Battlefield 3 please hurry!

[jimykx]

Re: Battlefield 3 please hurry!

Are you effing serious?

He is, you cant deny the gameplay all feels the same

[imported_0Zero]

Re: Battlefield 3 please hurry!

Well yes the gameplay is rather similar. They made some changes to the CoD series over the years but not much.

You guys seem to forget that when bf2 came out, it was a ****ty ****ty game. Yes It was popular and fun at times, but it was a poorly made game. You think bf3 is going to be any different? I mean cmon guys this is Dice we are talking about. They don't hold true to their word. Even though they say that the PC is going to get lots of support, it won't. It's going to feel like a console port for sure. They said that BC2 would not just be another console port, and guess what? IT WAS. BF1942 was probably the best game they made. This is a day and age where console FPS makes way more money than PC FPS does.

I am going to get the game for sure, but I am not getting my hopes up that much because of Dice's constant ability to disappoint. I'll probably get it for PC and PS3, but it will die on the PC quickly much like every game that is released nowadays for the PC.

[CptainCrunch]

Re: Battlefield 3 please hurry!

Well not to put a hole in your post (its more of a needle though) Battlefield Vietnam was released in 2004, Battlefield 2 in 2005 and 2142 in 2006, but then a 2 year gap between it and Bad company.

Yes, that is true and why I put years because DICE doesnt release a game every year where Activision has CoD that way. However, some would argue that CoD isnt that way either since IW and Treyarch go every other year.

I'm sorry, I can't take this joke that seriously after you follow it with this-

Are you effing serious?

He is, you cant deny the gameplay all feels the same

Yeah, in my second post, I am talking about gameplay because Red brought up the "feel" of CoD. Because she went that route, I tend to agree with her that the games are different and Battlefield has changed more than CoD has.

Though I feel that BC2 feels more like Battlefield, I think we all can agree that its not because of map design and other features.

Well yes the gameplay is rather similar. They made some changes to the CoD series over the years but not much.

You guys seem to forget that when bf2 came out, it was a ****ty ****ty game. Yes It was popular and fun at times, but it was a poorly made game. You think bf3 is going to be any different? I mean cmon guys this is Dice we are talking about. They don't hold true to their word. Even though they say that the PC is going to get lots of support, it won't. It's going to feel like a console port for sure. They said that BC2 would not just be another console port, and guess what? IT WAS. BF1942 was probably the best game they made. This is a day and age where console FPS makes way more money than PC FPS does.

I am going to get the game for sure, but I am not getting my hopes up that much because of Dice's constant ability to disappoint. I'll probably get it for PC and PS3, but it will die on the PC quickly much like every game that is released nowadays for the PC.

I agree with this to a point. The console port thing is getting blurred now and though I think BF3 will behave like BC2, its not going to be quite the same as a true port as MW2 was. All of the Battlefield games (dont know on 1942 as I wasnt playing then on release) have had some very rocky releases.

I think BF3 is going to be a great game and have the "feel" of Battlefield. Its also going to have imported features of Battlefield, Bad Company, and Call of Duty.

Crunch

[Infernalis]

Re: Battlefield 3 please hurry!

I'm playing CoD:BO on my PS3, it's more fun than BC1 was (maps too big, no feeling with weapons). Call of Duty is a good console FPS but a bad PC one.

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: Battlefield 3 please hurry!

He is, you cant deny the gameplay all feels the same

Only from a prejudiced BF fanboy standpoint. COD has gone through significant changes over the time, and while that's not what bothered me the most, throwing MW2 and MW together into the same mix, saying they are the same, is like comparing BC2 to 42 and saying they are exactly the same. You just don't do it, unless you were just mouthing off.

On one hand, we buy the game from the same franchise because there are certain qualities we are expecting. I don't support the rather stupid idea that a game has to be fundamentally difference from it's prequel. I don't want my favourite franchise to switch colours. I also like how you've cleverly hidden a small jab at BF series while singling out BF2142 for being different from the first 3. The game as crap. The "fundamental" differences are all in neutered vehicular aspect and removing everything which would even remotely be destructive to the "casual gamer". Or limited so that a casual gamer with 20 hours of EXP could take out an experienced gamer with 300 hours of EXP. What you single out as a game not bound by certain expectations an established fanbase wants, is a horrendous first step for DICE to please the vocal minority who have no idea what they are complaining about.

