The crisis of modern shooters

Every time I recall Battlefield 4, I have a double sensation. On the one hand, I feel a feeling of nostalgia, since for me the game was simply amazing in my genre. On the other hand, the BF series now lives the moment of degradation, and this is very disappointing me. 4 Battlefield was my favorite shooter, even despite the problems that were on the release. I mean various bugs and non -card problems. It was not so important for me, firstly, it was all corrected after some time (well, almost fixed), and secondly, the game was never bored. There is everything: tanks, helicopters, fighters, infantry, good cards, a bunch of weapons and body kit, a huge number of gadgets. And most importantly, it all worked and completely satisfied most of the players, but what can I say, you can still find clogged servers on popular maps of the “Operation Lock” type. Therefore, I wondered if today’s shooters satisfy the needs of players?

And yes, first I will make gambling sites no gamstop a small remark, we are talking about modern multiplayer shooters, all sorts of CS go are not there. So what we have on the market. Batleroili, such as Pubga and Apx, Rainbow Six, Battlefield 5, well, naturally the new Call of Duty. Pubg and Apex are played only because of one single regime, which has already become less in demand than before, and indeed, they do not fit into the framework of a “ordinary shooter”. What can I say about Rainbow Six? Yes, this is a good tactical shooter that is still actively developing, but comparing a rainbow with classic action-shutters is incorrect, as these are completely different games. So what remains: Call of Duty and Battlefield, yes, disputes about them have not been subside for a very long time. And more precisely, they did not subside. Now Battlefield, unfortunately, is not standing near Call of Duty, but you don’t think, probably, you have already fantasized everything, Call of Duty has remained the same Call of Duty, it still has many problems. Yes, there is a large -scale mode, ala battlefield, who supposedly burys him, but this is not quite. It is played many times worse, TTK for large cards is too small, the plastic technique, plus unbalanced, so there is also no destruction, so it’s hard to believe that you are behind the wheel of a tank, and not control a toy plastic machine. And due to the fact that TTK is too small, you can be killed from anywhere in the card in a second. In short, then the mode is played badly, and it is even difficult to compare it with the Batlefield. But the worst, as for me, is a handicap and a monetization system in general. Sizon Pass is added a few months after the release of the game, okay it would be good, but there is almost no content there. The sensational Gandikap mechanics, donaters throw in matches to weaker players and a lot of everything. In general, problems can still be listed for a long time. This was not Kalda bypassed Buttlefield, but Battlefield went down to the bottom. See a comparison of various gameplay aspects of New Kalda and Battlefield 4. Despite the fact that Battledield was released in 2013, most mechanics in Call of Duty are either absent at all, or work worse. Call of Duty did not bring anything new to the genre, she just has no competitors. But why? And why it happened?

The conditional “fall” of the Batlefield series began with Battlefield 1. It would seem that good shooting, cards, equipment, weapons. Everything that is needed for a good shooter, however, there is always one but, in this case, this is a setting. Well, the First World War can not compare with modernity. Neither in terms of the number of equipment, weapons and gadgets, nor in terms of scale of actions and destruction. You can not stick C4 to the motorcycle and explode about the tank. You can not jump out of the fighter, blow up a helicopter from RPG and sit back. And this very strongly complements the game and brings banal fun. The developers themselves drove themselves to a dead end, limiting themselves. I’m not saying that the game was bad, just players experienced an acute lack of content. However, by releasing the Battlefield 5, not only they chose almost the same setting again, they just opened up with the release, I will not go into details, I think you have heard about it for so long. In addition, the support of the game itself is suffering. This is a large -scale multiplayer project, Live Service by the way, and over a year it almost did not move from a dead point. While Battlefield 4 was stuffed with DLS, they corrected non -car and did not monetize everything that was possible, but in modern realities this problem is much sharper than it might seem at first glance.

In general, now you can summarize a little: there are 2 classic action-players-this is the Buttlefield and Call of Duty. Yes, in just a few years, so many cool and diverse shooters have disappeared. There used to be Battlefield 4, and Battlefield Hardline with its wonderful non -card and emphasis on infantry cards, and Battlefront, albeit casual, but with the cool gameplay, in excellent setting and without crazy monetization, as in Battlefront 2 of 2017. Due to the famous “Lutbo-Baby War”, the game passed by a huge part of people. Later, the lutboxes were cut out of the game, added a sea of new content, but this did not change the plight of the game, since the impression was originally spoiled. There is also Titanfall 2 in which, unlike all of the above, there was an excellent story campaign, and the multiplayer was also on top. And most importantly, they were all popular in one period, so the players had what to choose from. Okay, back to business. Now Call of Duty is out of competition, only projects are left by the type of rainbow or the same Insurgency, but few people play it now. Also, there is an unusual Escape from Tarkov, the game has a great idea, and from the point of view of gameplay it is also not bad, but quite specific. Firstly, the emphasis on realism, not everyone can like this, and secondly, the game is very raw from a technical point of view. In any case, I advise you to see a couple of reviews to make your opinion. Since fix this misunderstanding with the shooters? Well, Dice has time, in a year or two, a new buttlefield should go out, and in order not to get a Hayt wave to their address again, you need to make a few simple and seemingly obvious decisions. Firstly, make a game in a modern setting that all players have been waiting for several years. Even the authors of Call of Duty realized that everyone was tired of both the future and the past within the framework of the shooter. Secondly, they finally need to release the finished product. Take an example from the team of Vinca Zampella, the head of the Respawn studio, and not to release the game earlier than the time that the publisher could earn more money at the current time, without having reinforced for the future, otherwise the situation will be repeated from Battlefield 5.