BF2 or 2142? that is the question....

[jakeostapes]

So which is the best?

in everyones opinion does 2142 top the legacy of the battlefield?
i personally think it is shocking.
in everysense,

gameplay
weapons
vehicles
dodgymenus
dodgyrunningspeed
mechanical dogs walking on two feet
shocking accuracy rate, where are my bullets going?
and not too mentioned its still got loads of bugs.
admited i know it has better stat system, no nading etc etc blah blah. but has it all made it a better game?
i think its a little immature looking and really quite uninteresting.



any veiws on it?
post here

[hebrewhammer14]

Re: BF2 or 2142? that is the question....

bf2 is definitly better than 2142, if EA would release a patch for bf2 that would optimize bf2 like 2142 (kind of) (for example, a somewhat better server browser, hit detection(need i say more) and verifying client data time etc) is that would be nice, but it wont happen.

[7man]

Re: BF2 or 2142? that is the question....

BF2 is better although I have not played 2142 BF2 is way better since from what I have heard is that BF2142 is a bit glitchy

[Raidyr]

Re: BF2 or 2142? that is the question....

Most of the people here havent even played the full game. Plus, its the BF2 forum, kinda biased :\

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: BF2 or 2142? that is the question....

Played the second Beta, Demo and a little of the full. Its very restricted, plays like a failed tactical simulator (literally, failed and farked up), has no direction, no "personality", looks bland, and bores you quicker than BF2 would. terrain and maps look as if the main battles are supposed to be around flags/silos, whereas in BF2 a battle between 2 squads can take place between any spot between flags.

Air is a joke, yet anti air is powerful as hell. Vehicles are unoriginal, without purpose. Weapons are sometimes hilarious, like on the European side, the assault rifle has these sparkling, radar-looking thingies on the side, which have no use but to tell you that its "teh futur!!".

Weapons are pisspoor, but they at least sound better, really much better than BF2 airsoft guns do. Pisspoor weapon perfomance is balanced with incredibly restricted and uncomfortable movement. Even tactical simulators feel fluid and comfortable with the only downside being slow. BF2142 feels as if your soldier is packed with the Russian cold suit, armor plates and 2 sizes smaller boots (watch Armageddon to see the Russian cold suit, Russians find it rather hilarious).

There are a couple of really interesting concepts like hover/jet mode for the aircrafts, walkers as a whole, rifle attachments. EMP system, and skill based STA (except for EMP missiles of course).

But every good thing in the game is overshadowed with lack of imagination, some farked up stupid thing or plain unfunctionability.

Jets are a joke on the battlefield, Walkers have stupid "rockets" that bounce out like flashing ping pong balls, APCs are basically just for "getting there", and not really any troop support (Imagine a schoolbus with a SAW on it). And weapons, well, DICE thinks that a rifle with only technological gadget, as the illumino sights, should be 3 times bigger than your standard M4... with flashy odd sh!t on it.

Personally, I am not afraid to confess, I was looking forward to the game, hardcore. I imagined that DICE would pull off a game that was worth the anticipation. I mean, if you have a future Battlefield game, you could at least use some imagination and actually create a game where everything fits together and feels as if it belongs there. Even Quake, Doom, Dune, all non-todays games, set in future or alternate world, have all units fitting together to form a nice setup.

BF2142, DICE, just slammed together a BF2 mod with futuristic looks and here you have it. Even the net bat is a shameful copy from GRAW.

[imported_Nefarious]

Re: BF2 or 2142? that is the question....

That question is up for you to decide. Download the Demos and see which one you like. I personally, have enjoyed my BF2142 experience way more the my BF2 experience. The load times for maps in BF2142 are extremely quick; cut in half compared to its predecessor. CTDs are almost non-existent for me as well as other bugs. The unlocks are just awesome, so many to unlock and they add so much to good old fashion, raw infantry warfare. Everything is somewhat balanced (except for air power), infanfry have a much easier time taking out vehicles, with such things as motion-mines, the Pilum and the SAAW Anti-Air launcher.