Which is why we have MW2 over MW. MW is a masterpiece. In every sense of the word. You do not have to be a COD fan to admire it's features, attention to every single detail, and how they've managed to create a game which pleases both groups, which WE, as TBF2 members, have seen DICE not being capable of. In public play, COD2 plays different from COD4, for example, yet it keeps the same level design, same "feel", and the massive new features it adds does not detract from the gameplay.

This is how you made a series popular back in the day. Now you carry it with hype, and make sure every vocal fanboy screams from the top of their lungs, how their favourite series will kill the other one. Without actually having any reasonable reasons.

And while both games have changed for bad more than good, throwing all modern COD games into the mix while being selective about BF games just speaks of doublestandards.

Nice stats signature, by the way, jimy.

[Yoster]

Re: Battlefield 3 please hurry!

Its true that Cod and BF are different, but CoD is also insultingly shallow, requires little to no teamwork, much less skill per kill, and much less stragedy. CoD is an FPS with ADHD.

[CptainCrunch]

Re: Battlefield 3 please hurry!

Only from a prejudiced BF fanboy standpoint. COD has gone through significant changes over the time, and while that's not what bothered me the most, throwing MW2 and MW together into the same mix, saying they are the same, is like comparing BC2 to 42 and saying they are exactly the same. You just don't do it, unless you were just mouthing off.

Well, see, thats my point as well. CoD has gone through more changes over time than Battlefield. My first post was mentioning that. However, I disagree that MW and MW2 cannot be put into the same mix. MW is the pattern all the other games went by, even the ones Treyarch created. They ripped it up pretty good in MW2, that is true, but as far as how the weapons and avatar feels, it didnt feel any different to me.

On one hand, we buy the game from the same franchise because there are certain qualities we are expecting. I don't support the rather stupid idea that a game has to be fundamentally difference from it's prequel. I don't want my favourite franchise to switch colours.

I also like how you've cleverly hidden a small jab at BF series while singling out BF2142 for being different from the first 3.
There is no clever hiddent message. 2142 is different from the other three. Its no jab, its just when the first Battlefield game took a turn from its setup of kits and classes. Nowhere in my posts did I say one Battlefield was bad over another.

The game as crap. The "fundamental" differences are all in neutered vehicular aspect and removing everything which would even remotely be destructive to the "casual gamer". Or limited so that a casual gamer with 20 hours of EXP could take out an experienced gamer with 300 hours of EXP. What you single out as a game not bound by certain expectations an established fanbase wants, is a horrendous first step for DICE to please the vocal minority who have no idea what they are complaining about.

See, its different form the others.

Which is why we have MW2 over MW. MW is a masterpiece. In every sense of the word. You do not have to be a COD fan to admire it's features, attention to every single detail, and how they've managed to create a game which pleases both groups, which WE, as TBF2 members, have seen DICE not being capable of. In public play, COD2 plays different from COD4, for example, yet it keeps the same level design, same "feel", and the massive new features it adds does not detract from the gameplay.

Sure, they are CoD games. They will have some of the same "feel", but the CoD fanbase was not entirely supportive of CoD4 because of all those changes. They felt the game "changed colours" with 4 and now that we are four titles into these changes, they were correct. It was a big change toward consolism. In fact, CoD4 had a leader board and prestige on console whereas the PC did not.

This is how you made a series popular back in the day. Now you carry it with hype, and make sure every vocal fanboy screams from the top of their lungs, how their favourite series will kill the other one. Without actually having any reasonable reasons.

Yeah, I agree with that.

And while both games have changed for bad more than good, throwing all modern COD games into the mix while being selective about BF games just speaks of doublestandards.

