Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BF2 is much better, period.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Re: BF2 is much better, period.

    This thread has rage

    BF3 suxs,bite me.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: BF2 is much better, period.

      Oh Lord another one of these 'BF3 sux' threads.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: BF2 is much better, period.

        PC gaming is an expensive hobby, much more expensive than consoles but much more rewarding. I would expect BF3 to have sold less than 1m on pc and probably over 3m on xbox 360 and just above 2.5m on ps3.

        Game sales for new games that stress current technology are usually pretty low on the PC. I doubt anything changed for BF3 or even the new COD. BF3 taking a more powerful system it probably had less sales on the PC.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: BF2 is much better, period.

          Originally posted by Eagle101
          Oh Lord another one of these 'BF3 sux' threads.
          Yeah, but its by the same people. No matter where you go its the same ones.
          Twitter: @CptainCrunch
          Battlelog/Origin: CptainCrunch

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: BF2 is much better, period.

            Originally posted by LunaTiK TunaLiK
            Game sales for new games that stress current technology are usually pretty low on the PC. I doubt anything changed for BF3 or even the new COD. BF3 taking a more powerful system it probably had less sales on the PC.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: BF2 is much better, period.

              Have to agree with op...bf3 is some dissapointment...although young and is poised to become better as it ages...

              My main gripe is the overwhelming "console feel" and lack of cognitive gameplay.

              ...but the graphics are nice............duh



              I actually asked for a refund but EA says they don't issue refunds on digital d/l's.

              Teach me a lesson for next time

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: BF2 is much better, period.

                Has anyone ever got a refund from a PC game, in any format, after release?
                Twitter: @CptainCrunch
                Battlelog/Origin: CptainCrunch

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: BF2 is much better, period.

                  I think it comes down to whether you have played it or not, used vs. unused.

                  If you have already used it then they are not obligated to allow you to return it unless it was broken from the beginning..................................hmmmmmm mmmm!!!!!!!

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: BF2 is much better, period.

                    That broken argument has been used for years and has never worked. Im talking about installed the game and then demanded refund because you were unhappy for ANY reason. Has anyone ever got a refund?

                    I dont recall anyone ever getting a refund.
                    Twitter: @CptainCrunch
                    Battlelog/Origin: CptainCrunch

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: BF2 is much better, period.

                      I was offered a refund on Spore, but that was because the online part is broken

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: BF2 is much better, period.

                        Not following the track of this thread but anyway, IMO:

                        1942 = Good
                        BFV = Win!!
                        BF2 = Good
                        2142 = Win!!
                        BF3 = Good so far
                        BF4 = Win?

                        I dont know why but I always prefer the follow up game.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: BF2 is much better, period.

                          Elder hit the nail on the head. Most of you have short memories, or didn't play BF2 enough to remember it's load of problems, even in its current form.

                          Should I list them?

                          J10 vs anything else - J10 was awfully OP and it was almost like having a cheat, in the right hands. I'm not sure if this is an issue in BF3, as I hardly every fly.

                          Even BF2 maps were linear - On most maps everything was either north/south or east/west. Yea, they were a bit bigger, but after while, you found your that the bulk of the traffic all flowed the same way. There were a few non linear ones like Shanghai Stalemate, or Sharqi. But most of them were so linear, they could be owned by the bombers. In just about every map, you could clearly see DiCE's thinking in designing the map, and how they wanted the flow of traffic to go. I prefer a more free flow approach, where attacks can come from any direction. This is still a problem in BF3.

                          Indestructible environment - The damn trees with their cast iron leaves would annihilate a chopper that was moving at 5mph. And the super light poles that would stop a 60ton tank in its tracks. Or commanders that would hide in the back of an indestructible bunker that arty, or jet bombs or TV missiles couldn't help. BF3 has fixed this with the Frostbite engine.

                          The fog of war in BF2 - This was implemented mainly to let sub par computers be able to play. you couldn't see farther than a few blocks in most maps. BF3 has fixed this...

