|
Post by psijaka on Feb 26, 2012 16:44:15 GMT -5
I bought BF BC2 last November, in the mistaken belief that, being an older game than BF3, it would run on my laptop. Epic fail!
But I have been playing the game these last few weeks now that I have a new PC, and I am enjoying it so much that my thoughts are starting to turn to BF3 again.
So my question is - Is BF3 a significant improvement on BC2? In other words, is it worth paying the extra money and suffering the presence of Origin for?
|
|
|
Post by raxcoswell on Feb 26, 2012 17:52:18 GMT -5
I think I'm burned out on BF3 at the moment and have nostalgia goggles on for BC2. BF3 just annoys me all the time for numerous issues they haven't fixed, how dumb my team is, the maps etc.
Whereas in my mind BC2 is great, except for a couple of levels with gross chopper imbalance.
As for improvements, there's a lot of nice changes. It also seems a lot more vehicles based, which I don't really like, especially jets and all that stuff. I'm just old fashioned I suppose. It's still very buggy and glitchy and in need of a lot of big fixes, air and anti-air needs to be completely redone
It looks better (big woop) sound is great, but so's BC2 sound. The levels are more varied, both in looks and how they play. But talking from rush, a lot of them are really poor. More gadgets which are pretty much cool. It seems a lot easier, or the players are a lot dumber, or I'm just better, idk.
But yeah basically I'm just mad at it and I'm sure if I played BC2 a while I'd want mroe BF3.
|
|
tiesieman
True Bro
mental lagger
Posts: 1,401
|
Post by tiesieman on Feb 26, 2012 18:09:11 GMT -5
wait till the newest patch hits. The patch is supposed to be huge on both consoles and pc, but we can't tell with DICE/EA being so uninformative Sit it out for a bit is my advice
|
|
|
Post by didjeridu on Feb 26, 2012 19:58:08 GMT -5
The only things I miss from BC2 are some of the maps, motion balls, destroying MCOMs with explosives, and the AT4. BF3 does everything else better; especially when it comes to things like gunplay and hit detection. The weapons could use more variety in the stats department, but it's not like BC2 was much better. And even though Battlelog isn't that great, it's way better than BC2's menu. Plus I don't have to go to an outside site to get my precious stats action.
I'm a bit burned out of BF3 at the moment, but it's mostly because of the maps and the fact that I still haven't found any decent servers to play regularly. When the patch hits, that will be a healthy dose of fun. Who knows when that will be though. ME3 is almost here, so there's that.
|
|
|
Post by fazzmania on Feb 26, 2012 23:05:25 GMT -5
BC2 will always hold a special place in my heart. Some mechanics, such as tap firing single shots to kill distant targets or throwing C4 long distances were just perfectly done.
|
|
|
Post by saddaminsane on Feb 26, 2012 23:45:58 GMT -5
There were so many quirks about BC2 that made it special, especially things you could use to your advantage as an experienced player everything also felt more solid , as where BF3 feels more smooth and fluid- not necessarily better, just more fluid.
|
|
|
Post by psijaka on Feb 27, 2012 8:57:35 GMT -5
Thanks for the replies, Bros. Think that I'll hold off for a while until BC2 gets a bit stale. Really happy with BC2 on the whole; some great maps and makes COD look like childsplay. Got to be "King of the Scoreboard" for the first time a few days ago, by a large margin as well but still get noobish scores from time to time Still learning the maps and tactics I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by rudybojangles on Feb 27, 2012 9:48:15 GMT -5
Thanks for the replies, Bros. Think that I'll hold off for a while until BC2 gets a bit stale. Really happy with BC2 on the whole; some great maps and makes COD look like childsplay. Got to be "King of the Scoreboard" for the first time a few days ago, by a large margin as well but still get noobish scores from time to time Still learning the maps and tactics I suppose. What's your name on BC2? I was thinking about re-installing (I barely played at all on PC, logged in many hours on XBOX 360).
|
|
|
Post by psijaka on Feb 27, 2012 14:17:24 GMT -5
Thanks for the replies, Bros. Think that I'll hold off for a while until BC2 gets a bit stale. Really happy with BC2 on the whole; some great maps and makes COD look like childsplay. Got to be "King of the Scoreboard" for the first time a few days ago, by a large margin as well but still get noobish scores from time to time Still learning the maps and tactics I suppose. What's your name on BC2? I was thinking about re-installing (I barely played at all on PC, logged in many hours on XBOX 360). psijaka
|
|
|
Post by rudybojangles on Feb 27, 2012 21:01:59 GMT -5
What's your name on BC2? I was thinking about re-installing (I barely played at all on PC, logged in many hours on XBOX 360). psijaka tada. Maybe I'll install tonight and play tomorrow/later/weekend.
