The Generic Details of Battlefield 2042

[@fish_birb]

If you'd make "Battlefield 2042 Reimagined" I'd be soooo happy.

[@DomR1997]

I wish I was a fish birb. I'd be soooo happy.

[@Krusesensei]

Maybe in line with the 2142 story?

[@eyepatchpirate7726]

Yes!

[@mattavery7581]

I'm down for that!

[@irishspartanstudios]

I second this!

[@HandsumeAJ]

"The Americans are deploying troops in America we don't know why but we must put a stop to this"

[@franciscoguinledebarros4429]

Hey! Who are you?

[@HandsumeAJ]

@@franciscoguinledebarros4429 I'm you

[@franciscoguinledebarros4429]

@@HandsumeAJ God fucking dammit it's me again!

[@gr1mmy954]

Heavy?? I thought you are dead? You killed by engineer

[@atticusthegamingllama8302]

I loved Templin's idea about a Battlefield: 1952 game depicting an alternate history where NATO and the Warsaw Pact fight a conventional war. You could do so many interesting world-building changes to bring us to that point. It could show different fronts of such a war outside of Europe like altered versions of the Korean War, Algerian Independence War and Arab-Israeli conflicts. Hell, you could have the Soviets invade Alaska if you're willing to play by "rule of cool " a little.

[@josuemunoz5455]

Ohhhhhhh, that sounds gorgeous

[@Krusesensei]

Better then " the Russians take a ship scrapyard in a foreign country. We don't know why. But we must stop them!!!"

[@Marylandbrony]

I still like my idea where it’s battlefield but America got taken over by Qanon and the big reveal is that Q was Q from James Bond the whole time and it was a big troll prank.

[@UGNAvalon]

@Marylandbrony And Q from Bond is actually Q from Trek, hence the outlandish tech & trolling personality. ;D

[@George-zj9rr]

And include all the crazy soviet prototypes like object 279 tanks, American Davy Crockett mini tactical nukes, etc.

[@mikkelnpetersen]

I don't like the "hero characters" thing, I prefer the "unkown soldier" that you might be able to customize yourself.

[@viktordickinson7844]

Yeah same. Hero characters are the most unimmersive bullshit ever. Just more crap to sell to dentbrains

[@Tgungen]

Its like a Zoomer's image on how a war hero should look like: Addicted to shopping at Hot Topic

[@XxXNOSCOPEURASSXxX]

@@Tgungen hot topic is a millenial thing though.

[@Rrgr5]

the "hero" should be something more like the BF1 pickups, but they mess with it, so...

[@laisy961]

IMO hero characters work only if you have a story to tell, like what Overwatch tried to do (whether it's effective is up for debate) or they are distinctively unique from each other like Rainbow Six Siege. But Battlefield is the last place I expect hero characters.

[@HumanityAsCode]

I really like the idea of a shooter that has the same level of world building as our favorite RPGs. Where item descriptions can give you just as much insight into the world as some of the cutscenes and character dialogue. I like getting invested in a world so much that I try to absorb every detail that I can. So many games lack those details

[@WellBattle6]

You can take a look at Aliens Fireteam Elite. All the guns have their own lore.

[@commissarcactus1513]

Off the top of my head, Halo's the only shooter I know that really does this. Every bit of armor has some flavor text about which company manufactured it, which units use it, what tech went into it, or something like that.

[@morganrobinson8042]

Yeah, that's what the leadup to Destiny promised, at least from my point of view. Anthem too, if I'd have believed their hype trailer at all. Something more open world and mysterious, with a real sense of place in a world deep enough to get lost in for at least a few months. Not the Looter shooter that we got, with all the systemic problems that basically trivializes the reasons for what you're doing in favor of repetition and the endless endgame grind.

[@justhope2117]

looks like you'd really love the Metro series

[@keith5524]

Because there’s no love put into it

[@existentialselkath1264]

The most amazing scifi tech that seems to be available in 2042 is the ability to phase through elevator doors.

[@strangewolf1261]

NOPE! It's the Amazing Spidercraft!! XD

[@SargentGunnery]

and the hovercraft going up walls

[@strangewolf1261]

@@SargentGunnery I LITERALLY just said that! Xp

[@USSAnimeNCC-]

Everything the same it feel more like 2024 why would the Hind and Apache still be used even if their upgraded also why change the name of the Russian tank when it still the T-14 and the M1A5 when it completely different why not name it M2 Carlos or vanguard or something because it a new tank at that point

[@USSAnimeNCC-]

Also the air force is looking to replace the f-22 and at been designing one for a while now and their also finding a replacement for the Abrams also the T-14 would still be used but it be T-14D by then

[@hydronpowers9014]

"We must prevent the Russian Airsoft Team from capturing our hill"

[@Sundown42]

Underrated comment

[@marleegould542]

You do make a good point about the camouflage names. It would add so much to the world if they threw in tidbits like that, but it seems a lot of FPS players only care about multi-player and hardly ever play through the campaign or story.

