Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

[jake_]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

I wouldn't complain at all if they use a lot of the physics as in Mirrors Edge... running, jumping, rolling, hoping over things, sliding under things, etc.

[jimykx]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

I wouldn't complain at all if they use a lot of the physics as in Mirrors Edge... running, jumping, rolling, hoping over things, sliding under things, etc.

...Prone, dolphin diving....

[Rambo]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

Geee and i thought my posts stirs up the community:laugh:

[jake_]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

...Prone, dolphin diving....

There is no prone in Mirror's Edge. So no dolphin diving. Have you played the whole game? While running at a decent speed you can cause your avatar to slide under objects or jump over them without losing much momentum (jumping loses less than sliding). If they implemented similar physics in a BF game it would be impossible to fire while do so or at least you would lose as much accuracy as when jumping in any other context.

Geee and i thought my posts stirs up the community:laugh:

Oh psh, I've caused more trouble than you, believe it or not.

[Lordsethonan]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

I still remember to see a post here saying that maybe future dice bf games might have some Mirrors edge moves.

Do you know when you are falling down a building in mirrors edge and your screen kynda shakes to the sides??? DId it happened to you to spawn has an atacker without the parashute deployed and fall like a rock???? When ur falling the screen shakes pretty like the same way it did in mirrors edge :P

They actually said they were looking forward to trying to implement some mirror's edge moves into battlefield; not that they would.

It would be interesting to see nevertheless.

[otherside]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

We have:
*Cavemen who thinks gaming peaked with pong
*Dramaqueens and their I quit/cancel/commit harakiri threads
*Rabid fanboys that treat the game like a religion
*L337 pilots who think everybody else are just targets in their personal flightsim

But I dont see much of the entitlement you are talking about, at least not here on TGN.
Its not entitlement to state how you wish the game should be different, it first becomes that when you demand that they follow your wishes.

Tru


LMAO

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

There are two things wrong with your point of view. Firstly, I didn't say we should "bend over and take it like they intended it to be taken." It's perfectly find to complain about legitimate issue. The fact that this game isn't BF2 isn't a legitimate issue. Secondly, guess what: BC2 is to sell well even though a handful of BF2 fanboys are heartbroken that it isn't a port of BF2. The "veteran fanbase" that is upset with BC2 is a minority.

Youre bashing BF2 fans to prove a point. I already mentioned that the idea that this has something to do with the game not being BF2 is wrong. The veteran fanbase expects an evolution [sic!] over a previous title, and not just in technological terms. The fact that this game is not BF2 is a legitimate issue if you stop overly simplifying the problem by adding an insult to it. Its a console port with fewer gameplay elements in it. Its less of a Battlefield game than Battlefield used to be. And we cant class it under "experimental sidequests" like BFH and BF1943 either, because its being marketed as a fullblown Battlefield experience. To the PC crowd aswell. You expect people to trust the developer to know whats best while theyve proven to not to know. You also expect millions of Battlefield franchise followers to shut up. Last time they were catered to, was in 2005 (ignoring the 1.5 patch), minority moved on in 2007. What youre forgetting is that some of us see this as a beginning of the end for any potential for mindblowing experience BF2 was. Its time for clunky movement, neutered weapons and catering to the vocal minority who spent their time on the forums crying about statpadding and asking for stat reset.

Try applying this logic to a musician. Take Bob Dylan for example; he became famous early on as a folk singer. When he, being a creative musician and following his passion, turned "electric." Many in his folk fanboy base who "made him who he was" booed him or just got up and walked out of concerts because that wasn't the Bob Dylan they wanted to hear. They wanted to hear the same thing, no change.

This isnt a change were talking about, its a radical departure from your established style while trying to drag your fanbase along. Some of the silliest excuses Ive come across are constantly putting people down for "not being able to accept the changes". Theres is evolution and revolution. BFBC2 is not an evolution. If you want to appeal to your existing fanbase, you have to give them what they want. Note how people had no problem with BF1943 or BC. What separates these three games from each other. Where was Bob Dylan then?

[EDIT] You people werent part of the Resident Evil community when RE4 came out. It was a more radical departure from established (9 years old) concepts which proved to be financially a successful move. And people were using the exact same arguments then. Except that at the same time, it was competing with MGS franchise, which made gradual, evolutionary changes over the time, keeping the game modern, fun for newcomers without compromising the existing fanbase. BF franchise used to be very similar until BF2142.

[Kylee!]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

Well that's just going to start a whole new argument on how BC2 is such a degraded experience. Honestly, I really don't think so. BF2 was a clunky game at points... you have to admit that, not to mention it's share of bugs and inadequacies. Sure it was "epic," but I don't see any J-10 rape, white dust, insta prone spamming, or grenade spam in BC2.

Chris I'm assuming you've seen the speculations of what BF3 will be like righto? Maybe you should look to that for guidance, oh and you're also saying how BC2 is being marketed as a "all out battlefield experience." That's a pretty vague term, and could mean many different things... it appears that you may be grasping at straws because I don't even see what the reason in arguing your point is.

[Rambo]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

I think his views are spot on!,no one is wrong in this thread IMO and we knew this could be a hot debate! old skool vs evolution

[Kylee!]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

I think his views are spot on!,no one is wrong in this thread IMO and we knew this could be a hot debate! old skool vs evolution

Dude, no BF post-modernism please. That's no fun...

[jake_]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

*sigh* It's always more difficult argument when Chris gets involved.

From what I've heard from a few good, real-life, friends that played both a lot of BF2 and BF2142, BF2142 was a major improvement over BF2 without departing too much. That's the impression that I've received from people who enjoyed BF2142 on these forums, and from what I've heard about BF2 as well. Yet the game was nearly as well received as BF2. Yes, it was a futuristic setting and had a different feel, but I've always thought it was an excellent game. Why didn't the BF2 fanbase accept it?

You also pointed out that no one had a problem with BC1 1943. BC1 was only a console game and 1943 hasn't been released yet for PC, so I assume that's largely why they didn't have a problem with them. BC2 isn't being marketed as a successor to BF2. If it was, it wouldn't be named as a sequel to BC2. I don't think we should expect a game similar to BF2 when this isn't a direct sequel. BF3 is a long ways a way; there is no way we can make any decisions about it yet.

Furthermore, I don't think the developer necessarily knows best and I do think it's good for the community to say what they do and don't like. However, if you don't like a game, don't buy it. If a significant number of people don't buy BC2, DICE will get the message that it isn't what people want. However, DICE is entitled to make whatever game they want. I don't think the BF2 fanbase deserves anything more from BC2 than what it is.

Lastly, you're perceptions about the quality of BC2 and whether it's a step forward or a step back are purely subjective, as are all opinions on the final quality of the game. There is no universal truth since we don't all like the same things (and what kind of world would that be anyway?). Ultimately, if you don't like the direction DICE went with the game, you won't be able to change that. Yes, small details can be changed as can bugs and other issues, but DICE won't completely overhaul the game no matter how much part of the community dislikes it, especially if a larger part of the community enjoys the game. Plus, what if DICE develops a new fanbase around a different style of game?


edit: I realize I have been overly abrasive in this thread. I do apologize (somewhat) for that, but I do have my opinions. :)

[Nicfurious29]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

I don't understand your logic here Chris. I mean, I would understand peoples complaints about what's lacking in BC2 if it wasn't a SEQUEL. Seriously, what did you expect from this title? And I also want to know where you read or heard Dice promoting BC2 as a "full blown Battlefield experience". Especially since they've always stated that the BC series is a departure from the regular BF franchise. They've been stating the same thing since BC1.

So Dice decided to give the PC community a chance to experience what BC has to offer. I don't see the problem in this. Would you prefer the pc community be left out all together until BF3?

Ever since Dice started producing BF games for the consoles, the experience and features has always been lacking compared to the PC. No one seemed to have a problem with this when BF2 Modern Combat was introduced to the consoles.


What I'm trying to get at here is that we are being given an opportunity to play the sequel to a game that started on the console. A game that from the beginning was marketed as new approach to the BF franchise. Why would anyone get upset over the lack of anything short of a "full blown BF experience", from a product that from the beginning was never intended to be that. I cannot stress enough that this is a SEQUEL. Save the "lack of arguments" for BF2's true successor, BF3.

Edit....I made this post the same time as Jake. I didnt mean to repeat some of the points he already made. We obviously see eye to eye on this subject.

[Lordsethonan]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

I'll have to side with Jake on this one; 2142 was one hell of a game the "elite" never gave a chance, even tough it's well above technically from BF2; just because it's not BF2. Not without its flaws either; but most of them come from a new type of match; and from the limitations of the graphical engine.

[Minmaster]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

2142 rocks... only the hardcore BF2 players didn't take it seriously because they couldn't pwn in the jets and go 100-0 or cried when they couldn't make insta prone kills. i do understand where they're coming from as 2142 is a much more noob friendly and less punishing/unforgiving than BF2.
anyways, i thought most BF2'ers who boycotted 2142 were the ones who were upset that DICE was releasing a new BF game without totally fixing BF2 to their liking, not so much because 2142 was a horrible game. i think even that boycott sorta worked because DICE didn't release a new PC BF game for a while, and to most, a true BF followup has not happened yet.

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: Sense of Entitlement on these Forums...

Well that's just going to start a whole new argument on how BC2 is such a degraded experience. Honestly, I really don't think so. BF2 was a clunky game at points... you have to admit that, not to mention it's share of bugs and inadequacies. Sure it was "epic," but I don't see any J-10 rape, white dust, insta prone spamming, or grenade spam in BC2.

BF2 became extremely clunky when infantry players massive avalanche of complaints coupled with DICE not being objective with the wishes. If you compare BF2 v1.0 to v1.5, the game is unrecognizable. What used to be free and unrestricted infantry combat has turned into a collection of various delays. BF2142 went even worse, where the player literally felt like he was stuck in the mud. The air balance? Time after time, thread after thread people came up with viable solutions, raging from obvious to extreme. I never get tired of mentioning POE2, where you have 6+ fundamentally different jets, yet all well balanced compared to each other, while not overpowering when it comes to the ground. I dont want J10 rape, but I dont want BF2142 either. Thats two extremes which shouldnt exist.

