Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BF2 is much better, period.

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

  • Infernalis
    replied
    Re: BF2 is much better, period.

    Same on Xbox if you're playing with random players, it was the case on BC1 and the beta of BF3 on Xbox was horrible (no revive, no ammo at all). The only good thing is the integrated VOIP so most players are used to speak in squads (though you must hope you don't end up with idiots spouting nonense).

    Leave a comment:


  • Anarchy1
    replied
    Re: BF2 is much better, period.

    Originally posted by -Shifty-
    To me it sounds like you computer players are in a completely different game. When I bought my xbox, it came with a microphone, and I use the xbox's VOIP. The Xbox live system is perfect for playing this I get my four friends to join up into a private squad and party and we play together as a team. Just 20 or 30 minutes ago I was playing hardcore mode, and we were using bounding over watch and suppressive fire. It was slow BF2:PR-esque gameplay and it was darn fun!
    That makes me jealous. Squad play on the PC is just a way for people to get more spawn points.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stryker
    replied
    Re: BF2 is much better, period.

    BF3 has the potential to be a good sequel to BF2 but the amount of changes that are needed/wanted, we know won't happen. Like most, PC players would like integrated voice just like BF2 had. Considering this is a sequel to a game that had it, but we know Dice won't because it would undermined there precious battlelog garbage. They wouldn't add commander "just because" they didn't want to. Commander mode, was an amazing addition. Console gamers never understood it because they never use such a mode in COD, HALO, or any FPS on consoles. However, having played commander mode often it was fun, and def. helped team work. Taking out artillery, UAV, SCAN, and using them would be so much fun. Perhaps even having the commander running around and jumping into them to use them(if they want) the point is they would be there. If major changes/improvements were to occur to BF3 it can be saved, and not only be a superior game but a true sequel. However, with another BF game already announced and being worked on BF3 sounds as good as dead to me. Thanks Dice for the great years, I guess another one bites the COD..i mean dust.

    Leave a comment:


  • -Shifty-
    replied
    Re: BF2 is much better, period.

    To me it sounds like you computer players are in a completely different game. When I bought my xbox, it came with a microphone, and I use the xbox's VOIP. The Xbox live system is perfect for playing this I get my four friends to join up into a private squad and party and we play together as a team. Just 20 or 30 minutes ago I was playing hardcore mode, and we were using bounding over watch and suppressive fire. It was slow BF2:PR-esque gameplay and it was darn fun!

    I agree that this game is certainly not a true Battlefield game. The last great battlefield was 2142 in my opinion, and I would gladly purchase an exact copy of 2142 in Frostbite 2.0 with a few new features here and there.

    A few noteworthy observations:

    - Air power no longer rules the battlefield. In BF2, a good pilot could make all the difference for the team, but in BF3 you have to spot vehicles manually, and the weapons available are much less powerful.

    - Land vehicles are top notch! I absolutely love playing with the tanks, fast attack vehicles, HMMWV/Vodniks, etc. They're all very fun to play with, and the amount of unlock gadgets allows you to play in many different ways.

    - Infantry is fun, but there are still areas that need balancing.

    Leave a comment:


  • zuiquan1
    replied
    Re: BF2 is much better, period.

    BFV was made to crush EoD...

    I did enjoy the music though.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rambo
    replied
    Re: BF2 is much better, period.

    BFV was awesome ............ taunts,Vehicle radios,airlift tanks into battle,napalm.

    Also it brought rise to the awesome mods like POE.

    I would say then that BFV is better than BF3

    Bf3 should have been just like BF2 POE imo.(the artillery was epic aka 1942 style)

    Leave a comment:


  • captqbec
    replied
    Re: BF2 is much better, period.

    ...duh...is this still a PC forum...??

    Leave a comment:


  • MrChris_CJ
    replied
    Re: BF2 is much better, period.

    Originally posted by Kylee!
    Why do people seem to disregard BF2142? It was as much of a PC shooter as BF2, and I thought it was just an improved version of it (in some ways more than others...)
    because a lot of people don't like to accept that its a far superior game to BF2

    its like Captain Crunch says, don't for the love of god keep thinking BF2 is the pinnacle of online gaming or even the pinnacle of Battlefield

    because it is not

    1942 and DC have always been superior games, people moan about changes between BF3 and BF2 when BF2 was just as removed from the previous games

    I love BF2 don't get me wrong, it was my main game during my teenage years and it holds such a nostalgic place in my heart, but for everything that was great about that game there was a billion things that were just FUCKING AWFUL about it, don't get me started on Karkand, Wake or all the other clusterfucking going on

    2142 was better simple as, the class setup was spot on, it was balanced, you could rape in a gunship if you had skill and the AA and countermeasures system was great, 2142 worked better because Dice wasn't constrained by having to balance within a modern setting, they could go into the future a bit and use their imagination

    in terms of BF3, yes it has its problems, just like BF2 did, none of them, except for maybe map structure are on the "OMG THE SKY IS FALLING," that many people make them out to be, despite what people think Battlefield games have always had clusterfuck maps and sadly everyone flocked to them (24/7 Karkand, Gibraltar etc), so when Dice keep adding them into BF and vocal people on forums whine about them its incredibly funny

    the balance might be a bit off, some of the maps simply have wasted potential (Damavand) all the game needs now is a massive large scale map, like Tampa with 7 flags etc and it would be great, B2K will sort some of this problem imo but generally a lot of the maps are great

    then again I stick to 32-40 players, I don't subscribe to the idea that more players in a BF game is better, because its not true, it was rarely the case in BF2 and it just leads to an annoying gameplay experience

    its funny as well because when BF2 was released, I was one of the angry people about that, it added a lot of cool stuff sure but like I said, it was incredibly frustrating at times and just plain shit, I stuck in there though and it became better (even with memory leak patches lulz) although a lot of the problems still remained

    I play BF3 with friends mind, playing it on your own, ha well that can be torture, another problem these days is the playerbase has just gotten even more stupid, the mechanics are there, most of the players however are just to god dam braindead to understand or use them

    Leave a comment:


  • captqbec
    replied
    Re: BF2 is much better, period.

