"Battlefield 2042" had some problems when it was released a few years ago: fun! That's because the game currently sits at a respectable #13 on Steam's daily player count rankings.

That's pretty good for a game that was once, to put it politely but rudely, called a complete flop.

It helps that BF2042 just had a free weekend, but that free weekend is over and the daily peak is still at 90,000 to 100,000. The biggest factor in that is the discounted price, currently $10, but whatever the reason, enthusiasm for DICE's latest massively multiplayer shooter is the highest I've seen since 2021 (if you don't include the enthusiasm of dislike).

What many thought was the new worst Battlefield is still recognizable as a game released two years ago, but its particularities and series firsts have been hammered into a more traditional form. More cover has been introduced for the vast open spaces that characterized the map at launch, class divisions have been added (but new character abilities have not been lost), and the playlists now available are not the 128-player matches that once topped Battlefield 2042's feature list, but 64 It features only two-player matches.

The set of "core feedback" changes are documented in detail and include new maps, guns, and vehicles for multiple seasons.

As for the 128-player matches, I think they will return in a future Conquest playlist, and there is a custom 128-player server in Portal mode, but I'm a little disappointed that the "64-player matches are better" lobby seems to be winning. 128 players would mean that throughout a Conquest match I had a PlanetSide 2 flashback as I was able to fight in one corner of the map with everyone else on the server in the background. The larger scale also allowed me to distinguish Battlefield 2042 from Battlefield 1. (Just as I think the problems with Battlefield 2042 were overstated when it was released, I can't blame anyone for skipping the buggy and controversial $60 multiplayer-only shooter; after playing quite a bit of "Modern Warfare 2" this week " Modern Warfare 2," it's clear that the shooter and gun-customization meta-game of "BF2042" is nowhere near as fun as "Call of Duty."

But in "Modern Warfare 2," you can't snipe someone from the top of a skyscraper, jump off that skyscraper to escape an attack helicopter, or open the magic anytime parachute on your back to snipe someone in the fall." I don't think I need to qualify or poke fun at "only in Battlefield," which is an unusual marketing slogan for a video game.

If there was room on the SSD for a goofy big shooter, even $10 would be a lot cheaper. Based on the spike patterns in player numbers, which peak in the mornings Pacific time, it seems that most of the new players are in Europe and Asia (and quite a few of the new reviews on Steam are in Chinese), but thanks to cross-play, I have no problem finding a full 64-player game anytime I look for one. There is no problem.