                          Relentless uncap raping - In certain maps, like Dragon Valley, the uncap could get totally owned if the other team had all the flags. BF3 has fixed this by extending the boundary far away from the uncap. Sure, on BF3 64player urban maps, this is still an issue, but on the larger (laugh) maps, its been fixed.

                          TV Missiles far to OP - The TV missile was far too overpowered. It could destroy anything from 450m away. There was a guy, on this forum, who released a video on how to seat switch and get 30-40 kills per round. Before you know it, there were hundreds of copy cat seat switchers that turned the attack choppers into flying 1 man death machines. AA was virtually useless to them, because IGLA's and Tungsta's didn't lock on until the chopper was around 300-350m away. But a chopper pilot, on the liner maps like DV, knew where the AA was and could seat switch and nail it from 450m away. BF3 has at least eliminated seat switching, although I hear the TV missile is a complete fail in BF3.

                          I personally think BF3 has fixed a lot of BF2's issues. Sure, BF3 has a long way to go, but BF2 was by no means a perfect game. It had, and still does, A LOT OF ISSUES.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: BF2 is much better, period.

                            IMHO, BF3 is still a baby, give it time to grow! I remember Homefront, i had issues with multiplayer as well as Black Ops but after several patches the multiplayer was great in that i spent near or over 100 hours on both games, money well spent. BF3 is the same thing, give me any other game which did not have a track of patches to make it better. Honestly BF3 is an awesome piece of art, and if you will excuse i just came back from uni and i believe its time for me to start pwning and people calling me a hacker for no apparent reason.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: BF2 is much better, period.

                              Originally posted by John Carr
                              but on the larger (laugh) maps, its been fixed.
                              lol that line says it all m8 i don't need to read any more, as for fog in bf2 in dragon valley it was bad all the other maps apart from the ones that were meant to have fog in them were good, hell dragon vally even with the fog was amazing! fog isn't and wasnt as bad as your making it out to be, bf2 pw's bf3 for a game that is 7 years old, the fun factor is missing from bf3 and imo bf3 is not issue free etheir (i am not saying you said it wasn't just making a point) rubber banding and stupid lock on animation kills like the knife which all be it look cool in game suxx! the list goes on and on but this bring me back to why i like bf2 better than bf3, its the game engine. i don't like frostbite sure the graphics are cool but the gameplay suxx.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: BF2 is much better, period.

                                Originally posted by John Carr
                                Elder hit the nail on the head. Most of you have short memories, or didn't play BF2 enough to remember it's load of problems, even in its current form.

                                Should I list them?

                                J10 vs anything else - J10 was awfully OP and it was almost like having a cheat, in the right hands. I'm not sure if this is an issue in BF3, as I hardly every fly.

                                Even BF2 maps were linear - On most maps everything was either north/south or east/west. Yea, they were a bit bigger, but after while, you found your that the bulk of the traffic all flowed the same way. There were a few non linear ones like Shanghai Stalemate, or Sharqi. But most of them were so linear, they could be owned by the bombers. In just about every map, you could clearly see DiCE's thinking in designing the map, and how they wanted the flow of traffic to go. I prefer a more free flow approach, where attacks can come from any direction. This is still a problem in BF3.

                                Indestructible environment - The damn trees with their cast iron leaves would annihilate a chopper that was moving at 5mph. And the super light poles that would stop a 60ton tank in its tracks. Or commanders that would hide in the back of an indestructible bunker that arty, or jet bombs or TV missiles couldn't help. BF3 has fixed this with the Frostbite engine.

                                The fog of war in BF2 - This was implemented mainly to let sub par computers be able to play. you couldn't see farther than a few blocks in most maps. BF3 has fixed this...

                                Relentless uncap raping - In certain maps, like Dragon Valley, the uncap could get totally owned if the other team had all the flags. BF3 has fixed this by extending the boundary far away from the uncap. Sure, on BF3 64player urban maps, this is still an issue, but on the larger (laugh) maps, its been fixed.

