritarian, cruel bosses” and “sexist nightmares” who treated female authors in such a way that they were regarded as if they were hired as secretaries.
When women complained about their treatment, they were told that they needed to toughen up.
The bosses humiliated employees in front of the team and then said that it was meant to be funny.
Complaints to the HR department led to nothing. It is said that there were people whose job it was to dismiss such complaints. Employees felt that Bungie protected the “rock stars” of the company, even if they behaved completely inappropriately.
People in Bungie’s leadership had code names for the women in the studio whom they found attractive. The code names referenced the physical appearance or hair color of the women. Some were simply derogatory. These code names were used without the women knowing.
Luke Smith had to step in as a writer twice to save Destiny. After the report, one wonders: was he part of the problem or the solution?
Stress between the story department and the cinematics
What problems were there with cooperation?
There have repeatedly been issues with the leadership level, especially with former story leads who were promoted but were dissatisfied with the current story. The problem was apparently that the bosses had a vague idea of what “the vision” of Destiny 1 should be. It was just vague, diffuse, and nowhere documented. The authors of Destiny 2 were repeatedly criticized for not fulfilling this vision.
Another major problem was the collaboration between the story department and the cinematic department, which enjoyed higher prestige within Bungie.
It is said that the cinematic department often did its own thing, did not coordinate with the story department, and made decisions that led to the story having to be completely rewritten.
Writers would find out about some changes to their work only when the voice lines had already been recorded.
What was the problem with crunch? Because the story team was chronically understaffed and did not get help, employees had to work between 60 and 100 hours when an expansion was upcoming. One team member reportedly became so ill that they could no longer type and had to dictate text.
The issue was strongly linked to the fact that the story team was consistently criticized from both outside and within.
The Curse of Osiris was a low point in the history of Destiny 2 in 2017.
What was the issue with reddit? It is said that the criticism of the first DLC of Destiny 2, “Curse of Osiris,” was terrible on reddit. Individual women from the story team were singled out as guilty and were attacked.
These comments were then sent by a Bungie leader to other studio heads to show that the story was the problem.
In front of the team, it was said that they need not worry, as the authors from Destiny 1 would be brought back to solve the problems. As a result, the authors of Destiny 2 became afraid to do anything that would be poorly received by the community – thus they continued to crunch.
How bad was the situation in other departments? Although the report mainly focuses on the story team, it says that there were also issues with certain leadership figures in other departments at Bungie who behaved completely inappropriately.
There were surely repeated issues with long-time employees in leadership positions, who had been at Bungie since Halo 3, believing they could take liberties, and treating women poorly. There were also reports of racist and homophobic remarks.
The report also mentions that many sources said Bungie was still better than many other gaming studios. Only a few reported “physical harassment,” with some having little or no negative experiences.
But you do not have to have posters of naked women in the office to be problematic. The issues at Bungie are often more subtle.
The reports also mention that problematic individuals ultimately left or were fired – albeit too late, from the perspective of their victims, but at least. Multiple times it is mentioned that men quickly rose through the ranks at Bungie because they were liked by the “old guard,” but then quickly left once they reached the top.
It is said that Bungie has a “clique” problem. To rise, you need to have friends in the company’s inner circle. Because the circle has been predominantly white and male from the beginning, white men have had an easier time advancing in the company. A Black woman states, for example, that she often felt completely invisible in meetings. Her feedback and questions were simply ignored.
Pete Parsons addresses the problem immediately.
Bungie immediately reacts to the report
How does the report react? The head of Bungie issued a statement on Friday about the article, apologizing to anyone who experienced anything other than a “safe, fair, and professional work environment” (via bungie).
It is said that much has been done in recent years, including removing “Bad Actors”, i.e. troublesome individuals.
They claimed to have read the report properly for the first time and are currently digesting it. Parsons believes that anyone who deserved it has already been fired or no longer works for Bungie. If new information comes to light, they will investigate it.