Im simply showing the break when things started to visibly change. Am I wrong in saying that is in 2142 and why? If 2142 wasnt it, then when was it? When were the changes made in CoD? Was it before MW? I dont believe that it was. I believe it startd at that one. The OP was about CoD all being the same, which we both proved is not the case. While Battlefield didn't start really changing until 2142.

Its true that Cod and BF are different, but CoD is also insultingly shallow, requires little to no teamwork, much less skill per kill, and much less stragedy. CoD is an FPS with ADHD.

Thats the generic script everyone touts. It is true that it requires no teamwork. Its not designed for teamwork. Less skill and less strategy? I suppose that could depend on the map and camping, but I see plenty of that in Battlefield as well. At least I dont have to rely on someone who lets me down every time I need ammo, a revive, or to destroy a vehicle.

Crunch

[failtbh]

Re: Battlefield 3 please hurry!

For me CoD is great for the SP, after that throw it on ebay because CoD's mp gets very repetitive very quickly. As for BF there's a LOT to play with in the MP, mayb that scares away CoD fans.

[CptainCrunch]

Re: Battlefield 3 please hurry!

For me CoD is great for the SP, after that throw it on ebay because CoD's mp gets very repetitive very quickly. As for BF there's a LOT to play with in the MP, mayb that scares away CoD fans.

That doesnt explain why the CoD numbers in MP are so much higher than some of the other games though.

Crunch

[Sike]

Re: Battlefield 3 please hurry!

That doesnt explain why the CoD numbers in MP are so much higher than some of the other games though.

Crunch

because every kid wants to be in with the "cool" crowd at school, so they get their parents to buy it for them

[Infernalis]

Re: Battlefield 3 please hurry!

The number of players is much higher on consoles, it's rather low on PC, Counter-Strike is still the king on PC and even though it isn't miles better than CoD at least you have to aim properly to frag.

As for why CoD is so popular it's because it's THE game for the casual crowd, very accessible and fast paced with little emphasis on teamwork. That and the heavy marketing.

[imported_0Zero]

Re: Battlefield 3 please hurry!

The number of players is much higher on consoles, it's rather low on PC, Counter-Strike is still the king on PC and even though it isn't miles better than CoD at least you have to aim properly to frag.

As for why CoD is so popular it's because it's THE game for the casual crowd, very accessible and fast paced with little emphasis on teamwork. That and the heavy marketing.

Well being low on PC is irrelevant, game makers care about consoles nowadays....that's what brings them money. This is when it comes to FPS games. WoW type games and RTS's, well that's a different story lol.

Well if that's what it takes to sell games then why not? I mean they broke records for BO sales which means that it is an extremely successful game no?

Now the only thing that could actually put bf3 on the map is if they integrated the style of play in CoD with vehicles. Since CoD is such a successful series, then it must mean that everyone likes the feel and style of the game. You don't have to completely copy the competition, but if the competition is anal raping you in game creation and sales, then you should look to integrate some of their features into your own. This is what will save bf3 if they did this. I honestly do not think they have because it's Dice 'I make buggy and hit reg problem games.' we're talking about.

[Infernalis]

Re: Battlefield 3 please hurry!

You're wrong about being low on PC, Bad Company 2 sold more on PC than Xbox360 or PS3, there's still a lot of gamers on PC.

As for why CoD is so successful I already told why above and I frankly don't want that for BF3. The only things they can take from CoD is perks and gun attachments. Hit reg and weapons feeling are already fine in BC2 and include bullet drop and travel time instead of the old hit scan system CoD has, if they make you able to climb obstacles then there's nothing left to take of CoD.

[Redink]

Re: Battlefield 3 please hurry!

because every kid wants to be in with the "cool" crowd at school, so they get their parents to buy it for them

Hehe, I totally agree with you on this Sike. I had one guy said I really love BF series but I don't play them because all my friends play COD so I put my BF in the drawer. Sad but true, abandoning great game for a mediocre one.

[CptainCrunch]

Re: Battlefield 3 please hurry!

Or abandoning one game for friendship? I would hope loyalty to friends come over loyalty to a game.

It is a good point though, if so many go to it, others would have to follow as well.

Crunch