                                TV Missiles far to OP - The TV missile was far too overpowered. It could destroy anything from 450m away. There was a guy, on this forum, who released a video on how to seat switch and get 30-40 kills per round. Before you know it, there were hundreds of copy cat seat switchers that turned the attack choppers into flying 1 man death machines. AA was virtually useless to them, because IGLA's and Tungsta's didn't lock on until the chopper was around 300-350m away. But a chopper pilot, on the liner maps like DV, knew where the AA was and could seat switch and nail it from 450m away. BF3 has at least eliminated seat switching, although I hear the TV missile is a complete fail in BF3.

                                I personally think BF3 has fixed a lot of BF2's issues. Sure, BF3 has a long way to go, but BF2 was by no means a perfect game. It had, and still does, A LOT OF ISSUES.
                                I'm sorry, but BF2 didn't have linear maps. Not the 64 or 32 sizes at least. Remember Mashtuur City? Or Strike at Karkand? Or Gulf of Oman? Dragon Valley? Sharqi? I mean come on! That was one thing BF2 did great, map design! Who wins the wars depend heavily on the ability to plan and execute flanks, you know how to flank your enemy, you will win the war. I have spent over 3000 hours scrimming and playing in matches and LAN tournaments, I can tell you once your brain starts executing in that manner, online gameplay goes into a whole new level. Unfortunately you cannot do that in these maps in BF3. Simply because how each team have uncaps in all maps, nobody runs out of tickets, and how flags are so close to each other. There is simply no strategy involved, whoever manages to go from one flag to next faster wins. Well designed maps were one thing BF2 did great (and other BF games too like BF1942, BF2142, el alamein, berlin were all great maps). We can sit down here open up the maps and argue for hours on this one, this is where BF3 is in the thumbs down column of the comparison.

                                BF2 was a game that rewarded skill. TV missiles are far too overpowered? Tough sh!t mate, TV missiles are hard to use, requires great expertise, and a well skilled pilot in the opposing team is the only way to end it. TV guided missiles are supposed to be over powered, what BF3 could have done would be to making it too difficult to unlock them. I can agree with you on the J10 being overpowered, but J10 was overpowered with respect to F35B, so all they had to do was to nerf J10, instead they nerfed the entire air power, including helis, making them useless.

                                There was room for change and evolution was necessary for BF2, I agree with you on the fog of war, or destruction, they are great additions to BF3, but dumbing down the game modes, or core game play is a no go. They could have introduced evolution by adding new modes, or making over powered things more difficult to use rather than completely dumbing things down.

                                - What was the point of leaving VOIP out? Can someone please answer this question? What logical reasoning was behind this? This was one thing that was necessary in a game like BF2 (and is in BF3), to play effectively as a team.
                                - What was the point of leaving PING out? This is just out right idiotic.
                                - Horrible user interface? The chat box? The squad management screens? Not to mention the key bindings and how you can't set different sensitivities for different type of vehicles? I mean who in their right mind expects you to use the SAME SENSITIVITY for both helicopters and tanks? I mean don't you see what's going on here? This has NOTHING TO DO with evolution, this is simply them DUMBING DOWN the game for consoles and remaking it for PCs, not the other way around! These are core FEATURES of the game, they are nothing to do with game play, they are not some game mode or fire mode or game physics. If BF3 were a computer that DICE designed from ground up, their approach to these things would be similar to removing the video cards completely and using a on-board video card built into CPU! That's how retarded this whole thing is.

                                I can understand that there are some people who just out right don't want the change. I understand that type of mentality is not productive and not good for anyone, I completely agree. I am not sitting here and shrugging my shoulders and shaking my head and being like "no no no no!", I am saying, this game is nowhere near ready to be a "PC GAME", let alone a BATTLEFIELD game. That's an entirely different statement and has got nothing to do with what the rest of the cry babies are talking about.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X