They want to plan better now and set more reasonable release dates that take team health into better account. Therefore, they have postponed Shadowkeep, Beyond Light, and The Witch Queen.
Additionally, they have and will continue to strengthen their efforts to create a diverse and positive work environment.
She is the symbol for story issues: The Stranger.
The report does not name any responsible individuals but explains many problems
This is what it’s about: The problems in the report seem to focus mainly on one department of Destiny, the story team.
The reports explain a variety of problems and decisions in the 7-year history of Destiny and Destiny 2, which seemed puzzling from the outside:
No one in the report names the narrative leads that are described so poorly, but it is known, for example, that the story lead of Destiny 2 had to be replaced in April 2016 because he unexpectedly left the company after presenting a completely different storyline for Destiny 2 in a livestream in March 2016, of which we heard nothing later.
Destiny 2 was rebooted. Luke Smith had to take over and was heavily criticized for the final result.
It is known that the original author of Destiny 1 left the company, and a major rewrite had to take place there as well. This led to Destiny 1’s story being completely under-explained in many places: keyword “No time to explain why I don’t have time to explain.”
Whether the individuals who left during these reboots are the same people described in the article is not known. Caution should be exercised not to make assumptions about anyone.
The original article from IGN is extremely extensive and deals with a multitude of individual cases and problems. We will address more details of the report in the coming days on MeinMMO.
We have known for years that there were problems in the transition from Destiny 1 to Destiny 2 regarding the story:
For a week now, pre-order customers have had access to the new addon Endwalker from Final Fantasy XIV and are diligently playing through the story, which leaves many of them in tears. MeinMMO author Irina Moritz, on the other hand, has been (almost) smiling the whole time.
On December 3rd, all pre-order customers of Endwalker received access to the new content of the addon; many of them immediately dove into the story. I was also among the lucky ones who managed to escape the dreadful Error 2002.
Endwalker has sent me and other players on a journey of emotions, grinning and laughing countless times because the story warmed my heart during the cold season.
Warning: As this is my conclusion on the Endwalker addon, there will be spoilers for the story. If you haven’t yet completed the main story (MSQ), you should probably avoid this article (for now).
There are also spoilers for the story in the comments.
Bad Omen Before the Release for Story Lovers
The Endwalker addon faces the rather unique task of concluding an 11-year-old story. Such an event should of course unfold with plenty of fireworks and excitement.
Consequently, the director of the MMORPG, Naoki Yoshida, made extremely ominous remarks in various interviews before the release. Players should not feel too secure that nothing would happen to the main characters in the story, according to the boss. And the launch trailer for Endwalker also gave the feeling while watching that there would be a lot of blood flowing in the addon.
Recommended editorial content
At this point you will find external content from Twitter that complements the article.
I consent to external content being displayed to me. Personal data can be transmitted to third party platforms.
Read more about our privacy policy.
Yoshida’s facial expression while discussing possible deaths of NPCs in Endwalker has scared some players.
Thus, some players mentally prepared themselves for Endwalker being a massacre. Characters would die left and right, there would be innocent victims, the world would burn, and we would lose many good NPC friends.
It’s an experience that FFXIV players have already gone through in previous addons. Like when the beloved NPC Haurchefaunt was killed or when the Ascian Elidibus, who was actually an enemy, was defeated. These scenes have brought some players to tears.
As part of my work at MeinMMO, I always keep an eye on the gaming community (actually, I should keep both eyes open). After all, we want to know what’s happening with gamers. And from about Sunday onwards, the first posts from players who had completed the Endwalker story started appearing in the FFXIV bubble.
People played for up to 40 hours straight because they desperately wanted to see the ending. And many of them had tears in their eyes during the journey because they were so affected by the events in the story.
Recommended editorial content
At this point you will find external content from Twitter that complements the article.
I consent to external content being displayed to me. Personal data can be transmitted to third party platforms.
Read more about our privacy policy.
Crying, sobbing, and wailing: For many players, these are the three states of Endwalker.
