Being that Battlefield: Bad Company (2008) had the most radical change in the graphics engine (shifting from Refractor 2 to Frostbite) it makes sense that this was the cut off point. If a sequel uses a derivative of the predecessor's graphics engine, it would be as simple as porting the code and making small adjustments. You learn from what you have done in the past and you can create something better with less time in the future. is hard (and anything that is hard costs money) but once the framework has been created it should not be a huge undertaking to create A.I. Effort/Cost: I don't think effort and cost are the best reasons why offline bot matches have disappeared. Even though the campaign is pile of shit that no one plays and a theoretical offline multiplayer component is actually in the long run the much better value proposition because, as stated earlier, it is infinite replay value.ģ. A campaign component and a multiplayer component sounds like way more content on paper than just an online and offline multiplayer component. The less options people have, the more likely they are to keep up with the latest installment and pay more money. Shutting down servers, low player counts, and/or the online environment being filled with hackers often pushes people to buy the next game in the series. Long after the servers have been shut down you can still play these games just as they were in their hay day. Replay Value: Multiplayer games with offline bot match options have infinite replay value. Changing Conditions: Since the internet has become a staple in everyone's home, the need for offline substitutes has faded.Ģ. Why they bothered wasting their time and money making shitty campaigns instead is beyond me. So why are we talking about Battlefield 2 if there are so many newer Battlefield games out there? Unfortunately DICE/EA decided to remove singleplayer matches with bots from all of their future games (the last game to have bot support was Battlefield 2142 which was released in 2006).
0 kommentar(er)