But of course thats just my experience others have endored through many problems. How about expanding your question, like BF2 or BF2142 or Half-life 2?:p

[TOAO_VTEC]

Re: BF2 or 2142? that is the question....

I feel the game (2142) meshes together well. That is, of course, based only on my experiences.

I should add that my first couple days playing 2142 were abysmal. I actually stopped for an entire week and went back to BF2, only to decide I hadn't given 2142 a fair shot the first time. After that I was hooked.

APC's, I might also add, are obscenely overpowered on infantry maps like Fall of Berlin. They're more of a threat than the Walkers. The first gunner seat (not the driver) has a grenade launcher with huge range that sends three volleys that have huge spalsh damage. It's not uncommon to wipe out 5 guys with one volley.

[scott123]

Re: BF2 or 2142? that is the question....

The best way to put it is like this:

I couldn't stop playing the BF2 demo when it was released. I purchased the retail BF2 and 800+ hours later I still play BF2 as much as always.

When the 2142 demo came out I was also excited....until I played it. I tried 3 times to enjoy the demo but (IMO) it just SUCKED.

Never bought 2142, and I will never be interested in 2142.

[Guest]

Re: BF2 or 2142? that is the question....

omfg Bf2 Pwnzors Cheap Pieces Of Futuristic Crap

[Raidyr]

Re: BF2 or 2142? that is the question....

Jesus ****ing Christ, is it so hard to like both games, and play both games equally?

Off Topic: Half Life 2 > all, I <3 the Source engine.

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: BF2 or 2142? that is the question....

I gave BF2142 about 30 hours on beta, 10 hours on Demo, and about 5 hours on the retail version. Take or leave 5, its about 40-50 hours, and thats enough. I wasnt impressed, at all.

APCs are "overpowered" only to those who said jets were overpowered in BF2. All you need to do is engage from distance, or exploit its blind spots. Smart players prevail, always.

It doesnt mesh together, which is what many people have noticed.

In BF2, DICE used the true and tested army setup, and it blended in perfectly. It worked not because DICE were smart, it worked perfectly because DICE used proven methods.

In BF2142, DICE used the same army setupd, but with mild modifications. But it doesnt work. The vehicles have no actual role on the field. They are force multipliers, yes, but if you apply BF2142 to real world, you will quickly notice that it just isnt working. Its hard to explain, I hope this gets through. Its as if DICE set up a parking lot of random vehicles, that "supposedly" have a role, but are really just "bigger, faster, more powerful", instead of being specialized to certain area.

APC in BF2, troop supression, troop transport, semi-offensive vehicle with tools to defend against a bigger threat.
APC in BF2142 is nothing but a schoolbus with a mounted machine gun. It has its special uses in Titan mode, but it just doesnt fit into the futuristic battlefield.

Tanks are the second issue, tank in real life is a stalemate breaker, close support, troop supression vehicle, that has a wide array of different purposes. In BF2142 tanks are anti-vehicle weaponry. Some say that the mounted machine gun being the only one is a great teamwork addition, but with only 32 players being on one team, Id say its a waste, a horrible waste. From what I noticed, tanks were there mainly to take out Walkers. I dont really have much problems with Tanks roles as anti-vehicular, as its armor is weak, but it has a great zoom mode for distant shots and all, but in order to get the same formula that BF2 had, you have to use a tank and an APC together, for true flag capping support, which again, is a horrible waste because theres only 32 players per team.

An army consists of certain elements, that you can identify and quickly tell their purpose, even if youre not really educated in military tactics. Its common sense. If you look at BF2142, youll notice that the vehicles dont really form a system.

Air vehicles cant give adequate air support, armor doesnt quite do troop supression. But they got Walkers right, I give them that. Walkers fit right in, as anti-infantry vehicles. If it was up to me, I would strip them from anti vehicle missiles (which still look and fly like silly pingpong balls, why not FFARs?!) to make them into pure but solid anti-infantry vehicles.

I know it doesnt make much sense, but thats an obvious hint that DICE didnt really know what they were doing. Im sure players have all found the best use for all weapons and vehicles, which is why many, many servers ban for Jihad Jeeping, for example. But that doesnt mean that its fitted together seamlessly.