[@MandoWookie]

I really hate that the focus has been so exclusively on multiplayer. Battlefield 4 and 1 had interesting gameplay mechanics in campaign, and I really liked BF1s campaign style, that had a lot of potential to tell a lot of stories in a big war, without having shoehorn it into a CoD style campaign. It's even more disappointing because the MP of Battlefield has steadily gotten worse. BF3 had probably the best, BF4 improved a lot of things but removed one of the best modes and map design was hit and miss. Bf1 got boring very quickly once the novelty wore off. I didnt even bother with BF5.

[@WoobooRidesAgain]

Are you kidding? Most of us FPS players have been dying for a good campaign from one of the major publishers for years. Everyone I know praised Titanfall 2's story campaign as one of the greatest ever made for FPS games. One of the biggest draws for Battlefield 1 was how it integrated a storyline based on historical events into the Operations mode, which was honestly a big hope for _this_ game before it was revealed to be a lazily tacked on excuse plot. The only people who don't care about good campaigns or stories for these games are the publishers, who want to do everything they can to funnel players into the multiplayer modes in order to get "engagement" and more money out of us.

[@siluda9255]

@@MandoWookie i liked bf1 multiplayer

[@arsmariastarlight3567]

Even Battlefield 2142's worldbuilding (100 years later from 2042) still makes a lot more sense than 2042's worldbuilding. The objective on each map makes sense and plausible, both sides have a distinct design philosphy and battle doctrine: PAC vehicle has rounded design, EU has angular design. PAC mainly uses plasma weapons, while EU uses ballistics. PAC has hover drives, EU has tracks. PAC has high mobility but low armor, while EU has high armor and low mobility. The camo also makes sense, in snowy map, everyone uses their own distinct snow camo, same with the desert map and no nonsensical camo like 2042's Tier 1 camo Ah how I missed the 2142's days, futuristic warfare, but in battlefield game, with BF2's class-based system and scoreboard, and the titan assault game mode is absolute beast to play, and this was a game that's released in 2006!!! Something has gone terribly wrong when a 2021 game is worse in terms of gameplay, worldbuilding and lore than a game released 15 years ago

[@michaelramon2411]

Given where the maps are and the whole Nopats idea, it feels like a better idea would have been to present the conflict as a whole bunch of proxy wars, with each side giving their clients both weapons/vehicles and Nopat mercenaries. American and Russian armies aren't literally in Western India, but a Pakistani army is, or India has broken down into an ethnic civil war, and American/Russian Nopat armies are in open but undeclared war with each other in support one side or the other. That's also more realistic, given that it answers the whole "where are those nuclear weapons?" question that any future superpower war scenario has to dance around.

[@mattiaslime758]

Or better. Private military organisations or other mega corporations that use these no pats as expandable meat for the grinder.

[@jimmyseaver3647]

@@mattiaslime758 Having them as a third, "Wild Card" faction would be kickass.

[@mattiaslime758]

@@jimmyseaver3647 wild card faction?

[@jimmyseaver3647]

@@mattiaslime758 Their own faction with their own goals, taking advantage of the chaos to ensure that they lose nothing.

[@forickgrimaldus8301]

And this would have been the perfect explaination for the PAC somehow gaining Asian Countries that historically are their enemies while the EU lagged technologically.

[@Irawulf]

the camo being the same on both sides isn't nitpicky. That's verry important for identifying friend or foe, especially if both sides use the same camo

[@justevil100]

The game feels unfinished. They have clearly held back 70% of the game to fill out their " live service "....... It is not worth the price that they are asking or I unfortunately paid......

[@theliato3809]

bold of you to assume they though ahead to make that game content.

[@Seth9809]

What are you talking about? Outside of the campaign, this game has way more features and addons than previous ones.

[@justevil100]

@@Seth9809 You would not be saying that at launch. It has still had only what 3 - 4 new maps since launch. It is a solid step backwards from previous entries.

[@Seth9809]

@@justevil100 I have waited over a decade, if not decades, for a Battlefield game to have bots again. I've waited years for factions to have assigned equipment that they start with, like in Battlefield 3. This is the first battlefield in a long time, that is available to people who actually have lives and don't have razor thin reaction times or delay on their internet. It also has content from previous battlefields and it's fun.

[@Seth9809]

@@justevil100 It's certainly got way better gun options and way better customization than I remember Battlefield having. My copy of Battlefield 3 and 4 anhd BC 2 are all basically worthless. They're only good for the campaign and that's a mixed bag at best. Meanwhile, my copy of BO1 is still exactly as much fun as it was years ago. So is my copy of Battlefield 2. A game worth buying twice once my first copy was ran ragged and no longer loaded.

[@ronaldlennier86]

0:18 now I'm just picturing a templin field agent pretending to be fighting on whatever side and he is just complaining about the shoddy world building of the war to some very confused in universe soldiers

[@michaelramon2411]

"Private Stevens": "The world's economy doesn't make any sense!" Sergeant: "Okay, wiseguy. You get to charge the machine gun nest next."