|
|
|
Post by vulgar on Feb 28, 2012 4:19:19 GMT -5
The only things I miss from BC2 are some of the maps, motion balls, destroying MCOMs with explosives, and the AT4. BF3 does everything else better; especially when it comes to things like gunplay and hit detection. The weapons could use more variety in the stats department, but it's not like BC2 was much better. And even though Battlelog isn't that great, it's way better than BC2's menu. Plus I don't have to go to an outside site to get my precious stats action. I'm a bit burned out of BF3 at the moment, but it's mostly because of the maps and the fact that I still haven't found any decent servers to play regularly. When the patch hits, that will be a healthy dose of fun. Who knows when that will be though. ME3 is almost here, so there's that. I miss the jungle maps more than anything. BF3's maps are nearly all urban or desert. Also BC2's destruction in general. And on a completely subjective note, I like BC2's style a lot more. It's rock-n-roll, whereas BF3 is more dark. Not my cup of tea. On a technical level BF3 is much improved. The vehicle maps have grown on me. But I still prefer BC2's vehicle balance/smaller maps. This may be a bit premature, but I'm hoping they take everything they've done incredibly well in BF3 and mix it with BC2's style for BC3. ;D
|
|
|
Post by raxcoswell on Feb 28, 2012 6:08:50 GMT -5
Yeah, I hate to say it but I basically find vehicles pretty boring. As a rush boy I like them from a tactical perspective or whatever, breaking the lines with a tank or slamming an amtrac into their flank etc, but from a gameplay pov, there's just much less going on compared to on foot. There are a fair few maps that are very heavily vehicle-based, and they don't really do anything for me at all, especially considering that vehicles are essentially 'ranked' (ie jet kills chopper kills tank kils ifv/amtrac/car). Only thing like that in bc2 was heavy metal, which was basically a joke/novelty map full of turgid gameplay. At least those levels play a little better in bf3, but it still hardly gets me going. I'll take the infantry + 1-2 vehicles maps every time. I could take a couple of jungle maps, but I like the urban stuff too. Destruction, ehh. 95% of the buildings in bc2 are only there to get demolished. Stuff feels a little more purposeful in bf3, and you can stil blast through walls just as much as I can imagine anyone wanting to. And the destruction is still massively overstated anyway (shoot a 320 at those big warehouses on firestorm).
On a technical level, stuff is improved, but it's very very much a rough gem. And not even a good gem. Like aquamarine maybe. Jumping over a 2 foot wall will quite often just flat-out kill you. And the matchmaking, sheesh. Been on 99 losses for a few days, and was trying to get as many wins in before I hit triple figure losses. At the end of the weekend I was 599/99. Monday night, log in, join game, "your team lost!". Thanks for including this. Thanks for making this count as a loss. Sums the game up for me really. Or at least, the lack of thought and lack of craft in so much of it
|
|
|
Post by rudybojangles on Feb 28, 2012 12:32:32 GMT -5
My PC nostalgia factor for BC2 is lacking, but I may just boot up the old BroBox and slap it in to get in the mood.
|
|
|
Post by psijaka on Feb 28, 2012 13:14:17 GMT -5
Heavy Metal lol.
It goes from one extreme to the other, this map. Some games it is all wookies hiding in bushes with their 'leet sniper rifle; others it is heli rapefest, but just sometimes you get a good mix.
One game we had "B" under control and I sat on the AA gun and shot down 6 or 7 helis; pretty dumb pilots not to nail me. Other games it is instant death to go near the thing....
|
|
|
Post by nalle on Feb 28, 2012 13:15:06 GMT -5
They could add the Halo sort of vehicle vs. foot soldier balance. Only thing you can do now when you've not got explosives and meet anything with wheels or threads and armor is to run away in panic or hide. Even with an RPG or a SMAW, you'll most likely die while trying to take out anything with those properties.
Also: Aircraft should be as easily countered as they counter everything that's on the ground. I say add auto-aim to anti-air cannons + let multiple simultaneous lock-on "heat seeking" missiles to be fired by anti-air vehicles and add ground-to-air-missile pads with similar properties.
|
|
|
Post by raxcoswell on Feb 28, 2012 14:04:29 GMT -5
Heavy Metal lol. It goes from one extreme to the other, this map. Some games it is all wookies hiding in bushes with their 'leet sniper rifle; others it is heli rapefest, but just sometimes you get a good mix. One game we had "B" under control and I sat on the AA gun and shot down 6 or 7 helis; pretty dumb pilots not to nail me. Other games it is instant death to go near the thing.... only good thing that map ever did for me was give me that achievement for shooting down a helo with one of the stationary AT things.
|
|
GoHarvard
True Bro
It's not that serious.
