Anyone else feel the maps don't have that "warzone" feel to them?

[puglous]

Re: Anyone else feel the maps don't have that "warzone" feel to them?

Well to be honest USMC hardly every tries to flatten a city before moving in because we try to not kill ciz. USMC would rather assault a city with infantry to save lives the destroy the city with arty to save Marines.

I do get what your saying about the environment...but it sounds like you are more going for a destroyable environment...and that would rock.

I smell a political flame war coming.

Anyway, this may be the case in real-life, but not in BF2. I see tanks in Karkand and Mashtuur. And, as mentioned, artillery striking every 3 minutes. Even if people don't flatten a city during modern combat, people would still occasionally miss some shots and hit buildings.

[Jofaba]

Re: Anyone else feel the maps don't have that "warzone" feel to them?

Occasionally miss some shots and hit buildings? Hell we miss entire COUNTRIES. We accidently toss shots into neighboring countries not involved in our wars (and it's not just us).

=P but with destructible landscapes... maybe not so much the LAND, and considering the lag I get when I add a couple dozen extra bots (great fun if I lower my settings though), I'd hate to see what a falling building, that wasn't a game pausing animation, would do to the game. It'd have to have a navmesh that fell and spilled in the right direction... or okay, so they wouldn't make it single player obviously, but still.

I'd love to be able to shoot some holes in a fence though. Have scorch marks from tank shots etc stay on buildings for the whole game, or at least a good five to ten minutes (until you've gotten so involved in your next objective that you've forgotten about it). Shooting through windows. I'm amazed at some of the stuff in BF2 and then at the same time I'm bewildered by what's missing and so essential.

You can shoot the fish and the birds in FarCry. Nearly every object can be interacted with in Half Life 2, yet I cant shoot out lights in a night map, can't plow down fences with a tank, and a freestanding tripod rocket launcher stops a tank dead (and causes quite a bit of damage).

Maybe someone should figure out how to combine engines... they'd be a millionaire. I'm pretty sure a duel core processor and maybe... 3 or 4 gigs of quality ram could do handle that =P

[imported_Fig]

Re: Anyone else feel the maps don't have that "warzone" feel to them?

The maps feel like terrain that has never been touched by a military. All the bases arn't even military bases, they are just 'places' with tanks sitting in em, the only slightly military thing being sandbags, which look incredibly artificial in thier placement usually.

BF2 is lacking majorly in the ambiance department. Makes the game feel more like... a game and less like an 'experiecne'. The most 'realistic' (as in, made me feel like I was there) experience i've ever had was in the EOD mod for BFV, the black night map, figthin the VC. Me and my freind 8 ball were moving, slowly, through the dense jungle. We couldn't see much more than 70 feet in front of us at all. Every once in a while, some explosions and flashes would happen and die out quickly. We just kept crouched, advancing as stealthily as possible. Just when we got to an overgrown Khmer ruin, we tried to take up defensive positions in the thing. When we stopped moving... we both realized that we heard footstpes....and they weren't ours.

Right as I looked around back at 8ball (who was about 7 feet behind me), behind him stood a mans shillouete. holding a large machete above his head. It came down and tore 8ball, and I screamed (I was scared off my ass) and unloaded an entier clip into him. Then... I waited and waited... hearing more foot steps... not knowing if they were from freind or foe... I waited....

Nothing close to that has ever happened to me in BF2...

[Tiger]

Re: Anyone else feel the maps don't have that "warzone" feel to them?

Some things that irk me are how all the fences have convient holes cut out of them every couple of yards making them useless. Also how TOWs are setup in the base and are only affective after the enemy is in your base.

[Flares]

Re: Anyone else feel the maps don't have that "warzone" feel to them?

Well to be honest USMC hardly every tries to flatten a city before moving in because we try to not kill ciz. USMC would rather assault a city with infantry to save lives the destroy the city with arty to save Marines.

I do get what your saying about the environment...but it sounds like you are more going for a destroyable environment...and that would rock.

So those pre ground assault air strikes and mortar fire are just for the cameras?
Joking aside, regarding city fighting, a couple of posters are correct. Heavy bombardment favours the defender. The rubble simply provides more hiding places and cover. This was a lesson learned in WWII by the western allies after D-Day and the bombing of Caen by the Allied air forces. Towns are no longer "softened up", rather "precision" strikes take place.
It's much easier to fight through a town on foot, supported by helos and armour.
However, in the BF2 urban environments, more burnt out cars, smoke and general debri would be most welcome. Maps like Mashtuur and Karkand look too clean.
I look forward to the day when weather effects are introduced. Fighting through snow and rain would increase immersion significantly.