[@mattavery7581]

The thing I find must unbelievable about this scenario is how some countries just collapse. I can see the government's of third world countries collapsing due to economic and environmental circumstances but countries like China, the UK, Japan, France, India, Germany and Canada doesn't seem likely. This would have been a great opportunity to do something new, old allies becoming rivals, countries being annexed instead of the same old generic America Vs Russia.

[@theliato3809]

The rise of a tenious relationship between say US and EU/Russia and China would be great grounds to explore potential conflicts.

[@mattavery7581]

@@theliato3809 Instead of the operators they could have introduced new factions it would have been great to see new weapons and nationalities in the game.

[@theliato3809]

@@mattavery7581 Seems like they were going for the whole Hero game with the no pat(man i hate this distinction) operators. Like Overwatch, Apex, or tf2. There was a bit of options they could have taken but took the option of none in the end.

[@CommanderLongJohn]

@@theliato3809 They literally copy and pasted Apex's "hero" system and Modern Warfare's operators-even basically replicating MW2019's fucking main menu and operator screen..

[@marco8414]

They said they cut out a campaign because it would allow them to spend more time on everything else, but it seems like they cut out a campaign because they ran out of creativity.

[@USSAnimeNCC-]

No shit I can do a Google search and find out about stuff every military have in development that will available in 2042 but nope here an M1A5 and the t-14 but it name t-28 or a hind and Apaches why set it in 2042 if their not going to anything new

[@Seth9809]

@@USSAnimeNCC- You do understand that DICE tried to predict the future over and over, and every single time they were wrong. Any weapon they thought was cool, was thrown away as soon as a battlefield game came out. Also, you're an idiot. The T-14 is so new, it's never going to be actually issued.

[@thomasgodridge5945]

I love these details, and hearing your opinion on them Also, "Generica". Love it.

[@IAmTheAce5]

I have a theory: the jankiness of the factions' operations and organization might be explained if the goal was to _get rid_ of the operators and specialists so neither side has to keep their end of the arrangement.

[@nokh3382]

Actually I think your on to something, certain maps have natural disasters or map changing events like a rocket during its ignition phase. No sane person would fight in this kind of situation unless they were offered an abused amount of money.

[@europanzer3929]

The more I see about the game's setting the more baffled I am with Dice's lazyness. Mostly because a similar setting was done by Ubisoft with Tom Clancy's Endwar way too many years ago. You have the traumatic event that sets everything in motion, nuclear war in the Middle East being much quicker than climate change, but as time moves forward the world starts to fall apart all the same. There's not much around it but in the campaign one can hear brief snippets of news that talk about devastating droughts, monstrous typhoons, crops failing, famine, climate refugees and new powerful diseases. It only makes it more obvious the nonsensical war the three superpowers are fighting rather than adressing these issues that will eventually affect them too. And speaking of superpowers, having the war be a three way free for all actually made for an interesting twist, adding to that that none of the superpowers were the villain. The whole thing starts due to one Russian officer, but not due to Russia itself. In fact, in the prologue to the war is the USA who jumps the gun and attacks Europe, kicking off World War III. And throwing the European Federation in the usual statu quo was a nice touch, since it's not the usual enemies fighting, but also former allies. Yeah, China was absent, but oh well... The factions were both recognizable and interesting (despite falling in some tropes). The US which hasn't changed that much, but part of it's lore reveals that they occupied parts of latin america, seizing valuable resources despite them being pretty much self-sufficient; Russia experiences an economic boom with its newfound wealth, allowing them to get back much of the soviet sphere of influence; while some countries of the EU form the European Federation that relies heavily on cutting edge tech for their needs, although they have their own adventures in Africa (I think Nigeria its mentioned). It's not just these three, there are more countries out there, but these are the top dogs. And that actually leads me into the fight itself. Each faction has its own tech, camo patterns, vehicles, upgrades... that can be traced to and resemble the ones in current use (with some exceptions). Hell the regular troops use current day weapons, the best of the best reserved for the playable elite units. And most of the battlefields are actually strategic places. Refineries, satelite uplinks, mountain passes, river crossings, military bases... all the way to the capitals of the enemy factions. Assets that would be valuable in the war. But instead, we are stuck with Battlefield 2042. Yay... TL; DR: Just remake Endwar, Ubisoft. Or make a first person shooter in that setting. It would be much more interesting than this.

[@benniotto]

I dunno, endwar was pretty stupid too… I liked it, but it was pretty dumb.

[@TexasLawbringer77]

Endwar was fantastic, I can’t believe they haven’t tried to expand on it (that lame online browser-based game didn’t count) Also, I loved how the M1 Abrams became the M2 Schwarzkopf.