Endwalker Delivers Exactly What I Expected and Wished For
Gaming as a hobby has accompanied me, like many of you, throughout my life. And while I enjoy playing (almost) all kinds of games, I particularly like them when they have a “message.” A message conveyed through the story or gameplay that, in the best case, makes me smile.
Such games include the Mass Effect trilogy, Undertale, Journey, and of course FFXIV. From the beginning, the story of the MMORPG was driven by themes of goodness, understanding and above all hope.
The hope that in the end, everything will turn out well. That despite all the problems and suffering, there are still beautiful moments in the world. And I entered Endwalker with exactly this conviction. No matter what Yoshida or the trailer suggested: In the end, everything will be fine.
Hardly any game brought me as much joy in 2021 as Endwalker (It Takes Two was also very great).
I held on to this conviction throughout the entire addon, even when the situation often seemed hopeless.
Initially, one is confronted in Garlemald with the suffering of its inhabitants. The evil Garlean are suddenly no longer the ruthless conquerors and oppressors, but helpless people in need. But due to their experiences and state propaganda, they would rather die than accept help from the outside.
It seems there is no way to reach them. And yet, in the end, it is possible, even though not everyone could be saved.
When the end of the world breaks out and Thavnair is overrun by monsters, the situation becomes even more desperate. People turn into monsters and attack their friends and relatives, who in turn succumb to despair and become monsters.
Vanaspati was a dungeon where many terrible things happened. You see a mother transforming into a monster before her children’s eyes, and then they follow her.
But even here, there were always moments filled with hope. Despite horrific scenes, one could draw something good from the situation that helped to move on.
And every time the situation turned for the better, I celebrated and smiled like a fool. Because it was just beautiful to see that my hopes had not been in vain. And with every difficult situation that was overcome, the hope grew stronger that we would ultimately succeed.
At times, I felt like a small child because Endwalker swept me away. There was no time for tears. There were many problems to solve and the end of the world to prevent.
And although the path to the grand finale was littered with tragedies, it only strengthened my determination and my smile in the end.
I also found it great that there was no real “villain” to defeat. It was very much in the spirit of FFXIV. It showed that there isn’t one big evil cause for problems that you must eliminate to make everything okay.
The world is a complicated place, and attributing everything to one person or entity would be much too simple and disrespectful to the buildup of over 10 years of story.
I knew that the FFXIV team would not deliver a bad and depressing ending (you probably knew that too) and was not disappointed.
More about FFXIV and Endwalker on MeinMMO can be found here:
These happy endings are one of the reasons why FFXIV has been my “happy place” for years. You probably know it: Gaming as a hobby is a form of escapism. Especially in recent years, there have been almost daily bad news about the pandemic and other issues in the world. That really brings you down.
And when you’re in gaming communities every day, you are overwhelmed with negativity. There are always complaints, anger, frustration, and even death threats against developers.
But I refuse to get angry about my hobby. What good is a hobby that only brings me bad mood and makes me upset? I might as well punch myself in the face.
A meme that has been circulating in the FFXIV community in recent months. Players use the MMORPG to boost their mental health.
That’s why FFXIV has become a kind of “safe haven” for me over the years. Whenever I notice that my mood is sinking, I log into the MMORPG and go on an exploration tour through various player houses. The sheer amount of creativity that some houses are built with is just wonderful to see.
Or I get creative myself and look for cool locations to take nice screenshots. Or I just hang out in a hub city, watch the people and listen to music. It’s just therapeutic being able to unwind in a game like that.
And especially when bad news and anger are the order of the day, a beautiful story of hope like in Endwalker can be balm for the soul. It has strengthened me in my daily endeavor to pay more attention to good things and to appreciate positive little things. That helps enormously.
Even voice actress Mica Burton is among those who sought and found comfort and relaxation in FFXIV.
And I’m not alone in this. People crave happy endings. That’s why we enjoy reading fairy tales or watching classic Disney movies. They bring positivity and beautiful feelings into our often grey and frustrating everyday life.
