What we think so far...truthfully

**Vreki** · 03-07-2010, 06:09 AM

Re: What we think so far...truthfully

I think this game is an incredible frustrating experience.
According to my stats I have only managed to play 2 hours online since release, and not for lack of trying.

Singeplayer is just uninteresting, I dont even want to play it when the servers are down.

I am beginning to agree with the IGN score. Multiplayer is great when it works, but the medicore SP they added to it has to drag the overall score down.

**GothicDevil** · 03-07-2010, 06:15 AM

Re: What we think so far...truthfully

I was playing sp but it died on the crack the sky mission and kept freezing, i was using sp to practise...I found just 2 servers so far in the UK they have been good and no lag, I was pissed off cause I couldn't find a server or connect to them, and I couldn't see the ping on the servers that where loaded, so hopefully they will fix this...

**TheEn|gma** · 03-07-2010, 08:23 AM

Re: What we think so far...truthfully

The SP from the first one is soooooo much better the comedy was great in the first one the style has been all but removed from this one, the story from the first one was simple but still miles better than whatever is supposed to be going on in this one.

The MP is a million times better, there have been a few growing pains over the past few days but since I got the game on Thursday I've only not been able to get on three times to play online and when I have I haven't experienced any noticeable lag really. I need a new graphics card though to crank some of the settings up

**Infernalis** · 03-07-2010, 08:37 AM

Re: What we think so far...truthfully

Frankly the mp is really nice, I like the game much more than the beta. The weapons are accurate enough with a good feeling, good maps, good balance, lot of immersion. It's not like the step between BF42/V > BF2 with the squad system, commander etc but it's a good BF.

**=MNKY=Frosty** · 03-07-2010, 08:54 AM

Re: What we think so far...truthfully

I absolutely love it, i've got about 15 hours played online (with some of my friends nearing 20) and we've all had a blast. There are a few issues (SERVER BROWSER, Knife not working when it should, other dumb stuff) but I can look past them as everything else in the game works brilliantly.

Compared to the likes of BF2 and 2142 when it comes to game issues, this has them trumped. The game itself has not real bad bugs and no real bag glitches, lets go look at BF2/2142 and see how many patches it took to get the games to a reasonably unbuggy experience.

Ofcourse, it doesn't have that BF2 feel, it doesn't have epic huge maps with 5 tanks rolling round, jets bombing flags etc but it's not a sequal to BF2, infact on the PC it's not really a sequal to anything.

/endrant.

I don't know why loads of people have been compaining about lag and not finding servers, since the only time I have experienced problems like that are when the EA Servers are down...

**MrChris_CJ** · 03-07-2010, 09:08 AM

Re: What we think so far...truthfully

I love it

close to rank 19 atm, not sure how many hours but I was on it until the early hours last night (lost track of time)

it retains a great sense of action and atmosphere while retaining good balance tbh, nothing like streaming across atacama desert or arica harbour and watching the **** hit the fan

**H4yd3n** · 03-07-2010, 09:35 AM

Re: What we think so far...truthfully

Originally posted by Vreki

I think this game is an incredible frustrating experience.
According to my stats I have only managed to play 2 hours online since release, and not for lack of trying.

Singeplayer is just uninteresting, I dont even want to play it when the servers are down.

I am beginning to agree with the IGN score. Multiplayer is great when it works, but the medicore SP they added to it has to drag the overall score down.

Odd, I'm having a completely different experience. I get into a game 95% of the time, and multiplayer is amazing. I've played the singleplayer, but I'm not much of a singleplayer type person, it's too easy and boring so I can't really comment.

**CptainCrunch** · 03-07-2010, 02:07 PM

Re: What we think so far...truthfully

My honest truth and opinion:

Single player was fun and I looked forward to moving forward in the game. I loved the comedy in it as well as the three AI soldiers actually killed people and did things to help you out. I also like the personal talk the soldiers get into if you just stand around.

The graphics and sounds are amazing and using fraps I can play the game on high with some items turned off and still get 60fps. On medium I get the same FPS, which is strange that it does not shoot up until I switch it to low.

The multiplayer games are a lot of fun. The maps are nice and I really enjoy all the game modes. I have to get used to the destructive environment as I thought I was trapped a few times and then relized I can make my own door.

I have two huge "hates" on the game:
1. The browser is utterly broken. NOTHING works on it consistantly. BIG drawback. It will be fixed, but when a game relies on multiplayer, thats a big problem.
2. The horn in Conquest. I just dont get why it has to be that loud and outright stupid.

Once the overload problems and the browser gets fixed, this game will be ACE, until then, its fun.

Crunch

**Odedge** · 03-07-2010, 02:56 PM

Re: What we think so far...truthfully

Being a long time BF 2 player, I opened myself to this new version of Battlefield. I have only played a little of the SP, which is fine for a first effort. I am not a big fan of SP anyways, so it's not an issue either way.

The Good

1. Destruction is awesome, it really changes the battlefield experience in a good way. Though in Rush, it can be more of a problem.
2. The feel of the game, while different is pretty good. I think they have really improved the infantry combat and the weapons feel better than previous games.
3. Point system (while exaggerated compared to BF 2) is more intelligent and rewards players for squad related actions and actions that help the team.
4. Map Settings and general design are pretty good.
5. Visuals are great and scalable. Sounds are done really well for the most part.