Posts: 390
|
Post by GoHarvard on Feb 28, 2012 14:07:24 GMT -5
Yeah, I hate to say it but I basically find vehicles pretty boring. As a rush boy I like them from a tactical perspective or whatever, breaking the lines with a tank or slamming an amtrac into their flank etc, but from a gameplay pov, there's just much less going on compared to on foot. There are a fair few maps that are very heavily vehicle-based, and they don't really do anything for me at all, especially considering that vehicles are essentially 'ranked' (ie jet kills chopper kills tank kils ifv/amtrac/car). Only thing like that in bc2 was heavy metal, which was basically a joke/novelty map full of turgid gameplay. At least those levels play a little better in bf3, but it still hardly gets me going. I'll take the infantry + 1-2 vehicles maps every time. I could take a couple of jungle maps, but I like the urban stuff too. Destruction, ehh. 95% of the buildings in bc2 are only there to get demolished. Stuff feels a little more purposeful in bf3, and you can stil blast through walls just as much as I can imagine anyone wanting to. And the destruction is still massively overstated anyway (shoot a 320 at those big warehouses on firestorm). On a technical level, stuff is improved, but it's very very much a rough gem. And not even a good gem. Like aquamarine maybe. Jumping over a 2 foot wall will quite often just flat-out kill you. And the matchmaking, sheesh. Been on 99 losses for a few days, and was trying to get as many wins in before I hit triple figure losses. At the end of the weekend I was 599/99. Monday night, log in, join game, "your team lost!". Thanks for including this. Thanks for making this count as a loss. Sums the game up for me really. Or at least, the lack of thought and lack of craft in so much of it Same. When playing conquest on large maps I just don't have any fun because I'm not into the vehicle thing. On Xbox it rotates all maps and there's no way to avoid playing them unless my party quits and then re-enters match making and then repeat the shit cycle of trying to get everyone on the same team. If Infantry Only was an option via quick match - I'm pretty sure those servers wouldn't be empty.
|
|
tiesieman
True Bro
mental lagger
Posts: 1,401
|
Post by tiesieman on Feb 28, 2012 14:43:24 GMT -5
I think vehicle warfare only really works on a map where there's lots of vehicles and with 64 people in the server. Too bad bf3 doesn't really have a map like that (older bf games easily had 1,5-2 times the vehicles caspian has)
Fighting infrantry as a tank isn't really fun. Either they can't hurt you and they hide, or they hurt you with rockets while hiding. Tank on tank warfare is pretty okay though, unless the other tank has an engi repairing. (really hoping repair speed gets nerfed hard)
Aerial combat against infrantry is pretty useless unless you're a chopper gunner or you're in one of the rush jets who are actually good against things on the ground (scout choppers are ok too). The conquest jets and heli rockets are good for taking the odd tank out, but it isn't really fun. Most of the time in choppers and jets you're just evading stuff
But yeah, most of the time I get more points in less time on foot while having more fun
|
|
|
Post by didjeridu on Feb 28, 2012 17:57:59 GMT -5
Vehicle warfare and/or vehicle heavy maps are generally terrible. I find that it usually devolves into these situations:
1. You're in a vehicle all game and are killing with ease. Fun at first, but too easy and very unfulfilling.
2. You're in a vehicle when you get the chance, but there are Engis, SOFLAMs, and enemy vehicles everywhere. You can't live for more than a minute without bombardment by RPGs/Javelins, tanks, helis, jets, etc.
3. You can't get into a vehicle, and there are so many enemy vehicles that you have a 0% chance of survival unless you want to camp the base/runway/spawn menu waiting for one.
4. You're tired of being killed by tank whores, so you switch to Engi. As soon as you whip out your RPGs, there are no tanks to be found. Instead, death from above. You switch to Javelin (or even Stinger). Guess what? All the enemy air is gone and you have multiple tanks shoving shells up your ass. Repeat forever.