For me and many others, FFXIV has therefore become our “happy place” where we log in to relax. And Endwalker has reinforced this feeling with its hopeful and positive story and warmed the heart.
Of course, not everything is peace, joy, and pancakes. It’s not like that anywhere. There are problems like Error 2002, there are complaints and annoying players. But that’s okay. It’s something I can accept calmly because the positive experiences outweigh the negatives.
And in the end, as always, everything will be alright.
Just before Christmas, such a controversial decision is a big topic in the community. Many players hope that Niantic will apologize for this experiment and put a good, free box in the shop. Others believe that this is only the beginning and that the developers are planning more experiments of this kind.
This is new: On December 9, two accounts linked to Niantic spoke up on Twitter.
YouTuber Zyonik writes (via twitter.com): “Niantic told me that they introduced the lure module boxes with different prices as a test to improve the game experience. They decided not to announce it because that could have distorted the results.”
The Twitter account “GOStadiumPvP” writes (via twitter.com): “Update from Niantic on the price differences for lure module boxes. In this specific test, the team ultimately decided to remain silent about it, as widespread knowledge of the test could influence the results. They are aware of the frustration this causes in the community and will seriously consider the feedback regarding improving transparency and communication.”
“Didn’t they promise to act more transparently at the end of summer? Uff,” writes ChartreuseMage on reddit
“Wait, they decided to *remain silent about it, as widespread knowledge of the test could influence the results’. Do they think the player base is as bad at communicating as they are? And that we don’t have the internet?” asks GhostHarvester on reddit.
On Twitter, makeshift95 writes (via Twitter.com): “I understand the experiment and that they want to test the limits. But at a time when the community is upset that the dragon event puts players behind paywalls, I don’t know if that was the best timing and to hide it from players.”
Just before Christmas, such a controversial decision is a big topic in the community. Many players hope that Niantic will apologize for this experiment and put a good, free box in the shop. Others believe that this is only the beginning and that the developers are planning more experiments of this kind.
The lure module box costs in the shop for Pokémon GO for some players 3 to 4 euros more than for other players. However, there was initially no explanation. Now there are statements from the developers.
This is the controversy: For a few days now, you can find a bundle with various lure modules in the shop of Pokémon GO, which is called “lure module box”. Trainers quickly noticed: For some, the box costs 350 coins (about €3.50), while for others, the box costs up to 700 coins (about €7). Initially, the community thought it was a mistake, but more and more players reported differing prices.
Niantic remained silent about this for days. Now they say that they did it intentionally and didn’t want to announce anything at first.
Lure module box with different prices for different players
This is the box: In the Pokémon GO shop, you can find the box under the “Limited Time Only” tab. It contains
A rain lure module
A magnetic lure module
A moss lure module
A glacier lure module
What prices are there for the box? It is unusual for players to pay different prices for the same box in Pokémon GO. It is known that there are different prices for tickets and coin purchases depending on whether one buys in the Samsung Galaxy Store or through Google Play. However, such huge differences as with the lure module boxes were previously unknown.
On reddit, user VolksDK asked on December 6 how many coins the lure module boxes cost players. Over 600 people responded in the comments, naming the following prices for the same lure module box with the same contents:
350 coins
400 coins
450 coins
500 coins
550 coins
600 coins
650 coins
700 coins
Players tried to find a pattern, but the prices seem to be randomly selected. Some players living in the same household have different prices. It is therefore not dependent on the region.
“I believe the price differences are random. They are just testing to see how many boxes are sold at which prices. I wouldn’t pay my price [650 coins]. I might have bought it at 350.”
The idea that Niantic is conducting this action to test how much a box is still interesting for players was shared by many players in the community.
This is new: On December 9, two accounts linked to Niantic spoke up on Twitter.
YouTuber Zyonik writes (via twitter.com): “Niantic told me that they introduced the lure module boxes with different prices as a test to improve the game experience. They decided not to announce it because that could have distorted the results.”