The Bad

1. The knifing/grenade system is fairly week. The ability to do either with just one button is cheap for the PC version (compared to selecting the weapon, then using it). Too many people use the knife in CQB than their main weapon.
2. Conquest maps needs to have either more maps or not be so linear. White Pass is way too linear and small for 32 players. I have had some games that seem to only last 5 minutes, which isn't good for a BF game.
3. I like how each map has a UCB as defending them in BF 2 got old quickly, since most people didn't acre to. But their implementation in BC 2 is weak. They usually only have 1 way to get out of them (in a vehicle), too many times they are too close to a flag, and it would be nice to have the option to not let enemy players go into them (don't know why DICE can't/won't do this). If one team happens to get all the flags, which can happen easier than BF 2, a constant attack on the main usually happens, which is never good for keeping players in the server.
4. Regarding the visuals, the only I don't like is how 'bright" some maps are (the desert one especially). At times it feels like a nuclear bomb jest went off. Also, on the sounds, while they are way better than BF 2, too many times they really numb the audio side of the game in a bad way. Even if this is more "realistic", I don't think it helps game play.
5. There needs to be a better way to tell people they are about to lose. I would mind if that horn was played for a few second, but not the entire time. In the time when you really need to play well, you have an extra audio distraction, which is ultimately just annoying.

The Ugly

1. The server browser is really broken at this point in time. If it's a mater of server overload, then I am sure it will be fixed soon. While it seems to have nice features (friends list is very nice to have), right now, it's an exercise in frustration and some times failure.

Overall, I really like the game and will continue to play. My only concern is the maps will tend to get old sooner, rather than later given their relative small size.

**MuaySteve** · 03-07-2010, 03:44 PM

Re: What we think so far...truthfully

The good:
No bunny hopping, no dolphin diving (fack U dolfins!) and no nade spamming.
The graphics and sound are outstanding.
Great all round playability, everything from the way the weapons handle to snow and smoke blowing across the screen blocking your shot as a sniper.

The bad: I an only connect to MP about 50% of the time. No toggle on the crouch key. The horn.

Running an e8400, ATI 4850, 4GB - High settings: 30-40 fps.

**=sds=god** · 03-07-2010, 03:47 PM

Re: What we think so far...truthfully

Hard to judge the success of the game, when you cant play it.
Once again, EA/Dice has literally shot themselves in the foot, on this release.

**Dangerdog** · 03-07-2010, 04:36 PM

Re: What we think so far...truthfully

I'd buy the single player campaign from BC1 as DLC or something on the PC, they should port it over.

The single player campaign in BC2 could have used a little more polish, I find the enemy AI to be quite dumb most of the time - they move to a scripted point on the map and just stand there a lot of the time. It could have been a little more open with the maps, there was one in the single player campaign that was quite expansive but there were too many linear levels. I did like the weapon supply crate system and the plentiful ammo throughout the campaign, hate games that give you cool weapons and then lord the ammo over you as something you have to carefully conserve.

Few too many non interactive cut scenes, especially towards the end of the game. I think it ended where the game should have been at the midway point, I know they want to milk the franchise but really wasn't a satisfying ending to the game.

Multiplayer, personally I love it when it works - both rush and conquest. I do get the feeling that the maps were really designed and balanced around 24 players and not 32, but I'm glad they raised the player cap as it makes the battles extremely frantic, have had so many down to the last second saves on Rush mode. I do wish the maps were bigger and that there were more vehicles, it's like they have all this content in the game but it's waiting to be unlocked - and maybe it is with future map expansions. If they can keep up this level of destruction and increase the scale of the game for Battlefield 3 I'll be loving every minute of it. In fact if they said Battlefield 3 was coming out next week I'd run down and pre-order it without seeing anything from the game itself.

**sithdemon** · 03-07-2010, 06:27 PM

Re: What we think so far...truthfully

The few actual gameplay aspect aside. I still want prone, I still want 64 players, I still want a attack marker I can place anywhere. ect ect. Though even in Bf2 I still want free lean or a cover system.

The engine it self is the most impressive aspect of it. It's the first game in my eyes that touches Crysis levels of graphical detail. In a number of places it seems better, some a little worse but not by much. The destruction in Crysis had more detail and realistic behavior however only certain buildings. And if I remember correctly there wasn't even much of that in multiplayer. Where even though Frosbite 1.5 isn't whole sale destruction it certainly is a good selection and one can only assume even more will be destroyable in Frostbite 2.0. Little things like the ground making holes when there is a explosion on it, for amour the most and even for infantry this is another dynamic that is present everywhere, even in just the flat desert. Tanks have to foresee them or basically hit that pot hole and totally lose your aim.

The sound I think even the most nay of nay sayers can agree it's a very believable sound engine, if not one of the most invigorating. especially the sounds in the distance really sounds proper, and actually functional to tell you things like a big old tank is over yonder.

All those things come together to make it feel like a real battlefield, like nothing I've felt before, even though I've played a few other FPSs with destruction this one works the best, and has the vehicles to really show case it properly.

**Corvic** · 03-07-2010, 09:30 PM

Re: What we think so far...truthfully

Finally back at school, so I got to play a few rounds.

I am loving every second, wishing I didn't have more homework to do...

I think the weapon damage buff from the beta is perfect, the high texture graphics are amazing. Apparently I got on a good server (used play now button) because I had perfect latency and never got dropped.

I didn't play any rush, but I found the conquest maps to be entertaining, lots of cover so you never feel vehicles are overpowered. Lots of snipers, but the cover usually makes them nothing but an occasional annoyance.

What we think so far...truthfully

What we think so far...truthfully

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment