In the world of kiddy gamers, graphics mean the world. If the graphics suck, then the game sucks.....it is a shame really. Im gonna teach my son to love what he gets, whether it is like everything else he wants or not To make the future of gaming a better place
Say what you want to say but DC and PoE both lasted longer for me, and had me for over half a year each, while BF2 kept me interested for less than 2 weeks which is kind of disturbing.
But you see thats the problem. When EA bought Trauma alot of people were lead to believe that BF2 would basically become an official DC2.
Yes BF2 if freakin great, but alot of us wished it would have kept or implemented more of DC or the idea's from DC into it.
What you say is true, but you fail to take into account the number of mongrels in the forums who would go on and start whinging about how BF2 is merely a glorified DC and nothing really changed....
In the world of kiddy gamers, graphics mean the world. If the graphics suck, then the game sucks.....it is a shame really. Im gonna teach my son to love what he gets, whether it is like everything else he wants or not To make the future of gaming a better place
Well I'm 18 and the fact is I love to see how far games have come and that means the graphics technology.
BryanG, "how far games have come" mean a lot of things, not the least of which is gameplay, and BF2 took a big step BACKWARDS compared to DC.
All I know is this "Desert Combat" is looks ugly as hell next to BF2.
Okay, BF2 has better graphics, i'll give you that. But honestly, it ends there. When it comes down to it, DC pushes the limits of the BF1942 engine. Thing is, a LOT of people are going back to playing Desert Combat, even after BF2 is released. People who have actually tried DC and KNOW what multiplayer fun truely is........like DC, and a bunch are dropping BF2 for it.
And the fact that so many people on this forum (a BF2 forum) are defending DC also says something. Maybe the EA fanboys should actually play DC for a week, you'd play it a helluva lot longer i bet.
The whole AA thing is really irritating... All the people who can't fly well want AT kits with stingers so everyone and their mother has AA missiles, and all the aircraft are useless... The people who can fly want AA as ineffective as possible so they can rape all... There should be a middle ground... I think DC had that one right with the AA kits you could pick up during the level... That way they can have a limited number and still have effective infantry based AA.... It'd be great if EA could implement something like that in a patch...
As far as the DC/BF2 thing, they're both good games.... You just have to keep in mind that BF2 is now at the equivalent of DC .1 ... Give them some time to refine it and add stuff before you make direct comparisons...
The difference is that BF2 is a retail game, retail games arent supposed to use excuses like "this is just our pre alpha testing build dont blame us" because it isent supposed to happen to a retail company, people who payed money for a game want it to be good and fun to play, excuses arent worth money.
Hey can anyone post video's of them or someone else doing manouvres in DC that you can't do in BF2, I see a lot of people complaining that you can't do certain things in BF2 that you could do in DC. If you want to explain to people like me who have never played DC why the controls are better this is the way to do it.
actually the other day i played some really good hours of DC and these are the things i missed from BF2
- Graphics of course
- IRON SIGHTS!!! (actually i was playing CS the other day and i tried to raise the sigs on the M4 and i got killed because i didnt remember that instead of the iron sigs it was going for the freaking silencer :P) damn!!!i hated that...
- The AI of course!!!
- and the commander and squad mode
- oh and the guillie suit :P
all the other good things belong to DC honestly!!! by the way, im really looking fordward to the g36..,. i mean, POE :P (i just love the G36)
Comment