Battlefield 3 - Games - Facepunch Forum

[QUOTE=alex525;27952993]Just... no magnum ammo. [B]PLEASE.[/B][/QUOTE] No perks, period. Even more so for vehicles, why would a vehicle suddenly get more armor or the ability to pop smoke just because someone got into it (I see the potential for a joke here, but you get the point).

[QUOTE=DaMastez;27954998]No perks, period. Even more so for vehicles, why would a vehicle suddenly get more armor or the ability to pop smoke just because someone got into it (I see the potential for a joke here, but you get the point).[/QUOTE] I think all tanks should have the ability to pop smoke and all helis should be able to pop flares

[QUOTE=Jrock455;27955263]I think all tanks should have the ability to pop smoke and all helis should be able to pop flares[/QUOTE] Just like the old days, baby.

I hated Hardcore in BC2, yes, it gets unrealistic without it, but i can't stand playing without a minimap, even more with medic.

Yeah, I don't like running around blind and dying in one hit most of the time ether.

[QUOTE=thedekoykid;27947226]For some reason, I'm getting the impression that the Bad-Company series was a "test-bed" for the Frostbite engine. They needed to make money and globally test a game engine before making the next Battlefield game.[/QUOTE] Don't say. Bad company's are awesome. I'm yet to find an MP game that is more intense than Bad Company 2 - the graphics, the sounds, the particles, the exploding walls.. Oh god. Don't know about you guys, but every second round that I have looks no worse than this: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vepiJznvvY0[/media] How's that not awesome?

The problem is that the already bad balance of bfbc2 gets completely destroyed when you reduce the life to 60%.

Yeah I like Hardcore mode, but I really hope it won't be just "Same game, just without HUD and 60% health". It needs to be done better.

BF3 better have onslaught for all maps or MP coop for all maps.

[QUOTE=acds;27956783]Yeah I like Hardcore mode, but I really hope it won't be just "Same game, just without HUD and 60% health". It needs to be done better.[/QUOTE] You have to be joking, developers actually take the time to balance hardcore separately from softcore instead of just disabling the HUD with one command and then cutting everyones health in half or so? Joking aside, perhaps simply having proper hitboxes where one shot to your foot (or hand, or arm, or leg) won't kill you in hardcore would help a lot. [QUOTE=marlkarxv3;27956985]BF3 better have onslaught for all maps or MP coop for all maps.[/QUOTE] No, it better have Conquest; other gamemodes are fine as long as they are designed around keeping the combat on a wide field (so, not rush). As for coop I believe they confirmed there would be coop of some sort.

I don't know why but I can't get used to the weapons on BF2. It just seems pure luck actually hitting someone and doing sufficient damage half the time. No doubt they'll have better feedback in BF3, thats one thing BC2 did right.

[QUOTE=DaMastez;27957125] No, it better have Conquest; other gamemodes are fine as long as they are designed around keeping the combat on a wide field (so, not rush). As for coop I believe they confirmed there would be coop of some sort.[/QUOTE] it's [B]BATTLEFIELD 3[/B], how would it not have conquest?. BC2 has conquest, it sucks because all the maps designed like box canyons that force you to shuffle to one end of the map or the other with no room to maneuver, but it's still there. It's the bread and butter of the Battlefield series, hell even some of the different game modes like titan mode are offshoots of Conquest, Battlefield just isn't Battlefield without it.

Yeah, BC2 was all Rush, I want the real Battlefield gamemode, and that's Conquest. Rush is fine, but it should not be the standard mode.

There is Conquest in BC2 you know.

Next thread should be a Battlefield Megathread. That would be stellar.

[QUOTE=acds;27957438]Yeah, BC2 was all Rush, I want the real Battlefield gamemode, and that's Conquest. Rush is fine, but it should not be the standard mode.[/QUOTE] Yeah I do hope they keep Rush and have specially tailored versions of maps for it. but have that in addition to conquest not the other way around. rush is fun, but conquest on rush maps is not.

[QUOTE=Strikebango;27957493]There is Conquest in BC2 you know.[/QUOTE] I know, but it felt like the game was thought for Rush, then they added in Conquest.

[QUOTE=DaMastez;27957125] No, it better have Conquest; other gamemodes are fine as long as they are designed around keeping the combat on a wide field (so, not rush). As for coop I believe they confirmed there would be coop of some sort.[/QUOTE] Well no fucking duh it will have conquest. And the coop is for the campaign. Adding bots won't take time away from development. BF:1942 and BF:V had full bot support. Look how they turned out. BF2 didn't have full bot support, but it had the tools to add such a thing. Look how that turned out.