The Twitter account “GOStadiumPvP” writes (via twitter.com): “Update from Niantic on the price differences for lure module boxes. In this specific test, the team ultimately decided to remain silent about it, as widespread knowledge of the test could influence the results. They are aware of the frustration this causes in the community and will seriously consider the feedback regarding improving transparency and communication.”
“Didn’t they promise to act more transparently at the end of summer? Uff,” writes ChartreuseMage on reddit
“Wait, they decided to *remain silent about it, as widespread knowledge of the test could influence the results’. Do they think the player base is as bad at communicating as they are? And that we don’t have the internet?” asks GhostHarvester on reddit.
On Twitter, makeshift95 writes (via Twitter.com): “I understand the experiment and that they want to test the limits. But at a time when the community is upset that the dragon event puts players behind paywalls, I don’t know if that was the best timing and to hide it from players.”
Just before Christmas, such a controversial decision is a big topic in the community. Many players hope that Niantic will apologize for this experiment and put a good, free box in the shop. Others believe that this is only the beginning and that the developers are planning more experiments of this kind.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Just over 20% have either no problem with them, or even prefer the new system. We’ll show you some voices from the community.
Most want them removed, but some see the problem elsewhere
The sentiment in the comments is not quite as clear, but they largely reflect the survey results. Here are some voices expressing opposition to the specialists:
ReZZiT says: “Yes, please absolutely remove the specialists … they just don’t fit in at all.”
SomeBody writes: “I wish for the old classes. Many gameplay issues could be resolved that way. For example, not everyone can just pack a rocket launcher or claymore mines.”
Boris thinks: “To say that the specialists are to blame for everything would be exaggerated, but they are definitely part of the problem and should be removed or banished to the Hazard mode, which ultimately amounts to the same thing.”
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Just over 20% have either no problem with them, or even prefer the new system. We’ll show you some voices from the community.
Most want them removed, but some see the problem elsewhere
The sentiment in the comments is not quite as clear, but they largely reflect the survey results. Here are some voices expressing opposition to the specialists:
ReZZiT says: “Yes, please absolutely remove the specialists … they just don’t fit in at all.”
SomeBody writes: “I wish for the old classes. Many gameplay issues could be resolved that way. For example, not everyone can just pack a rocket launcher or claymore mines.”
Boris thinks: “To say that the specialists are to blame for everything would be exaggerated, but they are definitely part of the problem and should be removed or banished to the Hazard mode, which ultimately amounts to the same thing.”
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Just over 20% have either no problem with them, or even prefer the new system. We’ll show you some voices from the community.
Most want them removed, but some see the problem elsewhere
The sentiment in the comments is not quite as clear, but they largely reflect the survey results. Here are some voices expressing opposition to the specialists:
ReZZiT says: “Yes, please absolutely remove the specialists … they just don’t fit in at all.”
SomeBody writes: “I wish for the old classes. Many gameplay issues could be resolved that way. For example, not everyone can just pack a rocket launcher or claymore mines.”
Boris thinks: “To say that the specialists are to blame for everything would be exaggerated, but they are definitely part of the problem and should be removed or banished to the Hazard mode, which ultimately amounts to the same thing.”
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Just over 20% have either no problem with them, or even prefer the new system. We’ll show you some voices from the community.
Most want them removed, but some see the problem elsewhere
The sentiment in the comments is not quite as clear, but they largely reflect the survey results. Here are some voices expressing opposition to the specialists:
ReZZiT says: “Yes, please absolutely remove the specialists … they just don’t fit in at all.”
SomeBody writes: “I wish for the old classes. Many gameplay issues could be resolved that way. For example, not everyone can just pack a rocket launcher or claymore mines.”
Boris thinks: “To say that the specialists are to blame for everything would be exaggerated, but they are definitely part of the problem and should be removed or banished to the Hazard mode, which ultimately amounts to the same thing.”