[@xtangero]

It was a tremendous concept with a good lore behind it Gameplay was a bit meh and the circular food chain for units was a bit tiresome, but overall something new and fresh that was thusly rewarded by never being talked about again by Ubisoft

[@LupusAries]

When I look at the Equipment and think back on how Bohemia was ripped into for not being creative enough in their 2035 scenario in Arma 3...... Yeah, the tech was quite similar, but at least it wasn't just a reskinned, slightly changed version. We got new guns, new Helos (one based on the Comanche, one bastard love-child of a threesome between a Hind, a Havoc and a Hokum), reimagined and upgraded tanks (like NATO using the Merkava), tons of new MRAP, IFV and APC...... This is a no-effort 2042 scenario.. .. Yeah, this is no effort at all

[@Seth9809]

Endwar was cheating, they had Tom Clancy or some ghost writer of his do all the heavy work.

[@chemputer]

This really shows how dumb they think their audience is. Perhaps not the developers, or even the game designers, but the people managing it, directing where effort can and cannot be spent. Those people think that their player base is made up of 12 year olds and idiots, apparently. And sure, maybe there is a decent percentage, but does that really justify cutting corners for everyone else?

[@theliato3809]

Ultimtarely this shows how much the devs actually care about the setting that they simply reduced it down to two shooter teams of American and Russian militaries and their army surplus side kicks. The ignoring of any decent ideas on where to wage wars, Destroying the EU, beefing up Russia as the only foe to simply be the antagonist, and ignoring the rest of the world in whats effectively a wohke wash, catchy but kind of hollow aesthetic designs, and our cast of two dozen characters fighting the whole war by themsleves. This is probably more comparrable to a game like TF2 or overwatch without any of the charm those characters and settings have to give their appeal.

[@Willpraissman]

Welcome to battlefield 2042 where if you shoot a man in the head it doesn’t count as a headshot

[@GamersHolyArmy]

It feels like the dev team used all their creativity on the phrase "weather event" and just handpicked the most generic parts of every other Battlefield to make a game around that phrase.

[@ISAF_Ace]

tank designs are always something interesting to examine

[@Marylandbrony]

This is if in World War 2, The Germans and the Soviets fought in Istanbul instead of Kursk or Narva.

[@occultatumquaestio5226]

More like if the Germans and the Soviets fought in Mozambique. There actually were plenty of moments IRL where Turkey may have joined either side prior to 1945 and there were a few battles between the two that were actually close to Istanbul.

[@tetraxis3011]

@@occultatumquaestio5226 And there is the fact that Russia has multiple times throughout history, desired to control Istanbul(so it’s Black Sea fleet doesn’t get trapped).

[@shinyagumon7015]

Honestly I prefer the wacky nonsensical worldbuiding of CoD to this. That was at least entertaining, Battlefield 2042 just feels empty.

[@Mediados]

I think that's because of the setting. 2042 is a way too near future to give it something unique, it's mostly just straight up the present, and that is extremely boring.

[@peterdonlon2083]

@@Mediados I mean, the modern era can be very interesting. BF2042 is just bad at it.

[@sonogamirinne7172]

Then this comment is just Biased

[@bichengan]

@@sonogamirinne7172 wut... Will you admit you have a bias as well? There has always been rivalry and competition between CoD and BF. Both franchises in their current state are essentially cash cows.

[@sonogamirinne7172]

@@bichengan bias what? Both game are equal shit right now, who the fuck bias who huh?, both are getting trash by fanboy, so the fuck bias the shit who here?

[@nuggs4snuggs516]

Your take on the mission briefings reminds me of 2142s mission briefs, which give a bit more personality to what are otherwise sort of uninspired grey and orange cities and installations

[@mingchoi8369]

Why do I get this feeling we'll be seeing a reimagining video on the world of Battlefield 2042 soon?

[@dragonbornexpress5650]

Wouldn't that be something.

[@iratepirate3896]

2142 did all of this ten times better. You could tell how the war was going just based on where the battles are fought.

[@shadewolf0075]

Yeah from Berlin falling to the PAC to wake island in PAC territory

[@kelsiel6147]

DICE: So smaller nations aren't able to do anything and the conflict is only about the US and Russia. Also DICE: Here is a Jaguar from France, the French can't join this war but they can sell weapons to both fighting nations.

[@Seth9809]

I love how you're too dumb to understand that's basically how the real world is. France sold weapons to both sides of multiple conflicts, and is really bad at winning wars.

[@bryan-7997]

Most points I agree (lol tier one skin) The one in the briefing for the ship breaking yard though was because of occupying us forces recovering a Russian sub based on the Russian side’s briefing.

[@Krusesensei]

Still miss good Storys like in World in Conflict (or even the older ghost recon [combat in south osetia, Ukraine and Belarus are not SO fictional :p ] games...) 😢

[@808INFantry11X]

Fictional is not bad but they could have atleast put more work into it

[@michaelramon2411]

Even just seeing that one map was set in India got my head spinning with ideas about a future where an increasingly authoritarian Indian government kicks off a rebellion from its fed-up minorities. India accuses Bangladesh of harboring rebels and threats escalate into open warfare, which causes Pakistan to attack India while Myanmar sides with India and attacks Bangladesh. over longstanding border issues. The UN Security Council unanimously threatens to rain hellfire on any side that uses nuclear weapons (which works), but Russia and the US immediately start providing conventional arms or Nopat armies to their preferred side. That's (hopefully) fictional, but provides an interesting base for a story, and it took me like five minutes of thinking!

