[QUOTE=xxdeadb0ltxx;27361552]Is that so much to ask for :([/QUOTE]
Yes.
I can't wait, my balls are tingling!
[QUOTE=Johnnsen;27348470]Bigger max players would be great. Obviously since stuff is always headed to console too it holds back a ton of stuff that the PC was able to handle fine years ago, including the playcount, but huge battles are a must for BF3.
Question is how much HUGE BATTLE atmosphere there is with 32 players max. I wish they would bump up the max players in multiplayer shooters already.
Especially with lots of vehicles and different roles for players on big maps, the atmospheric techniques used in BC2 would be awesome. (The graphics and sound do a great job for that in BC2 already, despite the rather narrow fights)[/QUOTE]
Are you refering to 32 players per team? Cause currently BF2 supports up to 64 player games. I doubt they would go backwards....
[editline]11th January 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Kidd;27360101]I don't mind destruction as long it's minor.
Blowing away a fence or trees and certain walls is fine.
I just dont' want to be taking cover in a house and the whole fucking thing just blows up.[/QUOTE]
[editline]11th January 2011[/editline]
Thats cause your a camper
[QUOTE=HCF;27362392]
Thats cause your a camper[/QUOTE]
Camping with the right class in bf2 can be a game changer.
[QUOTE=johan_sm;27362689]Camping with the right class in bf2 can be a game changer.[/QUOTE]
Its also super fucking lame.
Things need to be more destructible than in BC2. I don't want to see a pixel worth of stuff I can't remove with sufficient explosives. :D
[QUOTE=BmB;27363106]Things need to be more destructible than in BC2. I don't want to see a pixel worth of stuff I can't remove with sufficient explosives. :D[/QUOTE]
no
[QUOTE=BrickInHead;27363168]no[/QUOTE]
yes
Yes. Go shoot rockets at invincible wooden doors in 2004, I'll be in the future if you need me.
[QUOTE=BmB;27363201]Yes. Go shoot rockets at invincible wooden doors in 2004, I'll be in the future if you need me.[/QUOTE]
Go shoot doors that are not meant to be shot while you should be following the story and linear gameplay and enjoying the experience it gives to you.
[QUOTE=BmB;27363201]Yes. Go shoot rockets at invincible wooden doors in 2004, I'll be in the future if you need me.[/QUOTE]
go ahead and destroy every pixel of the environment like a tool while the enemy team caps your point then you ADD little tool; it's not like it's a game that should have some form of landscape other than a horizontal plane because you just want to level everything
[editline]11th January 2011[/editline]
i called you a tool too many times in that post, let me grab a thesaurus really quickly
[editline]11th January 2011[/editline]
twit
[QUOTE=kukiric;27363249]Go shoot doors that are not meant to be shot while you should be following the story and linear gameplay and enjoying the experience it gives to you.[/QUOTE]
This is Battlefield.
[QUOTE=BrickInHead;27359693]i disagree i think the squad changes were a step backwards
by making it so that you could spawn on any of your squadmates it completely ruined the "squad" sense of the game, there was practically no reason to stay around one central leader and stay alive together in one group.[/QUOTE]
I disagree. If anything, it helped. In the originals, if your squad leader died, he can't spawn on you. Your entire squad had to either split up, or fall all the way back to a friendly point to regroup with your newly spawned squad leader. Now, if you squad leader takes a 50 cal. to the head, he can simply respawn one of the three of you and keep on plowin'. How does that remove the need to stay around a central leader? It makes you work together. If anything, it removes some big monarch character and makes each squad member equally important. If ever you do split up, it would only be by a few dozen feet or so, flanking around a house.
The only time you'd ever truly split up is if your squad had no intention at all of working together, such as someone sitting in the back getting marksman headshots while another viciously camped the heli spawn.
[editline]11th January 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=FunnyBunny;27363538]I disagree. If anything, it helped. In the originals, if your squad leader died, he can't spawn on you. Your entire squad had to either slowly die off, or fall all the way back to a friendly point to regroup with your newly spawned squad leader. Now, if you squad leader takes a 50 cal. to the head, he can simply respawn one of the three of you and keep on plowin'. How does that remove the need to stay around a central leader? It makes you work together. If anything, it removes some big monarch character and makes each squad member equally important. If ever you do split up, it would only be by a few dozen feet or so, flanking around a house.