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Just over 20% have either no problem with them, or even prefer the new system. We’ll show you some voices from the community.
Most want them removed, but some see the problem elsewhere
The sentiment in the comments is not quite as clear, but they largely reflect the survey results. Here are some voices expressing opposition to the specialists:
ReZZiT says: “Yes, please absolutely remove the specialists … they just don’t fit in at all.”
SomeBody writes: “I wish for the old classes. Many gameplay issues could be resolved that way. For example, not everyone can just pack a rocket launcher or claymore mines.”
Boris thinks: “To say that the specialists are to blame for everything would be exaggerated, but they are definitely part of the problem and should be removed or banished to the Hazard mode, which ultimately amounts to the same thing.”
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Just over 20% have either no problem with them, or even prefer the new system. We’ll show you some voices from the community.
Most want them removed, but some see the problem elsewhere
The sentiment in the comments is not quite as clear, but they largely reflect the survey results. Here are some voices expressing opposition to the specialists:
ReZZiT says: “Yes, please absolutely remove the specialists … they just don’t fit in at all.”
SomeBody writes: “I wish for the old classes. Many gameplay issues could be resolved that way. For example, not everyone can just pack a rocket launcher or claymore mines.”
Boris thinks: “To say that the specialists are to blame for everything would be exaggerated, but they are definitely part of the problem and should be removed or banished to the Hazard mode, which ultimately amounts to the same thing.”
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Just over 20% have either no problem with them, or even prefer the new system. We’ll show you some voices from the community.
Most want them removed, but some see the problem elsewhere
The sentiment in the comments is not quite as clear, but they largely reflect the survey results. Here are some voices expressing opposition to the specialists:
ReZZiT says: “Yes, please absolutely remove the specialists … they just don’t fit in at all.”
SomeBody writes: “I wish for the old classes. Many gameplay issues could be resolved that way. For example, not everyone can just pack a rocket launcher or claymore mines.”
Boris thinks: “To say that the specialists are to blame for everything would be exaggerated, but they are definitely part of the problem and should be removed or banished to the Hazard mode, which ultimately amounts to the same thing.”
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Just over 20% have either no problem with them, or even prefer the new system. We’ll show you some voices from the community.
Most want them removed, but some see the problem elsewhere
The sentiment in the comments is not quite as clear, but they largely reflect the survey results. Here are some voices expressing opposition to the specialists:
ReZZiT says: “Yes, please absolutely remove the specialists … they just don’t fit in at all.”
SomeBody writes: “I wish for the old classes. Many gameplay issues could be resolved that way. For example, not everyone can just pack a rocket launcher or claymore mines.”
Boris thinks: “To say that the specialists are to blame for everything would be exaggerated, but they are definitely part of the problem and should be removed or banished to the Hazard mode, which ultimately amounts to the same thing.”
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Just over 20% have either no problem with them, or even prefer the new system. We’ll show you some voices from the community.
Most want them removed, but some see the problem elsewhere
The sentiment in the comments is not quite as clear, but they largely reflect the survey results. Here are some voices expressing opposition to the specialists:
ReZZiT says: “Yes, please absolutely remove the specialists … they just don’t fit in at all.”
SomeBody writes: “I wish for the old classes. Many gameplay issues could be resolved that way. For example, not everyone can just pack a rocket launcher or claymore mines.”
Boris thinks: “To say that the specialists are to blame for everything would be exaggerated, but they are definitely part of the problem and should be removed or banished to the Hazard mode, which ultimately amounts to the same thing.”
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Just over 20% have either no problem with them, or even prefer the new system. We’ll show you some voices from the community.
Most want them removed, but some see the problem elsewhere
The sentiment in the comments is not quite as clear, but they largely reflect the survey results. Here are some voices expressing opposition to the specialists:
ReZZiT says: “Yes, please absolutely remove the specialists … they just don’t fit in at all.”
SomeBody writes: “I wish for the old classes. Many gameplay issues could be resolved that way. For example, not everyone can just pack a rocket launcher or claymore mines.”