Obviously that's pretty pessimistic and not always the case, but I just don't care for heavy vehicle play. I like using vehicles to get where I'm going faster, and I'll fight with it when it makes sense, but spending an entire game in a vehicle just isn't fun. I guess I just don't get the same sense of satisfaction at fighting Assaults, Supports, and Recons in a tank while being nearly invincible that other people do. I like shooting guns a lot better. I like blowing them up, but I don't like hiding for the majority of the round because my team somehow enjoys letting enemy vehicles flatten them. Even on the off chance there's a decent Recon who SOFLAMs often, you'll almost never find a Support with half a brain so you can shoot more than a few Javs. Against a smart tank driver and/or in bad map locations, RPGs are a death sentence. I really, really miss the AT4.
|
|
|
Post by saddaminsane on Feb 28, 2012 18:23:55 GMT -5
we need more cars and small-fast vehicles- it's way too often that in some 64 player conquest maps there's not enough transport vehicles to carry everyone to somewhere people are needed they need to make civilian cars drivable
and maybe those ATV's from bc2 and snow maps with snow mobiles and scout helicopters with unguided missles just so it feels epic....yeah....
|
|
|
Post by rudybojangles on Feb 29, 2012 9:25:46 GMT -5
I played briefly last night. One word: AT-4. Me and my level 5 self unlocked it and I took down 8 choppers in one brief round of Heavy Metal conquest. Definitely worth the money in terms of entertainment! PS: PC is a bit too easy to take down choppers on, switching from XBox!
|
|
|
Post by SheWolf on Feb 29, 2012 10:54:33 GMT -5
are you serious? from what i remember, a chopper pilot with smoke and half a functioning brain is pretty much impossible to down, exept with AA guns.
|
|
|
Post by rudybojangles on Feb 29, 2012 13:08:56 GMT -5
@shewolf: If you played it early and didn't play it after one of the later patches, the AT-4 rocket went the same as the standard TOW launchers did, making hitting a moving helicopter with the AT-4 less than ideal and straight-up difficult. They had the wonderful (no sarcasm here) idea to double the rocket's speed. Combine that with the ability to kill Attack Chopper occupants immediately and kill the transportation choppers while giving them some time for the occupants to escape, they were god-like in the THE RIGHT HANDS!EDIT: Those three I linked are the best I know of, but each of the three video producers also has other pretty amazing montages, AT-4 or no.
|
|
|
Post by SheWolf on Feb 29, 2012 13:14:17 GMT -5
i played right after release, but didn't stop pretty much until BF3 came out. And still, in semi-competend hands i pretty much never saw a helicopter getting shot down (exept by other helicopters and AA).
these videos are nice and cool and all, but they only tell us the story of the 15 rockets that hit, (most likely completely inexperienced or witles pilots) out of the 750 that were fired.
put someone who knows what he is doing in a helicopter, and you can shoot as many at4 at him as you want, he will mess up your day without even really having to think about the rockets.
i do agree however: at4s are brilliant to down inexperienced or incompetent pilots, especially those of the slow-hover and the divebomber-chopper variety.
|
|
|
Post by raxcoswell on Feb 29, 2012 14:34:02 GMT -5
i played right after release, but didn't stop pretty much until BF3 came out. And still, in semi-competend hands i pretty much never saw a helicopter getting shot down (exept by other helicopters and AA). these videos are nice and cool and all, but they only tell us the story of the 15 rockets that hit, (most likely completely inexperienced or witles pilots) out of the 750 that were fired. put someone who knows what he is doing in a helicopter, and you can shoot as many at4 at him as you want, he will mess up your day without even really having to think about the rockets. i do agree however: at4s are brilliant to down inexperienced or incompetent pilots, especially those of the slow-hover and the divebomber-chopper variety. It's only montages, but there are enough unbroken clips of him getting two helicopters with two rockets to get the idea he was probably getting a better rate than 15/750 but yeah, this was hard to do on xbox in my experience. I could get the odd blackhawk, anything else was only a couple of times. tank shells were way more effective for me, and I think I sniped as many attack helo pilots as I did AT-4s on them. definitely got more dumbfire CG helo kills than AT-4 also
|
|
|
Post by didjeridu on Feb 29, 2012 15:56:17 GMT -5
No Ravic? I am disappointed.
|
|
|
Post by rudybojangles on Feb 29, 2012 23:05:21 GMT -5
i played right after release, but didn't stop pretty much until BF3 came out. And still, in semi-competend hands i pretty much never saw a helicopter getting shot down (exept by other helicopters and AA). these videos are nice and cool and all, but they only tell us the story of the 15 rockets that hit, (most likely completely inexperienced or witles pilots) out of the 750 that were fired. put someone who knows what he is doing in a helicopter, and you can shoot as many at4 at him as you want, he will mess up your day without even really having to think about the rockets. i do agree however: at4s are brilliant to down inexperienced or incompetent pilots, especially those of the slow-hover and the divebomber-chopper variety. Many back-to-back shots there. Not amazing pilots in this one (but really, with the BC2 heli's you can't do that much...) A pre-buff montage for you history buffs
|
|
|
Post by psijaka on Mar 9, 2012 14:38:02 GMT -5
I really can't see me buying BF3; barely getting time to play BC2 as it is.
So many online games coming out or in the pipeline.
|
|