[QUOTE=marlkarxv3;27958576]Well no fucking duh it will have conquest. And the coop is for the campaign. Adding bots won't take time away from development. BF:1942 and BF:V had full bot support. Look how they turned out. BF2 didn't have full bot support, but it had the tools to add such a thing. Look how that turned out.[/QUOTE] The most highly regarded online shooter of all time? I don't see where your going with that. In other news, I've been having a blast playing Project Reality. Only problem I find is the "elitests" of the game. I just came out of one where I was playing transport helicopter, managed to do about 6 drops in a row without dieing, and died once to Anti Air, and was kicked from the squad. So I had no other choice but to make a second transport helicopter squad, and was reported to the admins for doing it. And then a second time for driving a helicopter, since I wasn't in THE transport helicopter squad.

[QUOTE=Redskins1234;27958814]The most highly regarded online shooter of all time? I don't see where your going with that.[/QUOTE] You didn't understand the post correctly. I'm saying that the best BF games had bot support.

[QUOTE=goon165;27957289]it's [B]BATTLEFIELD 3[/B], how would it not have conquest?. BC2 has conquest, it sucks because all the maps designed like box canyons that force you to shuffle to one end of the map or the other with no room to maneuver, but it's still there. It's the bread and butter of the Battlefield series, hell even some of the different game modes like titan mode are offshoots of Conquest, Battlefield just isn't Battlefield without it.[/QUOTE] Thing is, if you treat BC2 like a real battlefield game, you get something you don't like because it was not a sequel to BF2. It was a sequel to BC1, which was more linear, faster, smaller combat but still battelfield-ish. Tired of all the people complaining about BC2 being so small, it's you're fault for not knowing what they were aiming for because you didn't play BC1 or something.

[QUOTE=goon165;27957289]it's [B]BATTLEFIELD 3[/B], how would it not have conquest?. BC2 has conquest, it sucks because all the maps designed like box canyons that force you to shuffle to one end of the map or the other with no room to maneuver, but it's still there. It's the bread and butter of the Battlefield series, hell even some of the different game modes like titan mode are offshoots of Conquest, Battlefield just isn't Battlefield without it.[/QUOTE] Heavy Metal was the only good conquest map in BFBC2

they should get rid of hitboxes and move on to per-pixel detection already SOF2 had it COME ON

[QUOTE=evilweazel;27960084]Thing is, if you treat BC2 like a real battlefield game, you get something you don't like because it was not a sequel to BF2. It was a sequel to BC1, which was more linear, faster, smaller combat but still battelfield-ish. Tired of all the people complaining about BC2 being so small, it's you're fault for not knowing what they were aiming for because you didn't play BC1 or something.[/QUOTE] BC1 wasn't small at all. BC1's multiplayer was basically BF2 plus a shiny new coat of paint minus 64 player maps (which include jets) and the comrose.

Im thinking to buy battlefield 2, i own 2142 already and i love it, does it still worth it? [editline]9th February 2011[/editline] Well, i bought it anyway, the complete edition off course.

[QUOTE=spekter;27957217]I don't know why but I can't get used to the weapons on BF2. It just seems pure luck actually hitting someone and doing sufficient damage half the time. No doubt they'll have better feedback in BF3, thats one thing BC2 did right.[/QUOTE] Agreed.

[QUOTE=marlkarxv3;27960256]BC1 wasn't small at all. BC1's multiplayer was basically BF2 plus a shiny new coat of paint minus 64 player maps (which include jets) and the comrose.[/QUOTE] Never said small, just smaller.

[QUOTE=alx12345;27961247]Im thinking to buy battlefield 2, i own 2142 already and i love it, does it still worth it? [editline]9th February 2011[/editline] Well, i bought it anyway, the complete edition off course.[/QUOTE] Yes, well done, even though the booster packs are free nowadays, you'd save 2 bucks over the Deluxe edition.

Spreading myself as wide as possible: [quote]I didn't want to make a thread, so I hope you guys can help: I just reinstalled Battlefield 2142. I lost the account information for my key a long, long time ago, and the one-shot keys are a fucking joke, so I can't reregister my key, and EA support is fucking useless. Is there any known workaround? [editline]9th February 2011[/editline] And retrieval of the account is a no-go because the email it was tied to was compromised a long, long time ago.[/quote]

[QUOTE=Arachnidus;27962661]Spreading myself as wide as possible:[/QUOTE] Wait for steam release and buy again.