This is just a poll to see what we like about SF and what those lazy buggers at EA and Dice should and shouldnt put in Battlefield 3(if there is going to be one)
Pages: 1 2
- Index »
- Games »
- Battlefield Series »
- Battlefield 2 »
- Expansions/Mods »
- Special Forces »
- Do we really like anything about Special force's Poll
Poll
What do you like about Special forces?
| The new weapons | 17% | 17% - 20 | ||||
| You get two unlocks at promotion | 13% | 13% - 15 | ||||
| The new jetski's, quadbike's, car's etc. | 10% | 10% - 12 | ||||
| new additions to previous weapons, teargas etc.. | 8% | 8% - 10 | ||||
| Nightvision, gasmask | 4% | 4% - 5 | ||||
| maps | 21% | 21% - 24 | ||||
| All of the above | 14% | 14% - 16 | ||||
| None of the above | 6% | 6% - 7 | ||||
| If BF3 should be made with a Half-life 2 engine | 3% | 3% - 4 | ||||
| Total: 113 | ||||||
sf sucks, no one ever plays it, its too tactical, bf2 is good enough for me
the onley reason why i got it is the xtra unlocks
to laggy
Forklifts.
I really enjoy SF, not sure why you people hate it so...
I really enjoy SF, not sure why you people hate it so...
I like it!
Fewer noobs and whiners if SF. Squads play as teams better, especially in Warlord and Ghost Town.Fo_Shizzle wrote:
sf sucks, no one ever plays it, its too tactical, bf2 is good enough for me
I enjoy the new maps and emphasis on infantry on many of them. Warlord rocks. I find myself missing my zipline in 'vanilla' BF2 now. THe only map that lags for me is the Iron Gator, and I only have 1 gig of ram and a 9800 pro video card. Somebody said to turn down/off shadows to improve the video lag.
I enjoy the day maps; hate the night maps.
Also... I don't view it as an "expansion pack".
To me, it's a new/different game.
Also... I don't view it as an "expansion pack".
To me, it's a new/different game.
I can't play it properly.
too much lag on all servers and massive loading times on the night maps something must be done (and don't say buy a better PC
too much lag on all servers and massive loading times on the night maps something must be done (and don't say buy a better PC
whahahahah
Not a very good expansion, should have stuck with the original format. New maps, vehicles, and wepons for the original, would have been nice. Hope that the next expansion goes back to the basics and fixes all the bugs. Also, I miss beeing able to play all the maps from both on one server like battlefield 1942. Hope this will happen in the next patch. Never have lag, maybe I've just found the good servers.
Last edited by yuck7777 (2005-12-29 07:12:35)
I like SF, because of the higher tactical issue...
IRNV-Field 3... New School Shit...
I like SF, I just dont like the night time missions much, its like Splinter Cell, whats the point in havin uber graphics if you have to look through night vision all the time.After playin SF for a while its a joy to go play Karkand in the daylight!!
To laggy no matter what server I'm on, long loading times, and the new vehicals suck, steering that piece of shit tank/apc thing is a joke, ATV's explode on impact on nearly all objects, helo's glide sideways unrealistically, night vision is a pain in the ass.
My solid conclusion is that they tried WAY to hard to make things 'balanced', which ended up quite the oposite.
If there wernt dumbasses out there who like to adjust their contrast and brightness to see in the dark, or people who use hacks, I know I wouldn't have to deal with half of the laggy/waiting issues with this game due to a poorly implimented solution.
Far as tactics go, they're needed, because I never have good rounds with SF, and from my experience, people play even more un-teamlike in SF.
My solid conclusion is that they tried WAY to hard to make things 'balanced', which ended up quite the oposite.
If there wernt dumbasses out there who like to adjust their contrast and brightness to see in the dark, or people who use hacks, I know I wouldn't have to deal with half of the laggy/waiting issues with this game due to a poorly implimented solution.
Far as tactics go, they're needed, because I never have good rounds with SF, and from my experience, people play even more un-teamlike in SF.
Last edited by Ryan_Mercury (2005-12-29 06:54:56)
lol, i love devils perch even though its a night map, i got an average score of 90+ on that map (32 player). i like tactical maps, and i only let the ppl i know join my squad, and if i dont know who the fuck they are, they better give me a very good reason why i shouldnt kick them from the squad
OK I won't say it but the fault does not lie in the server. There are servers that manage BOTH versions of the game. To them, data is data and game type is of no consequence to the server.fdcp_elmo wrote:
I can't play it properly.
too much lag on all servers and massive loading times on the night maps something must be done (and don't say buy a better PC
Looks like SF is more robust that the base game and demands more video processor power and memory. From what I've seen in order to run the game with all options maximized you need an Athlon 3200 or higher, 2 GB RAM, and an Nvidia 6800 or higher. Intel and ATI equivalents I'm not sure of.
I've been able to play all maps using a 4 MB/S internet connection with an Athlon64, 4 GB RAM, and an NVidia 6800 with 256 MB RAM on a PCI-E mobo. The larger memory permits me to enter a new game if not first certainly sooner than most people. This gives me the option to grab a tank or other prized asset and be rolling towards a flag before anyone else has spwaned.
Way to fail at generalizations about the entire BF2 gaming community.Fo_Shizzle wrote:
sf sucks, no one ever plays it, its too tactical, bf2 is good enough for me
I'm not too big on the night maps but Warlord and Ghost Town are pretty fun, I also like some of the new vehicles, ATVs are a great addition for people like me who like to get to certain points behind enemy lines nice and fast.
Im doing it for the new maps and weapons /
G36E FTW!
G36E FTW!
Kanil & KillerAFET hit it right on the head, forklifts and fewer noobs make a powerful combination
Gotta like warlord, it's like Karkand II.
Not to mention the fraction of the idiots that play. In SF it's not uncommon to see squads working together, good commanders, etc.
Not to mention the fraction of the idiots that play. In SF it's not uncommon to see squads working together, good commanders, etc.
Warlord rocks. I first played it yesturday, I like it, you need skill to be able to play it, you cant just camp one place if that is your story, you can zipline to flags...use grappling hook, flashbang then rush or teargas then rush. I lOVE IT
More emphasis on infantry combat. Infantry has always been my specialism.
Too tactical? Please explain what you mean by that.Fo_Shizzle wrote:
sf sucks, no one ever plays it, its too tactical, bf2 is good enough for me
never had lag, like the new maps, weapons and vehicles, not too keen on the night maps needs a few bugs fixing all on all i like it. Yes better teamplay, still some noobs that dont wait a sec to see if anyone else is coming down the zip line...way to break a leg lol....my system is a dinosaur....lol 5700 ultra, 1 and a quarter gigs of ram, 2.4gig athlon pro, sata HD and both games run ok! and only 1 meg broadband...
Pages: 1 2
- Index »
- Games »
- Battlefield Series »
- Battlefield 2 »
- Expansions/Mods »
- Special Forces »
- Do we really like anything about Special force's Poll