Battlefield 2- Lies in the shadow of 1942?

[QuakerOatz]

Re: Battlefield 2- Lies in the shadow of 1942?

I have a suspicion that people getting sick of BF2 quickly are not realizing the best part of the game, teamplay.

I never play alone anymore, aside from a Karkand battle here and there, I only play with buddies over teamspeak. And let me tell you that playing BF2 with a squad of 4-6 friends over teamspeak, is better than anything I saw in DC during the 10000 hours I played.

Playing lone wolf or in a squad with no direction, gets old fast.

[Rambo_Matt[US]]

Re: Battlefield 2- Lies in the shadow of 1942?

bf 1942 was worse I rememeber when i use to play 42 vanilla 3 gernades could destroy a armored tank in the road to rome expansion gernades cant destroy a tank insless its throwin inside the door and kills the drivers.

[Rambo]

Re: Battlefield 2- Lies in the shadow of 1942?

To this day DC & POE are still up there with BF2

just my 2c worth!

[Selecter]

Re: Battlefield 2- Lies in the shadow of 1942?

I think the best time for Battlefield was around the 1.3 patch. The game started to get much better, and the BEST was when the Iraqi SUICIDE BOMBER was inserted into DC for the first time it was amazing to see teams of 32 Iraqi suicide bombers against a normal US team! All the Iraqis did was spawn and run like hell to the nearest US flag and blow themselves up!

PRICELESS!

[CtrlAltDe1337]

Re: Battlefield 2- Lies in the shadow of 1942?

I think the repeat fun factor of BF42 and DC is alot higher than BF2. I got bored with BF2 about two and a half months ago and rarely ever play it, and I started playing the day the demo came out.

DC held my attention for much longer than that. I blame alot of it on the lack of content.

Then why do you have over 400 posts here:hmm:

[Umi.Ryuuzaki]

Re: Battlefield 2- Lies in the shadow of 1942?

I hope to god the mods save this game. I played BF2 in CAL for their season 1 - I wont say the teamwork sucked (more like it made me stop playing Pubs), but damn...its kinda sad how to be good in competition is be a bunnyhopper, gren launcher whore (my favoriate thing actualy =P ) and recently a C4 whore. I mean, with BF2Pro in development, i'm watching this and hoping this might save the competative community but after the 1st season, i'm back to CS-S and just lanning BF2 for fun now =(

[bam23]

Re: Battlefield 2- Lies in the shadow of 1942?

If BF1942 had the same amount of players as BF2, I would go back to BF1942. It just feels so much more polished.

[[=RDR=] RadoN]

Re: Battlefield 2- Lies in the shadow of 1942?

DC was great in its day, but against BF2 it doesn't hold a candle. I started playing POE mod with BF:V after that hack job of a patch "DC_Final" came out. I was one of the original guys that pioneered the "modded maps" in DC, and I can't stand it today. BF2 is far more advanced, and a lot more fun to play.

[imported_Master Shake]

Re: Battlefield 2- Lies in the shadow of 1942?

The BF series to this point has been about keeping options open, plane,boat,helo,tank,apc,jeep,foot,parachute,zipli ne,grappling hook,4 wheeler...ect..
The issue with BF2 lies with airpower and smaller maps, to many flags,slow ground vehicles, and (the big one) people that are more focused on stats than winning the map.

If we had a map such as Zatar Wetlands with the correct amount of Armor, fewer flags, and shoulder fired stinger missles the map would play totally diffrent. They also need to speed up the ground vehicles in general, not super fast or anything, but hummers should move and tanks should get over hills. Remember in DC flying off a cliff in a hummer and parachuting to safety? Heck I even jumped/crashed a dunebuggy into a low flying plane once total unpredictable moment. If they made push maps,sped up the ground vehicles and introduced shoulder fired stingers the game would rock real hard. As it is you must play diffrent witch does have its moments but it is diffrent.

I would aslo like to see incentive to winning a map, such as an extra 5 bonus points to each player or a temp unlock for the next round (like you get 1 flashbang each respawn or a diffrent pistol, something small but enough to get you motivated to beat the other teams a** instead of stat whoring)

[Angelus00]

Re: Battlefield 2- Lies in the shadow of 1942?

I have a suspicion that people getting sick of BF2 quickly are not realizing the best part of the game, teamplay.

I never play alone anymore, aside from a Karkand battle here and there, I only play with buddies over teamspeak. And let me tell you that playing BF2 with a squad of 4-6 friends over teamspeak, is better than anything I saw in DC during the 10000 hours I played.

Playing lone wolf or in a squad with no direction, gets old fast.

Excactly the main reason I play, well said sir.

This game was meant to be played as squads and a team, when will people play it that way....thats when they will find the real game.

[Pace]

Re: Battlefield 2- Lies in the shadow of 1942?

I have a suspicion that people getting sick of BF2 quickly are not realizing the best part of the game, teamplay.

I never play alone anymore, aside from a Karkand battle here and there, I only play with buddies over teamspeak. And let me tell you that playing BF2 with a squad of 4-6 friends over teamspeak, is better than anything I saw in DC during the 10000 hours I played.

Playing lone wolf or in a squad with no direction, gets old fast.

I like your post.

if you get with a good group and have good co-ordination and work as a team then you dont have time to get bored imo :p

[Augustus]

Re: Battlefield 2- Lies in the shadow of 1942?

The real problem is that the overarching BF2 gamestyle is based off of the Road to Rome bf1942 expansion pack - smallish maps with incredibly tight choke points.

Road to Rome's maps were well made and beautiful, but the expansion itself was not popular online.

I think the same thing is happening here.

[BIFF EXPLODER]

Re: Battlefield 2- Lies in the shadow of 1942?

the thing about bf1942 is that the maps were alot better, in most maps u could go full speed with the tank for minutes before u could see someone to take out, and when u did it would be really cool and long range tank wars, and now.... all the maps are so closed that when u see a tank it is alredy next to u, and no long range shooting skill required, vehicles lost alot of interest in BF2 sadly (probably because stupid ppl keep complaining about vehicles, and how the developers should remove them )

i miss the BF1942 community when everyone knew that the special thingabout the game was the vehicles and the BIG maps.

[Pace]

Re: Battlefield 2- Lies in the shadow of 1942?

seeing as I just bought it your all filling me with confidence id just like to say :lol:

no I guess a game is what you make of it.

[Dokukaze]

Re: Battlefield 2- Lies in the shadow of 1942?

Hmm, more fun than 1942? Maybe.

2's infantry combat beats 1942's anyday. Even though the weapon balancing makes no sense in terms of real world combat (LMGs primary use is close combat? wjat?), it's really fun in my opinion.

1942's (and DC's) vehicle combat will generally win. The maps in BF2 just... aren't that good. There's never enough vehicles for your team, but the enemies seem to always have enough.

It depends on the map, in my opinion, and currently most of the maps aren't amazing.