    Originally posted by DunkinSPE
    6 hours into BF3 and i can say it's not my cup of tea.

    Glad I only played $30 bucks for it.

    meh...


    ...EA knows the thing is a failure and is already starting to give it away...milking it as long as they can before it falls into oblivion.

    Leave a comment:


  • DunkinSPE
    replied
    Re: BF2 is much better, period.

    6 hours into BF3 and i can say it's not my cup of tea.

    Glad I only played $30 bucks for it.

    meh...

    Leave a comment:


  • Infernalis
    replied
    Re: BF2 is much better, period.

    Originally posted by Elder
    BF:V had many many problems and was just a boring and awful game to play. It was the first game in the series that attempted lock-on/heatseeker mechanics as well as mobile spawns and failed miserably. The infantry wasn't all that bad (once they balanced the weapons, lol m60) but vehicle combat was just terrible and unbalanced. Overall everything that BF:V tried to do, the Eve of Destruction Mod for 42 did it 10x better.

    BF2142 was essentially a mod made for BF2 that EA decided to market as a stand-alone game. It could be fun to play but the fact remains that it was no more than a mod with a price tag.

    BC1/2 were crap console ports meant to break into the COD market by introducing single player story-modes to the BF franchise and make the multi-player aspect more similar to modern warfare style gameplay.
    No BF:V wasn't boring and awful to play, the weapons had decent accuracy this time compared to the airsoft guns from BF1942. The heatseekers (there was no lock-on) and choppers were a test for BF2, the air vehicles were imba (just like BF1942, a good player in plane could rape anything even the Bofors gun). And if you're comparing it to a EVE then the same could be said with Forgotten Hope which was better than BF1942, PoE2 was also better than BF2 etc.

    BF2142 was different enough to not feel like a mod (or a high quality total conversion mod maybe?). Sure it was maybe too expensive for what it brought compared to BF2 (in term of gameplay that's basically a balanced BF2 with some SF ideas in it) but that's far from making the game "gay and irrevelant".

    BC1 SP was actually fun compared to what you have (even now) on the market, it was fun and refreshing, the MP was a console gameplay but since it wasn't released on PC there was no problem. BC2 had a meh SP and the gameplay was direct port from console and even then it was still fun to play, it just didn't felt like BF.

    BF3 feels like a bastard child between BF2 and BC2.

    Leave a comment:


  • CptainCrunch
    replied
    Re: BF2 is much better, period.

    I think some of you all need to watch The Pwned Life again. The truth of BF2 is there.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stryker
    replied
    Re: BF2 is much better, period.

    BF2 is a far superior game, i'v played it for 600 hours, not counting in menu, or between loading. The feel of the game was different, and while BF3 is an amazing game with amazing graphics, so was BF2 when it came out. To be honest BF2's graphics still look good today. Look at the textures, especially of vehicles. Even looking at graphics as irrelevant, the gameplay is far superior. Ever have that feeling when your team fills up a 6 man blackhawk and go and invade a base...That was such an intense feeling never knowing if a J-10 was going to take you out. Now BF3, where's the hawk? Oh wait there is a helo...huh 4 people...uhh ok...jumps in, dead. BF3 maps are either poorly designed, or extremely small. The problem with them also is that they were designed for console (with all the attack points in the center) and then ported to PC and extended. Half way through development they completely abandoned PC and worked for consoles, imagine what BF2 would have looked like if they did that? You can't can you? Halo.

    Leave a comment:


  • Elder
    replied
    Re: BF2 is much better, period.

    Originally posted by Infernalis
    Lol no, without them the "main BF" wouldn't be the same and most of them where on the same level as the core BF. The only weak ones were BC1 & 2 and even then they were still good games.
    Originally posted by jimykx
    I must mention that i found your opinion about bf2142 gay and irrelevant
    BF:V had many many problems and was just a boring and awful game to play. It was the first game in the series that attempted lock-on/heatseeker mechanics as well as mobile spawns and failed miserably. The infantry wasn't all that bad (once they balanced the weapons, lol m60) but vehicle combat was just terrible and unbalanced. Overall everything that BF:V tried to do, the Eve of Destruction Mod for 42 did it 10x better.

    BF2142 was essentially a mod made for BF2 that EA decided to market as a stand-alone game. It could be fun to play but the fact remains that it was no more than a mod with a price tag.

    BC1/2 were crap console ports meant to break into the COD market by introducing single player story-modes to the BF franchise and make the multi-player aspect more similar to modern warfare style gameplay.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kylee!
    replied
    Re: BF2 is much better, period.

    Why do people seem to disregard BF2142? It was as much of a PC shooter as BF2, and I thought it was just an improved version of it (in some ways more than others...)

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X