Chris I'm assuming you've seen the speculations of what BF3 will be like righto? Maybe you should look to that for guidance, oh and you're also saying how BC2 is being marketed as a "all out battlefield experience." That's a pretty vague term, and could mean many different things... it appears that you may be grasping at straws because I don't even see what the reason in arguing your point is.

Gordon Van Dyke disagrees with you claiming that its "vague". Im not grasping at anything. I am however disagreeing with the idea that Battlefield players should STFU and not expect to be catered to. Basically to "bend over and adjust to the "change"". Its not like people are burning down houses and lighting cars on fire. They just dont like their expectations not being met. Again.

From what I've heard from a few good, real-life, friends that played both a lot of BF2 and BF2142, BF2142 was a major improvement over BF2 without departing too much.

Were your friends playing 24/7 Karkand maps? I bet they never really bothered playing the game past the infantry aspect. The only improvement BF2142 had over BF2 was vehicular/infantry balance. But balance came with neutering the vehicular platforms. It became a much more fun experience to those who couldnt enjoy BF2 large maps because of air power. Those players also never picked an AT kit when **** hit the fan in Karkand either. You name one vehicular aspect in BF2142 and Ill tell you whats wrong with it. Calling it an improvement is just silly. I have to repeat myself just in case- I was looking forward to BF2142. I was even glad DICE created the "carrot on a stick" method for the scorechasing lemmings. But creative freedom which comes with a sci-fi setting was unfortunately severely underused.

That's the impression that I've received from people who enjoyed BF2142 on these forums, and from what I've heard about BF2 as well. Yet the game was nearly as well received as BF2.

Yet there was always a bigger crowd in BF2 (forums and servers). BF2142 had over a thousand servers when it first came out, and they quickly disappeared after the retail game came out. BF2 had demo servers up in hundreds even 2 years after the game was released. Apart from the serious air-to-ground inbalance, the bugs and random cone of fire, the game still felt epic, every aspect so deep that it took hundreds of hours to master them, each. Now, the issue here is that BF2142 was painfully similar to BF2, becoming an underwhelming experience once you started noticing that the tanks were just bigger BF2 tanks will less options. APC-s didnt have cannons and the "jets" were a retarded mix of both jets and choppers, just didnt have any teeth.

Im sure the game was great to those who played infantry. Slow, sluggish, very methodical and simplistic.

Yes, it was a futuristic setting and had a different feel, but I've always thought it was an excellent game. Why didn't the BF2 fanbase accept it?

Take it this way. The extremely "hardcore" part of the community which thought "sci is gay" was universally laughed at. Yet you dont see almost a single BF2 vehicle veteran from TGN moving on. You think its because they "couldnt adapt" or because the vehicular aspect simply sucked and the game was underwhelming?

You also pointed out that no one had a problem with BC1 1943. BC1 was only a console game and 1943 hasn't been released yet for PC, so I assume that's largely why they didn't have a problem with them.

BF1943 has been advertised as "BF lite" and BC1 has always been heavily advertised as a "non main BF title". Theres a major difference between how those two and BF2 are presented.

BC2 isn't being marketed as a successor to BF2.

Its being marketed as a full and authentic BF experience, which makes it a BF2 and/or BF2142 successor. See link below.

Furthermore, I don't think the developer necessarily knows best and I do think it's good for the community to say what they do and don't like. However, if you don't like a game, don't buy it. If a significant number of people don't buy BC2, DICE will get the message that it isn't what people want.

Are you serious? I assume you were on a vacation on Mars during the past couple of months.

However, DICE is entitled to make whatever game they want. I don't think the BF2 fanbase deserves anything more from BC2 than what it is.

Well, I think they do. Because theyve been pouring their cash into the games, because the game promises to be a Battlefield game at heart and because theyve been capitalizing off IW-s IWnet controversy by directly challenging it in front of the PC gaming audience. Its not like they have to deliver a remake of BF2. But its expected of them to deliver an all-aspect arcade combat game.

Lastly, you're perceptions about the quality of BC2 and whether it's a step forward or a step back are purely subjective, as are all opinions on the final quality of the game. There is no universal truth since we don't all like the same things (and what kind of world would that be anyway?).

Actually, there is universal truth. Your argument is exactly the same as those supporting Ubisoft with Rainbow Six Vegas and their radical departure from the tactical realistic sim formula. You believe people arent entitled to getting their expectations fulfilled. But were not talking about "people". Youre singlehandedly discarding the whole fanbase only because youve only liked one aspect of the franchise to begin with. I find this unacceptable. Its kind of like the console community enabling IW, when IW ignored the PC community.

Who cares if they wont change the game anymore. That has never been an issue. Its the continuation of a certain troubling trend, not an isolated incident of fanrage over a specific game.

Nicfurious, Ill get to you when I get around to it. Meanwhile, check this interview, start from around 5th minute mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DnbzBMVUy8