The only time you'd ever truly split up is if your squad had no intention at all of working together, such as someone sitting in the back getting marksman headshots while another viciously camped the heli spawn.[/QUOTE]
But that's how 90% of people play, join a squad for the free spawn point, don't teamplay for shit. So I think the free spawn point should be taken away. Including other "incentives" to play in a squad. There should be literally no advantage but the fact that you are playing as an organized group. That'll keep the loners out of the squads and actually make them useful.
Or you could just play with people you know/know online, and still take advantage of the squad benefits.
Can't wait for this one.
I remember playing on a custom jetplane map with friends and we intentionally crash into each other in high speed.
Shit was awesome :v:
Battlefield 2 with a lesser emphasis on Jets would be great. Jets completely ruined vehicle maps.
[QUOTE=BmB;27363567]But that's how 90% of people play, join a squad for the free spawn point, don't teamplay for shit. So I think the free spawn point should be taken away. Including other "incentives" to play in a squad. There should be literally no advantage but the fact that you are playing as an organized group. That'll keep the loners out of the squads and actually make them useful.[/QUOTE]
That and alot of servers now threatening to kick you if you don't join a squad which forces alot of lonewolfs out there into squads, which could be a spot for someone who wants to be a teamplayer.
[QUOTE=Nyaos;27365119]Battlefield 2 with a lesser emphasis on Jets would be great. Jets completely ruined vehicle maps.[/QUOTE]
You couldn't drive a tank on Wake Island for more than 10 seconds before some asshole pilot with a 40-0 K:D ratio bombed your ass to hell.
[QUOTE=BmB;27347549]I wish they would stop using GDC as a second E3.[/QUOTE]
They should use Pax east
Pax east is the only really-popular Convention on the East coast :saddowns:
[QUOTE=Tac Error;27365740]You couldn't drive a tank on Wake Island for more than 10 seconds before some asshole pilot with a 40-0 K:D ratio bombed your ass to hell.[/QUOTE]
Haters gonna hate...
This takes me back to the days of 1943 where I was a total pimp of a pilot and could always land a bomb on a tank. The pinnacle of my days was when I dive bombed 2 tanks that were passing each other on a road on Guadalcanal. Each bomb (1 from each wing) hit a tank, blowing up both of them, giving me a multikill.
[QUOTE=Nyaos;27365119]Battlefield 2 with a lesser emphasis on Jets would be great. Jets completely ruined vehicle maps.[/QUOTE]
TV Guided missiles weren't much better. When the air is more powerful than the anti-air there's something dead wrong.
It's being shown on my birthday :unsmith:
Good antiair+slower jet spawn would be good.
Also, if I hit a jet or a heli with a tank shell.
That jet or heli damn well better fucking *disintegrate*, not shrug it off like it was nothing.
[QUOTE=M_B;27358374]I hope this offers me something that Bad Company 2 doesn't have
[editline]11th January 2011[/editline]
the game runs beautifully for me, at literally maximum settings i'm still getting upward of 140 FPS, so maybe there's just something messed up with your system[/QUOTE]
Well there was this thread on the EA forums taking about two brothers who bought the exact same prebuilt pc's at the exact same time, both having the same hardware, one brother was able to max out all the settings while the other had the same problem I did, couldn't run the game past low without getting a slideshow. So they tried everything, switching hard drives, steam accounts, reinstalling, etc.. etc.. nothing would work, for some reason the game just wouldn't run well on that one brother's pc while on the other it was fine.
It's a problem that DICE said they would patch, it happened to 10% of the players, and they never patched it. Even when I tried the new MoH beta hoping that at least they would have improved the engine I couldn't run that game past lowest settings.
Hmm i just switched to windows 7 recently from vista.
And when i installed BC2 on win 7 it ran like crap, then installed audio driver and fixed.
Back to 50-60fps again.
I really hope it's not some downgraded crappy 32 player console port. The thrill of Battlefield 2 for me was always the squad mechanic. How you were actually working as a team, under a commander, and you weren't just CoD-style deathmatching everywhere: it truly felt like a team game.
Huge maps, huge player counts, and more akin to BF2 than BC2.
I just hope they have the same game structure as BF2 really; same classes and unlock system, same ranks. Remove the artillery strike from the sniper, give it back to the commander, etc.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
