PC gamer confirms battlefield 3?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • iQue
    Member
    • May 2007
    • 4925

    #136
    Re: PC gamer confirms battlefield 3?

    Originally posted by Hawkers
    If this thread turns into another 2142 vs. BF2 flame-war i'm going to poop intestines inside-out!!
    Ya rly

    Fine, you don't like 2142, we get it.

    Comment

    • MrChris_CJ
      Mudkips
      • Jul 2005
      • 2610

      #137
      Re: PC gamer confirms battlefield 3?

      to be fair I wouldnt mind if they did to BF3 what they did with 2142, in a sort of limited way

      but then again what Dice did with 2142 was quite lazy, they actually made effective AA, or half effective at least

      but then decided to get rid of the jets and make a chopper hybrid, toned down the missile damage ALOT and basically created a niche vehicle that only the very experience could use properly and effectively

      there are certainly still aspects of 2142 that require skill but it was certainly a hell of a lot easier to play, i think my KD for it was around 5, or over last time i checked what my stats were

      I hope they make BF3 actually challenging, if anyone here has played Stalker, then they would know that a game that isnt easy can be very enjoyable

      Comment

      • TrooperJac
        Lost in 2142
        • Nov 2006
        • 868

        #138
        Re: PC gamer confirms battlefield 3?

        I can agree with that. Personally I think the gunships are too easy to fly. They have a very arcade flight model and anyone can be up and flying within half an hour. Plus with all the IDSs and UAVs etc it's hard to get the jump on people.

        Comment

        • MrChris_CJ
          Mudkips
          • Jul 2005
          • 2610

          #139
          Re: PC gamer confirms battlefield 3?

          Indeed, theyre stupidly easy to fly, but killing stuff in them is a real challenge

          used to love picking them out of the sky in a walker

          Comment

          • TrooperJac
            Lost in 2142
            • Nov 2006
            • 868

            #140
            Re: PC gamer confirms battlefield 3?

            Taking a Gunship down with a walker is fairly easy. To really wipe the smile of his face you have to shoot him out of the sky with a tank. Now that is truly raining on somebody's parade :laugh:

            Comment

            • basra Bob

              #141
              Re: PC gamer confirms battlefield 3?

              with more recent EA published games (Bioshock, The Sims 2 expansion packs and upcoming Spore) Securom was used. so, imo, it is a high possibility that BF3 will use this if it is created.

              Comment

              • [GCA]Tim270

                #142
                Re: PC gamer confirms battlefield 3?

                Originally posted by Blud
                Give me a break, how could having no jets on Dragon hurt anyones stats other than the jet whores?
                You could still get stats using all the other vehicles, ground pounding etc. Nor would it be unbalanced--since the jets actually create many unbalanced maps already!.
                I love how you assume anyone who flys a jet its a 'jet whore' and maybe if you used your brain, unlike most bf2 players, there are also jets on your team that can shoot down the other jets, AA emplacements around the map that can bring down jets.

                Comment

                • waaah_wah
                  TEAM BLADE!
                  • Jun 2007
                  • 3656

                  #143
                  Re: PC gamer confirms battlefield 3?

                  ^^Static AA is completely useless vs jets. The worst it can do is annoying them

                  Comment

                  • b` m3ow

                    #144
                    Re: PC gamer confirms battlefield 3?

                    Originally posted by Sir. Tasty
                    I love how you assume anyone who flys a jet its a 'jet whore' and maybe if you used your brain, unlike most bf2 players, there are also jets on your team that can shoot down the other jets, AA emplacements around the map that can bring down jets.
                    AA sites in BF2 were crap, took to long to reload by then the jet could reach out of range, come down on top of you, drop a bomb or rip you with the machine gun.....

                    Comment

                    • Chris_Redfield
                      Member
                      • Oct 2006
                      • 5986

                      #145
                      Re: PC gamer confirms battlefield 3?

                      In order for someone to be good in STAs in BF2, he has to cram in some effort and gain experience. 3 sites manned can potentiall cover more than 70% of the entire map. It was close to 90% before DICE cut the lock range down from 375 to 300.

                      Comment

                      • LaikaSB
                        Member
                        • Aug 2007
                        • 316

                        #146
                        Re: PC gamer confirms battlefield 3?

                        Yeah, AA of any kind can be very effective if used intelligently. At the very least, properly utilized AA will send most pilots back to the runway.

                        Comment

                        • waaah_wah
                          TEAM BLADE!
                          • Jun 2007
                          • 3656

                          #147
                          Re: PC gamer confirms battlefield 3?

                          Originally posted by Chris_Redfield
                          In order for someone to be good in STAs in BF2, he has to cram in some effort and gain experience. 3 sites manned can potentiall cover more than 70% of the entire map. It was close to 90% before DICE cut the lock range down from 375 to 300.
                          Dont even try to say that static AA in Bf2 is an effective counter to jets.

                          Comment

                          • FPS[SONIC]
                            Member
                            • Oct 2006
                            • 2106

                            #148
                            Re: PC gamer confirms battlefield 3?

                            Yeah, AA of any kind can be very effective if used intelligently. At the very least, properly utilized AA will send most pilots back to the runway.

                            That sounds fine. However, that's not the way BF2 plays out when you've got skilled players on both teams. It's well known that AA does not stand a chance in BF2 when you've got skilled, coordinated pilots working the battlespace.


                            .

                            Comment

                            • Skaggy
                              Member
                              • Feb 2007
                              • 1974

                              #149
                              Re: PC gamer confirms battlefield 3?

                              Originally posted by Blud
                              Then the admin could disable them too. Just ground vehicles and 1 transport helo on each side. Finally a decent game could be played.
                              I wouldn't mind that actually.

                              An official "light-vehicle" mode with only jeeps and the occasional transport helo would be far better than IO.

                              Comment

                              • _S3rH3nD_
                                Member
                                • Jul 2007
                                • 187

                                #150
                                Re: PC gamer confirms battlefield 3?

                                if there will be BF3 there will be jets in it too..
                                can you imagine a "modern combat" game that has APCs Tanks AAs MAAs Boats Buggies Cars Combat Helos Transport Helos wont have jets in it?
                                then i guess people will start crying that helos are way too powered..
                                we know that 1 helo can totally rape an outpost if gunner and pilot are in cooperation and are both over average..
                                who is to kill helos then? FAVs? AAs that shoot rockets which even i can dodge with 200 hours in helos and i dont need flares but only a turn?
                                jets=modern combat
                                you cant call it a modern combat if there are no real aircrafts..
                                i wouldnt go for BF3 if there are no jets, seriously..its just my choice but why would i even bother buying BF3 when i can play COD4 inf without tank-apc-chopper whores
                                COD4 wins this part of this competition for sure so BF3 should include jets if Dice wants to keep the popularity of BF series..people love bf series because they include almost everything..not because inf..thats just loosing the taste of game..
                                i love bf2 more than cod sometimes cause there is a chance for me to use anything around me as a weapon when i am in danger..
                                cause its easier and more free to move around..yeah less realistic than cod4 but who cares? isnt it fun?it aint no HL for sure..
                                Looking forward to hearing good news about BF3 soon.

                                Comment

                                Working...