[@halofly3]

Weirder still, if you look at the specialists biographies, it shows that they’re all no pats with the exception of two. I say two because one is not confirmed. The exceptions are “Boris” (who is suspected of being a Russian plant) and “Paik” (who is undercover). It’s like dice took the time to make hero characters but not generic soldiers for each faction.

[@alexmauney9705]

2042's atmosphere just feels incredibly wasted. Imagine battles taking place in Tiberian Sun-esque ion storms or fighting through the flooded remains of city. I understand they are a bit limited given it needs to "adhere" to 4 and 2142 but having WW4 take place in a world falling apart is such a neat concept. Instead, most maps just feel like places that exists right now with Hourglass being the only one showing significant effects of climate change.

[@UbinTimor]

I mean, speaking as someone who served for 5 years in the United States Navy Information Dominance community, the "mission brief" that was said by that dude wasn't exactly that far off from what I had to deal with. Most of the time our movements basically boiled down to the higher-ups saying "The Russians/Chinese/North Koreans are here- we don't know why they're here, but we have to stop them." It was up to people like me to figure out why they were there in the first place and brief the CO, XO, and Operations department about what could be there and what they could be doing there to begin with. As lame as the the reasoning behind each match is, it's kind of just a reflection of both countries attitudes towards conflict with each other (we're here because they're here)- however it could, and honestly should, be better even if no one will pay attention to it. The fact that hardly anyone would really care why they're fighting on the map is probably the reason why the developers chose such a basic set-up brief for the match.

[@SpamtaroFTW]

"Hey you, Private of the Generican Army! We have to protect this general area from the Genericastanians from Genericastan! They need the general oil reserves to fuel their Genericastanian equipment. They will be no match against our marginally superior general purpose weaponry!" - General Gene Generson , Generican Ground Guard Garrison

[@the-flying-condor2697]

The whole world of 2042 seems bland. Since they cut the campaign I guess they went with a "no story at all approach“. Gameplay is fun though

[@fingerboxes]

1:15 -- I feel like not having enough face models so players don't notice when they're repeated could've been fixed by sticking helmets on everyone. Seems to work for other franchises.

[@Akapaco2]

That's literally what Battlefield 4 did. It worked really well.

[@superpepsiman5252]

Welcome to the future of sci-fi.

[@krthecarguy5150]

I wouldn't say BF2042 is futuristic enough to be Sci-Fi, more just Futuristic Military

[@JoaoSoares-rs6ec]

You mean boring

[@krthecarguy5150]

@@JoaoSoares-rs6ec I wouldn't call Non-Sci-Fi futuristic military stories boring myself, but if that's your opinion then that's fine

[@JoaoSoares-rs6ec]

@@krthecarguy5150 are you kidding it's a unfinished game were the only thing there is shooting, nothing else, boring as hell, I do appreciate that you accept my opinion even if you appear to disagree, yes j accept yours as well

[@Econ1991]

Feels a bit lacking in world development, like there's not really any stakes more like "go here, hold this, take back this"

[@ImperatorPenguin]

It's an EA game, is anyone really that surprised that the world of this game has fallen flat on its face?

[@JoaoSoares-rs6ec]

Good point there, in the last decade EA games have just gone from bad to worse,

[@somesimo5122]

There can’t possibly be any game more overlooked than BF2142. I played each one in the series, never have I ever had a better time and memories by playing Battlefield than with this 2142… I hope so much for a comeback (or a re-opening of the servers!) The story was surely lacking but Titan mode was so funny to play with friends.

[@JoaoSoares-rs6ec]

One of the few battlefield games I played and the one I enjoyed the most

[@TexasLawbringer77]

Unfortunately I think that applies to most of the pre-frostbite games (though, 2142 still being the most overlooked among them) In my experience there’s also a noticeable portion of the player base that believes the franchise started with Bad Company.

[@ClassicMagicMan]

BF2142 was the only battlefield game that I've ever played, but I loved it to bits. Judging by other's opinions of the other BF games, it sounds like I'm not missing out too-too much.

[@Remus-z6y]

Doesn’t feel like armies fighting, just a bunch of random people showed up for a fight.

[@dwim6423]

I asked for an equipment vid in one of the streams so thanks

[@awesomehpt8938]

The battlefield franchise is so lame these days. I’m still waiting for bad company 3

[@randomka-52alligatorthatis34]

Its kind of funny hearing the Video's Gripes with BF2042's Map Description on its intros, because I'm pretty sure Battlefield 2 did a great job with it(reasons from Oil, Logistics, to Strategic Location or Objective). And I think BF2142, BF3, and even BF4 had a good description or at least hints on why there is a battle on there maps. For Example, In BF2's map Dalian Plant(this is the map that I remember its description the most) which is set around a Chinese Nuclear Power Plant. The United States Marine Corps(US) is attempting to cease this vital power plant in order to disrupt China's Northern Electrical Grid/Supply and the Defending People's Liberation Army(China) must stop them to ensure the safety and operation of this Vital Infrastructure.

