Three months later, ‘Battlefield 2042’ is paying the price for a very bad decision

“Battlefield 2042,” its developers at Dice and publisher, EA, have been harshly criticized by players for its buggy state and lack of industry standard features since its November 2021 release. Some crucial numbers size up the state of the game. Start with 4,500, which is the number of average players for “Battlefield 2042” over the past 30 days. If that number seems small for one of the most anticipated games of last year, it is. On Feb. 16, the title ranked 223rd on Steam Charts for active players, well behind “Call of Duty: Black Ops 3,” which released in 2015. In fact, over the last 30 days “Battlefield 2042” has had fewer average players than those currently playing 2018′s “Battlefield V” (12,900) or even 2016′s “Battlefield 1″ (5,409).

Another insightful number is 203,872, which is the total number of signatures for a Change.org petition demanding owners of the game on all platforms be permitted refunds.

This is the backdrop for revisiting the game now, to see what progress had been made since its buggy release in November. Three months on, “Battlefield 2042” has made up little ground, and EA and Dice have veered into the uncomfortable position occupied by CD Projekt Red following its disastrous rollout of “Cyberpunk 2077.” Instead of rolling out new game modes, features and content over the past quarter, the priority has been to make sure the game simply works. In fact, that has been such a focal point, Dice announced its “Season One” content, which was initially expected to drop in March, will not begin until “early Summer 2022.”

Indeed, the main story line around “Battlefield 2042” is one of a cautionary tale, with players hurling justifiable criticism at the game’s bugs, its fundamental design and the decision to release the game in such poor condition. Are things improved in the game since its launch? Yes. There appear to be fewer bugs. An error message no longer populates the top right corner of the title screen every time I load in on PlayStation 5. In playing about 10 hours over the past two weeks, I didn’t once experience the glitch in which downed squadmates that had clipped through a wall or some other object couldn’t be revived.

But my experience was far from perfect. During the second round of one session, my loadout selection screen turned invisible. Then in the round, all my loadouts reverted to their defaults with none of the attachments I’d selected. Players would freeze mid stride as though they’d been turned into a statue. The missile lock reticle for the anti-air launcher still bugs out and disappears.

Back when I first reviewed the game, I noted that the bugs were only part of the problem. There was also a very foundational issue that the game just wasn’t that fun to play. Three months later, that remains true. Perhaps because of the amount of attention required to patch up the bugs, there haven’t been many changes that substantially improve the enjoyment level.

Perhaps it’s best summarized this way: I don’t think I’ve ever felt more alone playing a multiplayer game. Yes, a large chunk of that feeling stems from the continued lack of in-game voice chat. But other methods of communication feel worthless. It’s rare that any of my squadmates respond to a request made using the ping wheel. And the text chat inevitably and predictably devolves into one player raging at their teammates to “git gud,” while another eggs them on and the diplomatic efforts of a third fail after reminding everyone that “guys, it’s just a game.”

In a way, I’m grateful for those exchanges. At least I know there are other living souls on the server with me. Whenever I try to load into a PlayStation-only lobby, the excessive wait times to fill the server make me wonder if anyone else out there on the PlayStation Network is still playing this game.

What’s more, it’s impossible to meet and connect with a consistent group of squadmates in “Battlefield 2042.” There’s no easy way to talk to them. And if I can’t talk with them, what possible reason do I have to send someone a friend request or try to squad up with them? I have no way of knowing anything about them. They could be a toxic moron. Knowing nothing about them, why would I add them to my PlayStation Party or Discord?

And this contributes to the biggest problem “Battlefield 2042” faces. There are things worse than bugs and player outrage, and that’s player apathy. My gaming friends (most of whom I met over game chat) and I will gripe about aspects of “Call of Duty: Warzone” incessantly. From the cheaters, to poor sound cues, we rail on the state of the game with startling frequency. But we still get on and play regularly because we enjoy each other’s company and we can all play “Warzone.” Playing “Battlefield 2042” right now is not a communal experience. And when the game was crafted for and marketed to Battlefield’s extremely devoted community, that’s a big issue.

Henderson’s article recounting the town hall noted that “’Battlefield 2042′s’ bug count ratio got to ‘historic levels for a Dice game,'” and that EA and Dice were aware but felt they fell within acceptable margins based on previous Dice releases. The belief was that the studio, which had capably righted the ship after rocky launches of previous titles, could do the work on the fly.

In a statement to The Washington Post addressing reports of the town hall, EA Vice President of Communication, John Reseburg, characterized it as “an in-depth and very humble internal conversation about the recent Battlefield launch. It was about key learnings and actions we are taking, not blaming external factors.” It is good that EA and Dice are assessing what went wrong around “Battlefield 2042” and that developers are working to improve it. But hopefully no one loses sight of the biggest problem of all. The initial decision to patch up a flawed game after release — particularly over the holiday season when developers traditionally take a needed respite — shows zero respect for consumers. “Sell it, then fix it” is a recipe for disaster for any product, and that’s exactly what was cooked up with “Battlefield 2042.”

Ironically, in Henderson’s report on the town hall, another game came up during the discussion: “Halo Infinite,” which impressed players with its amount of polish when it released shortly after the “Battlefield 2042” launch. The irony there is that “Halo Infinite” was delayed by a year after fans griped about the game’s appearance. The decision, which at the time deprived the Xbox Series X of a top-tier, exclusive launch title, appears to have been a good one for Microsoft and 343 Industries, the game’s publisher and developer.

You only get one chance to make a first impression. It’s cliche, but that’s because it’s true. “Battlefield 2042′s” first impression was not a good one. In fact, our initial review headline directly stated that the game “should have been delayed.” Per Steam Charts, it debuted to a peak audience of over 100,000 players. Three months later, there are fewer than 5,000 playing on average. With “Season One” not starting until “early summer,” I can’t help but wonder how many players will stick around to see if “Battlefield 2042” is worthy of a second chance.