Today I really want to just play a game (NOT RTS) were you can have FUCKING EPIC HUGE battles with like...alot...of people. Should i get mag? or Bad company 2? COME ON FP. TELL ME WHAT GAME I CAN PLAY.
Any battlefield game
If you want quantity over quality go for MAG, if you want quality over quantity go for Bad Company 2.
Bad Company 2 may have less players than MAG, but the sounds alone make it feel so much more intense.
Mount & Blade
:eng101:
ARMA 2 if you want games that let you have a lot of units fighting.
It's a lot less buggy these days and with ACE2 it's pretty damn amazing.
Like Mount and Blade?
im guessing you mean quantity as in number of players, and quality as in gameplay?
bah
ArmA 2 has the capacity for huge battles, but I'm not sure if they're all that common (especially since the game's based on realistic warfare). If you're okay with something that isn't a shooter, Mount and Blade has huge medieval battles.
[editline]05:33PM[/editline]
Ninja'd for both...
[QUOTE=Vengance199;20539858]im guessing you mean quantity as in number of players, and quality as in gameplay?[/QUOTE]
Yes.
[QUOTE=133753P34K;20539849]ARMA 2 if you want games that let you have a lot of units fighting.
It's a lot less buggy these days and with ACE2 it's pretty damn amazing.[/QUOTE]
my computer can NOT run arma 2
Arma 2 can have some large battles if you set them up yourself in the editor, but most servers support anywhere from 16 to 32, although I have seen 64 players games and have heard there was once a server that supported as many as 256. That's probably just an urban legend, though.
[QUOTE=Snuffy;20539975]Arma 2 can have some large battles if you set them up yourself in the editor, but most servers support anywhere from 16 to 32, although I have seen 64 players games and have heard there was once a server that supported as many as 256. That's probably just an urban legend, though.[/QUOTE]
It exists. There was some pretty terrible game mode that was popular for a bit and it supported 256 players (The only server that hosted it was 256).
It was like domination but worse.
I really thought you were talking about single player games with like thousands of people shooting at each other, but you should go for bad company 2
[QUOTE=titopei;20542686]I really thought you were talking about single player games with like thousands of people shooting at each other, but you should go for bad company 2[/QUOTE]
besides arma 2, what single player game is there (NOT RTS) like that?
Mount & Blade has some of the best (if not the best) non-RTS large scale battles. I use to spend hours a day traveling around seiging castles and having huge 300+ vs 300+ battles
Battlegrounds Europe.
WW2 MMO.
battlefield 1942
Fallout 3, GTA4.
[QUOTE=Vengance199;20542887]besides arma 2, what single player game is there (NOT RTS) like that?[/QUOTE]
ARMA 1 and OFP 1 :v:
[QUOTE=133753P34K;20543353]ARMA 1 and OFP 1 :v:[/QUOTE]
haha good point
And also, is battlefield 1943 better than 1942?
If you can't run ArmA2 then you can't run BC2.
Upgrade first before buying anything else.
[QUOTE=Vengance199;20543389]haha good point
And also, is battlefield 1943 better than 1942?[/QUOTE]
no.
i miss 1942 now
fuck
Battlefield 2.
Get Bad Company 2, and if you have a good PC, ARMA 2.
Joint Operations features 150 player battles, but I don't know if they're still hosted anymore as it's quite an obscure game these days.
Other than that and the other games that have been mentioned, there isn't much else in the action shooter genre.
[QUOTE=The_Marine;20544265]If you can't run ArmA2 then you can't run BC2.
Upgrade first before buying anything else.[/QUOTE]
i can run bf2 on my ps3 :D
If you want the biggest of the big, then get MAG. 256 players per battle is nothing to wave fingers at, no matter how unbalanced it may be.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