If you have a futuristic setting, and you have no boundaries except your imagination, you could have created something a lot better, original and different. You dont have to use BF formula if youre 2142 into future. Electromagnetic impulse, why not go sonic shock weaponry? Microwave weaponry, miniature tactical nukes as artillery, advanced anti rocket defensive systems a´la Russian SHTORA, troop carrier miniguns for support class, exosceletons, radars, bigass explosions and shrapnel, signal flares, in vehicle VOIP comm, mounted miniguns, jetpacks (LOL), stimpacks, flamethrohwers, bunkers, I could go on and on, if you lack ideas, gameworld is full of them. Tanks turning into artillery sites (a´la StarCraft), hovercrafts that handle like jets or like choppers/current hovercrafts with just a push of the key at proper air speed.

Instead, there are 4-to-8 classes, which are exactly the same, weve got a jeep, an APC and a tank, with an addition of a walker. And a hybrid thingy, which Colin Clarke said he couldnt fly, I can only imagine how he flew a chopper in BF2...

[Raidyr]

Re: BF2 or 2142? that is the question....

Um, I have proved almost all your points wrong in the actual game. Tank shells have tons of splash damage, and APCs in real life are made to get troops from A-to-B without taking out tanks and walkers. They only have weaponry to SUPPORT infantry who should be carrying anti-tank tools.

Also, I would rather have 8 classes that are a little bit similar then 3 classes in BF2.

Sniper
Support
Medic

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: BF2 or 2142? that is the question....

Um, I have proved almost all your points wrong in the actual game. Tank shells have tons of splash damage, and APCs in real life are made to get troops from A-to-B without taking out tanks and walkers. They only have weaponry to SUPPORT infantry who should be carrying anti-tank tools.

In real life variations of APCs carry anti vehicular or antibunker weaponry aswell, and their troop supression weaponry actually does give them superiority in firepower.

BF2 APC does that, BF2142 APC has a mounted machine gun for direct hits and high ROF, which is basically like a SAW on BF2s boat. It doesnt pose a significant threat, especially when youre at longer range, dumbfire your rockets, or use the Pilum. At close range, simply jump beside the wheels and think for a quick way out. So BF2142 APC gives you just enough support to hit stupid infantry, or encounter smart infantry and make you just bail a little longer.

Also, I would rather have 8 classes that are a little bit similar then 3 classes in BF2.

Sniper
Support
Medic

[/quote]

LOL... yet

Medic
Support
Sniper/Recon

are the most popular kits in BF2142. Because most people equip their Assault class with the defibs, which makes them a Medic. As a default the class is a medic anyway.

The fact that you think youve proven me wrong in practice doesnt mean much. Im talking about parts of the game not fitting together to make one blended, seamless fluid picture.

As for the tanks, if I gun on the mounted turret, I kill more infantry than the guy does with the cannon. If you need 2 guys to make a formidable anti-infantry vehicle, out of 32, that is a little odd. If a tank would really be a powerful weapon, feared as it was rolling in, I wouldnt mind it taking 2 people to operate. But it isnt a powerful weapon.

[Raidyr]

Re: BF2 or 2142? that is the question....

If you can take out Walkers with ease yet have issues against infantry with a tank, something is very wrong.

And about the classes, atleast there is more variation, aka I dont see half the snipers camping a single roof while the other half are bunnyhopping, spamming claymores.

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: BF2 or 2142? that is the question....

If you can take out Walkers with ease yet have issues against infantry with a tank, something is very wrong.

But thats how it works in BF2142. I wouldnt mind if tanks were purely an anti-vehicular force, but they should have more firepower then, at the expense of splash damage, and they should make the tank into a vehicle hunter. Fast, mobile, accurate, make it into something different. Yet it looks like your standard real life tank, yet doesnt perform the way a real life standard tank would.

And about the classes, atleast there is more variation, aka I dont see half the snipers camping a single roof while the other half are bunnyhopping, spamming claymores.

Blame DICE for that. I didnt say BF2 was perfect, its still one ****ed up game.