[@mysteriousfletcher9838]

so the early clone wars has begun.

[@UnreasonableOpinions]

Working elements of worldbuilding are a strong addition even to pure-multiplayer games, and people do care about them. But it's easy for executive producers to pretend players just don't, since skipping it saves half a percent of budget, and makes an absurdly compressed production cycle less implausible.

[@DavidRichardson153]

There is one question that has been bugging me whenever I see any of these future wars, particularly those in the 2040 to 2080 range, and answering this question is not as easy to answer as one might think: What is the fuel used in war? The aforementioned time range is projected to be when all oil reserves that are comparatively easy to tap are drained. Militaries are still heavily dependent on fossil fuels, so how exactly are they powering their war machines? Biofuels sound like an obvious answer, but not really. Yeah, they can cover some of the machines, but synthesizing enough on a scale large enough to power everything is not exactly feasible, especially how most of the processes that produce biofuels that could be used for such still rely on materials that still come from fossil fuels (gasoline is just one of many things produced from crude oil - the heavier components are typically used in manufacturing all kinds of other products, including the vast majority of plastics). Even if you found other materials to use to produce this, odds are it is already being used for some other critical purpose, like, for example, food, and there is so much land that can be utilized for agriculture - much of which is already showing signs of failing and are only continuing on due to heavy usage of fertilizers (another thing that requires fossil fuel components). Nuclear could be the answer for navies as that is already the case for a slowly yet steadily increasing number of ships, and it might - *MIGHT* - work with certain army vehicles...but all army vehicles, not to mention aircraft? Sorry, but even Fallout acknowledges that this is not exactly feasible. This should go without saying, but renewables like solar and wind are obviously out. They might factor in to some degree for a base's defenses, but they were be mostly, if not entirely, useless on a dynamic and ever-changing frontline. So I ask once more: what is the fuel for these war machines?

[@11Bbq]

It’s interesting because video games like call of duty and previous battlefields have really gone all in on military jargon. I used to play those games in the barracks with my real life platoon. We thought it was kind of funny when a voice actor would scream military terminology but it turns out it’s worse when they just throw it all away. I know they probably want to appeal to a more casual audience but I don’t think many casual players would notice what’s coming in over the radio right before they drop into a battle. Only the people that actually care about the story do and they’re the ones that end up cheated.

[@JustinRM20]

What videogame manages to be the most realistic in terms of jargon and setting?

[@Arashmickey]

The videos about variations on the New Republic and New Order and such are interesting, but for some reason I really love this one about the smaller missed opportunities. Great stuff!

[@KatarMilak]

Another design choice I don't understand is the inconsistency of infantry weapons. Yes, some are based on weapons currently undergoing trials, such as the MCX Spear being the M5A3, but others don't make sense. A lever action rifle from the 1870s and .22 rifles would likely be all but useless against mid-20th century body armour.

[@Wintersoap123]

To be honest 2042 probably needed a campaign. Didn't have to be good, Just something to do some world building.

[@MazzaAzi]

Me: *Misreads Battlefield 2042 as Battlefield 2142* Also me: "OH BOY Battlefield 2142" Video: *starts* yet again me: "Oh Battlefield 2042, not Battlefield 2142......" *sad walker driver noises*

[@youknowwhatever8649]

Basically to sum it up it never really feels like the world is at war. Rather there’s just random skirmishes going on in random places.

[@dragonbornexpress5650]

Bingo! Season 2 solidifies this: Why are we attacking a Black Market stronghold in the Panama Canal? Why is the Panama Canal dried up in the first place?

[@AdamSmith-vj5uk]

Makes me miss the amazing details in BF1

[@jeffmynameis6201]

The templin institute should be involved in story writing of video games of this genre

[@LuvzToLol21]

Online shooters like this need to manage a balance in their mapmaking. On the one hand, players (and developers) want unique and innovative maps set in exciting locations. On the other hand, these maps should have purpose and fit into the narrative the game is trying to tell. One example of the latter is Call of Duty Modern Warfare (2019), the gameplay was great but nearly all of the maps were set in either middle of nowhere Russia, middle of nowhere "generic unspecified Middle East country", or some random block in London. The multiplayer maps fit perfectly into MW's story and themes of modern clandestine warfare, but they just weren't interesting. On the opposite end is something like BF2042. The Antarctic map is unique and very fun but there's no explanation given on why you're there or what you're fighting for.