Boris thinks: “To say that the specialists are to blame for everything would be exaggerated, but they are definitely part of the problem and should be removed or banished to the Hazard mode, which ultimately amounts to the same thing.”
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Just over 20% have either no problem with them, or even prefer the new system. We’ll show you some voices from the community.
Most want them removed, but some see the problem elsewhere
The sentiment in the comments is not quite as clear, but they largely reflect the survey results. Here are some voices expressing opposition to the specialists:
ReZZiT says: “Yes, please absolutely remove the specialists … they just don’t fit in at all.”
SomeBody writes: “I wish for the old classes. Many gameplay issues could be resolved that way. For example, not everyone can just pack a rocket launcher or claymore mines.”
Boris thinks: “To say that the specialists are to blame for everything would be exaggerated, but they are definitely part of the problem and should be removed or banished to the Hazard mode, which ultimately amounts to the same thing.”
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
At the beginning of the week, we at MeinMMO wanted to know what you think of the much-criticized specialists in Battlefield 2042 and whether they should be replaced by the old classes. Here are your answers.
The specialists have had a tough time in Battlefield 2042. From the very beginning, they have faced criticism for replacing the old class system and turning things upside down.
At the same time, there are also supporters in the community who do not see the problem with the specialists, but rather criticize other aspects of the game. If you are not yet aware of what the specialists are about, you can find our guide with an overview of all 10 specialists and their characteristics.
Our survey clearly showed: Most of you would prefer to do without specialists and want the old classes back.
4908 readers followed our call (as of December 11th, 08:20 AM). Each participant could only cast one vote. The initial question was: Should Battlefield 2042 remove the specialists and bring back the old classes?
This is the result:
Yes, I preferred the earlier classes – 79 %, 3863 votes
I don’t care, I like both systems – 12 %, 600 votes
No, I like the additional freedom with the specialists – 9 %, 445 votes
The result is therefore quite clear. Nearly 80% of you wish that Battlefield 2042 would return to the old class system instead of having specialists.
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
Just over 20% have either no problem with them, or even prefer the new system. We’ll show you some voices from the community.
Most want them removed, but some see the problem elsewhere
The sentiment in the comments is not quite as clear, but they largely reflect the survey results. Here are some voices expressing opposition to the specialists:
ReZZiT says: “Yes, please absolutely remove the specialists … they just don’t fit in at all.”
SomeBody writes: “I wish for the old classes. Many gameplay issues could be resolved that way. For example, not everyone can just pack a rocket launcher or claymore mines.”
Boris thinks: “To say that the specialists are to blame for everything would be exaggerated, but they are definitely part of the problem and should be removed or banished to the Hazard mode, which ultimately amounts to the same thing.”
However, there are also some reader voices who do not find the specialists so bad, or who see the problems elsewhere.
Reader BavEagle states:
I myself have a mixed opinion … On one hand, I really like some of the specialists’ skills and I enjoy playing as them. From a tactical standpoint, they offer some sensible options, but unfortunately, also quite a few nonsensical ones. And on the other hand: Unfortunately, the mindless camping with sniper rifles has become more and more established in Battlefield. […] Instead of definitely removing the specialists from the game, I would wish for:
Limiting the weapon selection of specialists based on their assigned classes AND overhauling the maps, so that unfair positions cannot be occupied, which are not accessible and/or attackable for every soldier without a helicopter, parachute, or skill, such as roofs of skyscrapers, which have no way to get up, etc.
Reader huhu_2345 also sees the problem more in the other mechanics of Battlefield 2042:
I do not see the specialists as a problem. […] The system undermines itself through design decisions like self-healing vehicles as well. Nobody needs a cutting torch anymore. Tanks mostly camp in their HQ and fire from there.
There are also definitely positive voices regarding specialists in the community.
Jerry sees it this way: “The freedom to customize my class as I please is something I really enjoy. Only the ‘hero’ aspect is something I would like to see removed, so that I can create my own character.”
