[QUOTE=Raidyr;36454766][video=youtube;lqQk_be2FYE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqQk_be2FYE[/video][/QUOTE]
I do not understand why you would buy this. The point of BF3 is open warfare, if you want CoD style gameplay buy CoD.
[QUOTE=Scot;36455369]I do not understand why you would buy this. The point of BF3 is open warfare, if you want CoD style gameplay buy CoD.[/QUOTE]
It was a bit of a break from the usual map design and added a bit of variety to the maps.
It also added new weapons, I for one think its cool for them to branch out a little.
[QUOTE=DesumThePanda;36455480]It was a bit of a break from the usual map design and added a bit of variety to the maps.[/QUOTE]
oh so open maps that feature infantry combat only wouldn't be exciting?
multiple ways to flank your enemy as the defend a choke point? flanking from multiple sides, etc etc
I think that would be fun, specially a jungle warfare or something, with bunkers, in ground bunkers and shit
[QUOTE=DesumThePanda;36455480]It was a bit of a break from the usual map design and added a bit of variety to the maps.[/QUOTE]
They should have made close quarters more like BF2 Special Forces, but exept for Gun Game the DLC seems terrible.
[QUOTE=Scot;36455369]I do not understand why you would buy this. The point of BF3 is open warfare, if you want CoD style gameplay buy CoD.[/QUOTE]
And now you DON'T have to buy CoD.
[QUOTE=SatansSin;36456226]oh so open maps that feature infantry combat only wouldn't be exciting?
[/QUOTE]
When did I ever day that they [i]wouldn't[/i]?
I like the idea of small maps like Close Quarters. They're chaotic, fast paced, and just fun as hell to play.
[QUOTE=simzboy;36456431]I like the idea of small maps like Close Quarters. They're chaotic, fast paced, and just fun as hell to play.[/QUOTE]
When I first got battlefield 3 I though 64 player metro was crazy, the CQ maps blew my mind.
What benefit does this have, it doesn't rank you up any.
I got this in my campaign playthrough without trying
faggots made me waste lots of An-94 ammo
I'd rather play metro than those new maps. And since I loathe metro, it says a lot. There are no chokepoints on those new maps. There is just constant flanking from 3 sides while being flanked from 5 at the same time. It kinda reminds me of Unreal Tournament but with the size of the maps and number of players it doesn't really work.
[QUOTE=SweFox*;36454748]Would be something if it were MP and not Sp.[/QUOTE]
I've seen it happen in MP, where the enemy team just kept spawning in the exact same spot right in the open so people would just sit around there and shoot them.
[QUOTE=Scot;36455369]I do not understand why you would buy this. The point of BF3 is open warfare, if you want CoD style gameplay buy CoD.[/QUOTE]
Every time I see someone type this I think of those morons who only play on 24/7 Caspian 64 player conquest.
Because Battlefield is only fun in gigantic open maps, right :v?
[editline]23rd June 2012[/editline]
sadly they did the small maps completely wrong
they're only fun if you have a smaller amount of players and you're not playing shitty gunmaster
[QUOTE=SatansSin;36456226]oh so open maps that feature infantry combat only wouldn't be exciting?
multiple ways to flank your enemy as the defend a choke point? flanking from multiple sides, etc etc
I think that would be fun, specially a jungle warfare or something, with bunkers, in ground bunkers and shit[/QUOTE]
This would be a great point except the game has that already, so they added some new CQ maps to give more options.
[QUOTE=RichyZ;36456932]except bf3 does close quarters horribly and cod does it well enough[/QUOTE]
No. No it doesn't. CoD CQB is a clusterfuck. Knives and fast firing shotguns, and that's it. Why should I ever think in a CQB situation in CoD, when I can just press one button that does everything for me. It's a one hit kill from any angle, it locks on, it's fast, and it can lunge.
Love how footage of BF3's singleplayer turns into yet another discussion about Close Quarters :v:
[QUOTE=RichyZ;36456932]except bf3 does close quarters horribly and cod does it well enough[/QUOTE]
BF3's close quarters are way better than CoDs.
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;36459164]Because Battlefield is only fun in gigantic open maps, right :v?[/QUOTE]
Yes.
I have close quarters and its actually really fun, even though the spawns are still shit
[QUOTE=simkas;36461605]BF3's close quarters are way better than CoDs.[/QUOTE]
While BF3 makes huge leaps in infantry combat as opposed to previous games (I would never say BF2 infantry combat even approaches the level of accuracy CoD delivers) I still very much prefer CoD.
Movement is smoother, small things like ADS and reload speeds are faster, and the whole package feels tighter. Again BF3 doesn't feel bad; I like the occasional Metro or Seine. CoD just does it better.
I wonder why they didn't use those other models in singleplayer for multiplayer.Would be cool if we could change models for each faction.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