[@cpprepper2662]

You should make a Battlefield 2042 reimagined

[@casbot71]

As a Battlefield *2142* veteran [released 2006, sequel to Battlefield 2] I was really confused at first. EA seem obsessed with the number *42* in their titles, _what is the significance of that number?_ this question will haunt me … it must mean something? There must be some answer, some _ultimate answer?!_

[@d.b.4671]

42 *is* the answer. You just don't know the question. :P

[@danwhowatches707]

Because Battlefield 1942

[@CoronadoJoe77]

It really feels like they missed the mark with this story stuff. China not being a player is so strange especially with geographic positioning to the maps. In bf4 I kinda cared because it made sense (to an extent) but here its just like, oh boy hero shooter but big and russian/american voices saying we capped/lost points.

[@Kevc00]

You know I could have easily ignored all this stuff, if they hadn't put in the specialists, where rather than being just a random soldier in an army, you are now a clone of a person with a name and backstory, feels way more call of duty than it does battlefield.

[@IBMobius]

The biggest disappointment with this gane for me was the lack of a story/campaign

[@OHCAM5]

Who plays Battlefield for the story?

[@JoaoSoares-rs6ec]

Agreed

[@JoaoSoares-rs6ec]

@@OHCAM5 people that wa want a something well done and that makes sense

[@theliato3809]

The fact they dropped campaign and how they handle the combatants should tell us how much they care about the story.

[@JoaoSoares-rs6ec]

@@theliato3809 that's easy they don't

[@fdYkn]

The more detailed lore, the better. Those scattered all over the world make no sense. There is no explanation, the clone problem does its part to not feel immersed at all.

[@davebowman9000]

Personally, I think that they gave up with the storytelling and are now going full Rule of Cool and these are just details in which they maybe should've put some thought into.

[@princezemas4002]

Most of the lore, especially the objectives of the battles, is hidden away in the player card images. However, even then its pretty surface level.

[@spikeruth1674]

After playing 2042 for the past week, I've been really feeling like they don't have a single writer on the team(s). I was going to say they had only had one writer, but literally anybody can make a more cohesive story and world if they just lazily came up with random ideas. I think this setting has potential, but they just need literally anyone with an imagination to pull this mess of worldbuilding into a story. They did this with Payday 2 where they originally had no story direction for many years, but then they hired a writer who was able to take the many dangling plot threads left over the years and tied them together into something unexpectedly deep and intriguing. I think Payday would actually make a great subject for a Templin episode because the story and lore go in a completely different direction from what you would expect from a game inspired by heist movies.

[@TheLoneTerran]

Ehh, you say when the fecal matter hits the fan, who cares? I know I do and so do most of my gaming friends. In games that allow it, we'll mod in correct camo and skins for vehicles to replace generic jeep or Humvee. Hell, if someone as notoriously ban-happy as EA has been allowing people to run cosmetic only mods, BF2042 could do it too. At least we didn't see any "city" camouflage. And you're right, least of all, the Russians would not need to import AA. Their AA is some of the best on the planet. So many issues that can all be boiled down to 'rushed out' and 'lazy' design. With all the glitches and bugs of the alpha, then beta, and the release, many of them just not getting any attention at all, devs were probably herded off by managers to some of project long ago. Plus, doesn't this future have fusion power? You really don't run out of resources when you have fusion energy...

[@magicmanticore3536]

Yes! We must fight for the fate of team 1 in Generica!

[@azwanajeeb2167]

More like templin institute like dimensional traveler, when they got into world Battlefield 2042 they fight for both side just to collect information about the current situation as the result they got confused instead, like what the heck fighting for, what the heck with guys with same face gather together, and what the heck with both side using same equipment, don't you have your own faction equipment to use.. which kind of funny

[@Robocopnik]

They couldn't even be bothered to come up with two camo schemes? Fuck me sideways, that's lazy.

[@S.Collins]

not even a front line but a bunch of "separate" proxy conflicts

[@xtangero]

What you described with the map briefings is exactly what they did with 2142. It's not like it can't be done, they just chose not to, it seems

[@Armoredunit]

I thought in 2042 the camouflage would be so advance that you can't even see the tank imagine that

[@karakas9905]

Right, now I need you to look at details in BFBC2 and BF3. Both phenomenal.

[@ambientlightofdarknesss4245]

2042 reimagined please!! maybe you can do the battles reimagined as well.

[@gre3nishsinx0Rgold4]

Even though battlefield 2042 has holes in it. I still prefer it to vanguard. It's the lesser of two shits.

[@yokogoph]

I do hope they get around to changing the scout and AA vehicle on the Russian side, but looking at their previous game BFV, I highly doubt they will *coughGermansusingC47scough*

[@mathiasfischbach4843]

I really like the idea of some guy in a "Templin Institute"-Shirt come out of a dimension portal, having a look around and then say "Yo, your war is boring and makes no sense!.":D

[@moonlight39echo]

5:00 the America tanks of BF2042 remind me a lot, at least in term of profile, of the Israeli Merkava Mk.1 MBT from the 1970s. Even back on the first teaser trailers for the game, when I saw the tanks I'm like okay new Abrams...umm wait a sec... I'm not saying that they are Merkava Mk.5s, but the design of the turret I would agree was inspired or based on the Mk.1

[@Mobius__]

Couldn't Russian and US forces using the same vehicles and camo be explained as the No-Pats buying their own vehicles? A combination of host nations supplying No-Pat armies, as well as No-Pats buying their own equipment as they are, well, No-Pats.