Osiris80 sees them as a good alternative if teamplay doesn’t work: “I find the specialists good. Since the community generally does not know teamplay, I appreciate being able to supply myself with health and ammo and can even res a few bots around me, who might not kill anything, but at least distract the enemy a bit. And yes, I’m talking about players.”
Many see Portal as the perfect option if they’re tired of the new specialists.
Alex writes: “I find it perfectly acceptable, I enjoy the freedom, and when I feel like it, I find enough space in Portal to play classically.”
amoxi feels similarly: “Anyone who wants to play BF2042 with the old classes can do so. There’s Portal for that. Use the mode. It offers so many incredible opportunities. It requires a bit of effort, but you will be rewarded.”
Specialists receive a lot of criticism, but there are also other issues
So what is the conclusion? The results of the survey are clear: most would want to do without specialists. However, there are also more moderate voices who see the problems in other areas of the game.
Lack of teamplay is often mentioned. Some design decisions by developer DICE would negatively affect teamplay as well.
The specialists offer some additional freedom that is welcomed in Battlefield. Additionally, there’s the Portal mode, where you can play the old classes of Battlefield while the specialists have to stay out.
What DICE decides to do with the specialists in the future will definitely be interesting to watch. However, an insider report suggests that publisher EA may focus even more on them in the future:
More than 3,000 people voted here on MeinMMO for the favorite class in Season 25 of Diablo 3. At the top, two classes are fighting hard for victory. We will show you the winners and losers.
What’s going on with Diablo 3? On December 10, Season 25 started in Diablo 3. For players, this means they can create a new seasonal character and start from “scratch”. Without gear, without gold, without Paragon points. A great race begins, where one aims to quickly reach max level and then run through the Greater Nephalem Rifts.
Before the season started, there were balance changes that made some classes stronger and others weaker. In our survey about which class you want to play in Season 25, there is a close race.
This is how you voted: You had one vote in the survey. If you want to play multiple classes in Season 25, select the one you are most looking forward to. Today we look at the results. 3,174 people participated in the survey (as of December 11 at 10:50 AM). And here’s how you voted:
Rank 7: Crusader with 206 votes – Corresponds to about 6%
Rank 6: Witch Doctor with 308 votes – Corresponds to about 10%
Rank 5: Wizard with 332 votes – Corresponds to about 10%
Rank 4: Necromancer with 333 votes – Corresponds to about 10%
Rank 3: Barbarian with 376 votes – Corresponds to about 12%
Rank 2: Demon Hunter with 772 votes – Corresponds to about 24%
Rank 1: Monk with 847 votes – Corresponds to about 27%
How strong is the Monk? Many of you want to play the Monk. In the last seasons, the class already established itself with Spin-to-Win builds far ahead in the meta. In Season 25, the Monk’s strongest build is the Inna Set with Mystic Allies. This plays high in the S-Tier. Close behind, in the A-Tier, you will find four other builds of the Monk.
In our Tier List for Season 25, you will find the currently best builds for each class:
But the Crusader also has two builds in S-Tier with “AdT Heaven’s Fury” and “Akkhan Bombardment”. Although it is unpopular in our survey, it has a lot of potential in the new season. This might be a reason for you to play this class and encounter less competition on the leaderboards.
Which classes were popular in the past? We regularly conduct surveys about your favorite class in Diablo 3 here on MeinMMO at the start of each season.
In Season 24, the Monk won with 549 votes. In second place, you chose the Demon Hunter (All results)
In Season 23, the Monk was in second to last place. The Wizard won with 643 votes – Just behind was the Barbarian with 622 votes (All results)
In Season 22, the Demon Hunter secured first place with 430 votes. The Necromancer was just behind in second place (All results)
Which class will you start with in Season 25 and why did you choose it? Share it with us here on MeinMMO in the comments and exchange ideas with other players from the community.
This is an AI-powered translation. Some inaccuracies might exist.
