BF2S Forums Battlefield 3 - Main Thread

Roc18 wrote:

steelie34 wrote:

great might be pushing it.  it's fun, but i dont think it will hold the big audience as long as bf2 did.  everyone shit on how bad bc2 was and how they couldnt wait for bf3, and honestly they're still waiting.

heres the quote

Roc18 wrote:

The thing I like most about BF2 is that it didnt appeal to noobs like Bad Company and Now Battlefield 3 is doing with this instant gratification shit with all these ranks/unlocks/assignments, 3d spotting, regerating health, AND vehicles,cramped maps etc. I wish they stuck with the formula of BF2 and didn't bend it towards appealing console players. But that's life all good things either change or come to an end. I look at Battlefield 3 not as a sequel but as a completely different type of game that I can still have fun with

Honestly what they should have done was call it Bad Company 3 lol. Bad Company 2 was meh, I only have about 80 hours on it after a year of playing.

Battlefield 3 is fun but it isn't using all of it's potential.

I think bc2 is a better game than bf3. The air warfar in that game left something to be desired, for sure, but the air warfare in bf3 sucks just as bad

I don't think it's fair to say the game sucks. When BF2 was released, it was groundbreaking, a great development on an idea DICE had been working on for years. BF3 isn't groundbreaking, it would be hard for it to be groundbreaking. It's already treading on ground BF2 covered and it has to adapt to a new era of gamers.

Sure, the game isn't as amazing as BF2 once was, but it's still a good game regardless. Movement is fluid, the gameplay is of a decent standard and there are plenty of options available to the player should he/she find themselves in a difficult spot.

I find it hard to understand why people say it's shit, simply because, well, it isn't. You're a fucking moron if you think the game is completely shit. You're someone who fails to understand the hard work that goes into these games and fails to appreciate a game for what it is - a game.

Remember, back in the BF2 days it was much easier for a game to be groundbreaking as there was less money/interest in the gaming industry. These days every fucker is at it and every topic has been pretty much raped to death.

The problem with most people who post of forums like this, is that you'll complain regardless of how good a game is.

Whenever someone is admiring the jets on BF3 you know they never piloted in BF2.   Totally faggotized.  The airspace is a fucking joke and whats with this invisible wall/stalling out @ ~400m?  Half the fun of the BF2 dogfights was leading the pursuer into outer space then taunting him as he was getting the countdown.

Just because people put a lot of hard work into something doesn't mean we should go easy on them and doesn't mean it's automatically not a piece of shit.

I'm disappointed because I would've been completely happy if it were BF2 + updated graphics. That's all they had to do. But they went a completely different direction, which is fine if that's their goal and that's what they want to do. They sure have picked up a lot of new fans with this one. However, they've also lost a lot of fans.

How do you know what I would and wouldn't have done? That's not really a valid rebuttal.

I played BF2 up until the beta for BF3. I enjoyed the hell out of it. I would have been satisfied if they used the same formula + updated graphics.

Thing is Battlefield 2 left huge shoes to fill, all the hype etc that went into marketing this game the past year culminating with the release had alot of people's hopes up for the game. Instead of a 10/10 game people were hoping for they got slapped with a 7-8/10 game. Battlefield 3 is good and I appreciate it for what it brings to the table, i expected this game to be better but I'm satisfied with what I bought.

Other people are pegging this game as if it's a 1/10 game when it's not.

There's still enough to do and enough variety to make me want to play this over MW3. The game isn't a complete piece of shit, it's still playable. But I know that there is absolutely no way I will ever get the longevity or that supremely satisfying feeling after a close round with lots of teamwork by both sides that I got in BF2. Like I said before, the game is flawed at a fundamental level and nothing can fix it.

Times have changed and EA/DICE wants to take down CoD. They're going about the gaming business the wrong way.

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Roc18 wrote:

steelie34 wrote:

great might be pushing it.  it's fun, but i dont think it will hold the big audience as long as bf2 did.  everyone shit on how bad bc2 was and how they couldnt wait for bf3, and honestly they're still waiting.

heres the quote

Roc18 wrote:

The thing I like most about BF2 is that it didnt appeal to noobs like Bad Company and Now Battlefield 3 is doing with this instant gratification shit with all these ranks/unlocks/assignments, 3d spotting, regerating health, AND vehicles,cramped maps etc. I wish they stuck with the formula of BF2 and didn't bend it towards appealing console players. But that's life all good things either change or come to an end. I look at Battlefield 3 not as a sequel but as a completely different type of game that I can still have fun with

Honestly what they should have done was call it Bad Company 3 lol. Bad Company 2 was meh, I only have about 80 hours on it after a year of playing.

Battlefield 3 is fun but it isn't using all of it's potential.

I think bc2 is a better game than bf3. The air warfar in that game left something to be desired, for sure, but the air warfare in bf3 sucks just as bad

ill play some bc2 or bf2 with you. i actually had some fun tank whoring in bc2, but the infantry was complete trash

mtb0minime wrote:

Pure_Beef_68 wrote:

mtb0minime wrote:

How do you know what I would and wouldn't have done? That's not really a valid rebuttal.

I played BF2 up until the beta for BF3. I enjoyed the hell out of it. I would have been satisfied if they used the same formula + updated graphics.

Because i see how easily you, among others, pick faults with the game. You'd be pissed if you forked out £40 for a game with updated graphics.

Don't get me wrong mtb0minime, i'm not saying BF3 is an amazing game. Nor am I saying that I like it anywhere near as much as I liked BF2. But, i will say that it isn't a bad game. Like any game, it has its faults. Unfortunately, BF2 players (as sad as it is, myself included) had huge expectations fr this game, only to realise that the series has moved on.

The sad part is that I didn't have huge expectations and it still let me down.

Okay, lets face it, no one has huge expectations of Dice. We always moaned at every new patch and every nerf that came with it. But i'm sure secretly you were hoping for something amazing.

All i'm saying is, whilst BF3 isn't the great, groundbreaking game BF2 once was, it's still a good game. I just think people get carried away on forums, especially as it takes zero effort to write how much you 'fucking hate' a game without applying little thought or reason.

it takes zero effort to write how much i fucking love a game

i fucking love bf2

mtb0minime wrote:

Pure_Beef_68 wrote:

I just think people get carried away on forums, especially as it takes zero effort to write how much you 'fucking hate' a game without applying little thought or reason.

Same can be said about saying a game is good.

You seem to be discounting other people's opinions because it doesn't match yours.

Not at all, i understand people not liking the game if it's not to their tastes. But for people to say it's 'shit' and 'fucking awful' is a massive exaggeration. People get too carried away on subjects like this, it's incredibly sad.

Oh well, at least BF3 is better (only slightly) than BC2.