[@joshuajoaquin5099]

question is how they managed to transport it on the battlefield even yet how they go connections with that said company then transfer them

[@the_corvid97]

Would have been fascinating if the No-Pats functioned like medieval bandits; raiding coastlines and rural regions forcing different countries to hire them as mercenaries. Could even be like the Foederati in the Late Roman era where they are promised land since they lost theirs.

[@darkhope97]

As far as a I understand that's how they are being used by US and Russia to literally be proxy fighters that they can denie their involvement

[@Eire_Cremins]

Perfectly made video as always, would love a Dice Developer to see this and actually understand it. The vehicles are a mess, both Russia and the US using the wildcat, which isn't even a mobile anti air vehicle as anti air is sad. They could of gave the Russians the BMP2 Terminator tank as a different option. Also only 22 weapons like 4 assault rifles is a complete joke. And the level choices while stunning to look at make zero military sense. Unfortunately I think I'm going to shelve this game as I bought it, played 5 hours and was just bored. Keep up the great videos by the way 👍

[@JoaoSoares-rs6ec]

As usual you made a very good point and I can't stop agreeing with you

[@Glitch_Online]

9:22 The game is built with suspension of disbelief in mind, but small details like these you mention are what help make it believable to begin with. Pandering to the lowest common denominator in every aspect is ruining so many franchises.

[@setsunamaki4514]

I still remember at Beta the more i play , the more background story didn't make sense its become

[@captaintaylor8265]

You have actually forgot many things:The journey of no-pats that ties all these locations together and battlefield 2042 info wars podcast

[@sufler5670]

I sometimes wonder if the templin institute is the predecessor of the combine from half-life. They have the same masks...

[@carrotedsquare]

Is that Bandog from Ace Combat 7?

[@mammothmk3355]

The reason why the story in Battlefield 2042 is the way it is, is because *it is a simply excuse plot so EA can make it a hero shooter.* They simply try to make a Hero Shooter Battlefield title. Just look at the "agent" in game and you will understand. So don't even try to make sense the narrative before the match, *for it doesn't matter anyway.* ;)

[@babylegs5049]

It's pretty bad when you can't get the big or small details right, it just goes to show AAA games care not for anything but making as much money as possible while giving as little effort as possible. In comparison there are some indie game developers that create games way above their weight class and get little to no recognition.

[@reecewestmoreland6137]

battlefield 2042 to is just a flashy version of the red and blue teams fighting over a box canyon

[@ravenRedwake]

It kind of feels like the background to the tabletop game Infinity, but on a army wide scale instead of black ops teams

[@fireteamdelta9108]

4:20 what game is this from

[@Goowehr_43]

Honestly they should of done a Tom Clancy End War-esque scenario and have it be a four way conflict. With the US/Commonwealth/Japan and South Korea falling out with the European Union and the Russia-China alliance from battlefield 4 falling apart and the two countries becoming enemies. You could have maps in Eastern Europe where Poland, Hungary, Romania and Ukraine don't know who to back resulting in the Russians and EU fighting for Eastern Europe but Eastern Europe secretly wants to join the US coalition. Which forces the US to engage EU forces on the coast of the Balkans and engage the Russians in Ukraine. Where as the US, China and Russia fight to secure North Korea, Mongolia and the South China Sea. The ultimate goal being to isolate each nation from valuable resources or putting say the Russians in an advantageous position to occupy all of Europe or Americans securing territory around China to blockade the mainland into submission. Also the whole refugee mercenary thing with the nopats is dumb, it should have at least been one Russian PMC and one American PMC fighting each other if not just straight up their actual militaries.

[@Ehxx]

"no explanation of how people got there" almost like something you'd see in a campaign..

[@Rottenflieger.]

The duplicated vehicles on both sides isn't too surprising when we consider the game was produced by the same devs who in BFV felt that both German and British paratroops should deploy from the same C-47 transport aircraft.

[@Dagfinm]

5:24 aCtUaLLy, that's a Ka-52, that is currently in service in the russian armed forces as far as I know... so basically they didn't even really put any futuristic heli for the russians. They could've used the Ka-58, a fictional Stealth-Heli, don't remember where it originally came from, but it would've been much better in the role of a futuristic russian Attack-Helicopter

[@uss_04]

How much of this games assets were contracted out? I really wanted to get immersed in the games feel, but it feels like they subcontracted out the games assets to 30-40 different companies and they were slapped together under a common engine

[@DABViktor]

Thank you the English subtitle.

[@habbex]

Totally agree with your points, the story just as the game is all over the place and I'll defined. Keep up the good work!