You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

Battlefield Bad company 2

Posted: Sun, 7th Feb 2010, 1:07am

Post 1 of 32

Fxhome Dude

Force: 996 | Joined: 1st Jun 2009 | Posts: 927

CompositeLab Pro User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Has anyone seen this?
Link
I got around to downloading the beta yesterday. It feels just like MW2 but there are so many options. There's none of the Halo, "Yea he unleashed a full round into me but I still got him." Everything is painfully realistic and a run-in-and-hope-for-the-best approach gets you nowhere but dead. It's Modern Warfare 2 wtih more vecichles, longer campaign, destructible enviroments, sweet graphics, in depth class system. Granted there will be haters but I think this will draw some of the deeper gamers in simply because of the tactical approach u have to take.. Granted MW2 will still rule because it's modern warefare (and 10 million + have already bought it). Has anyone else tried the beta? Thoughts?

Last edited Sun, 7th Feb 2010, 1:10am; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sun, 7th Feb 2010, 1:09am

Post 2 of 32

AwesomeFist

Force: 288 | Joined: 6th Dec 2008 | Posts: 541

Windows User MacOS User

Member

I heard of it but i haven't been able to find a beta key so i know nothing about it.
Posted: Sun, 7th Feb 2010, 1:31am

Post 3 of 32

Jrad

Force: 230 | Joined: 30th Apr 2005 | Posts: 478

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

I agree, its defiantly a hoot. You really have to rely on team work, in my opinion, to win. Sadly, no one really "talks." At least in the matches I've been in.

There is a comfortable amount of realism in it. Which keeps your actions you make in check, but doesn't get you frustrated.
Posted: Sun, 7th Feb 2010, 5:55pm

Post 4 of 32

Fxhome Dude

Force: 996 | Joined: 1st Jun 2009 | Posts: 927

CompositeLab Pro User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

The only thing I find dumb are the revivals that the medics can do. You have to wait an extra 10 seconds before spawning, and from personal experience, I'm not usually running around 15 sec. after being shot through the head....
Posted: Sun, 7th Feb 2010, 6:35pm

Post 5 of 32

Axeman

Force: 17995 | Joined: 20th Jan 2002 | Posts: 6124

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

SuperUser

Rating: +1

Wait... you have personal experience of being shot through the head?
Posted: Sun, 7th Feb 2010, 9:20pm

Post 6 of 32

Fxhome Dude

Force: 996 | Joined: 1st Jun 2009 | Posts: 927

CompositeLab Pro User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Firgure of speech and literal personifaction. I meant that since BF:BC2 is trying to focus on being realistic, it's rather dumb to have medics that can revive you and then ten seconds later your back in action. By personal expirence I meant most video games I play....Lol.
Posted: Sun, 7th Feb 2010, 10:29pm

Post 7 of 32

Terminal Velocity

Force: 2507 | Joined: 7th Apr 2008 | Posts: 1350

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

FXhome Dude wrote:

There's none of the Halo, "Yea he unleashed a full round into me but I still got him."
This just perplexed me a bit, because a round is one bullet. Did you mean a full magazine?

I don't know much about the first Battlefield, but this seems a bit like a copy off Call of Duty and other uber-popular shooters. The destruction system looks pretty neat though.
But if they're aiming for realism, creating firepoints is unrealistic. You try blasting a hole in concrete, you're going to get hit by shrapnel.
Posted: Sun, 7th Feb 2010, 10:55pm

Post 8 of 32

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

DO NOT CALL BATTLEFIELD A COPY OF CALL OF DUTY, YOU BASTARD!

Sorry. What I meant to say is that Battlefield's actually been around longer (PC Battlefield 1942 came out before PC Call of Duty 1). Playing Battlefield 2 on PC brings back vivid memories of incredible multiplayer moments, whereas Call of Duty is just a Halo-like "LOL I PWNED U" type of thing. Battlefield is about the atmosphere more than the skill level.
Posted: Mon, 8th Feb 2010, 4:24pm

Post 9 of 32

Fxhome Dude

Force: 996 | Joined: 1st Jun 2009 | Posts: 927

CompositeLab Pro User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I agree with Richard. You can't tell me that knives, air to ground missiles (No?), and entire feel of the game wasn't inspired at all by MW2. BF: BC2 enhanced the formula with destruction 2.o more vehicles. The series themselves are incredibly different but Bad Co. 2 feels like an exact copy of MW2.
And Richard I meant magazine. 32 rounds assault rifle mag.
Posted: Mon, 8th Feb 2010, 5:19pm

Post 10 of 32

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

I think the air-to-ground missiles and knives were influenced by actual modern combat. I think BC2 is definitely trying to compete against MW2, but that's obvious because they are both war games set in modern times... and before you say that Bad Company copied Modern Warfare 1 on that, Battlefield 2 actually was the first of the two games to do it.
Posted: Mon, 8th Feb 2010, 5:22pm

Post 11 of 32

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

FXhome Dude wrote:

I agree with Richard. You can't tell me that knives, air to ground missiles (No?), and entire feel of the game wasn't inspired at all by MW2. BF: BC2 enhanced the formula with destruction 2.o more vehicles. The series themselves are incredibly different but Bad Co. 2 feels like an exact copy of MW2.
And Richard I meant magazine. 32 rounds assault rifle mag.
But that's just the opinion with someone who has a tunnel visioned experience of the history of computer games and as a result, an opinion which does not coincide with fact.

First Up : BFBC2 Isn't aiming for realism on anti-particular level other than the improve graphics. The BF experience has always been solidly arcade. What a lot of kiddies seem to forget is that Realism is Boring - Arma 2 (A game I thoroughly enjoy) all too often serves as a reminder that crawling on your belly through the woods for 2 hours before being killed by something you didn't understand isn't a whole lot of fun.

BFBC2 is primarily about one thing : Blowing things the hell up. If you didn't notice that, there's something very wrong with you. BF has always been an arcade experience.

Secondly, I don't really see how BFBC2 can be seen as an exact copy of MW2 given that they're almost completely different in both gameplay style and setting. Though if you knew anything about games - you'd know that BF1942's Desert Combat visited the Iraq setting several years before Modern Warfare 1 was released.

Still, is it any surprise Iraq became a setting for war games? Really? Maybe games follow real life trends rather than implicitly each other.

My thoughts of the Demo : Totally lacks the sense of adventure that I valued the BF series for. Hopefully this is a problem limited to the game mode. I miss the scale of BF2 - 64 player maps, the sky AND the ground filled with players and squads performing stealth missions into enemy territory. It was that environment which led to some of my favorite experiences in gaming.

Not that I'd expect you kids to understands. You weren't there man, YOU WEREN'T THERE!
Posted: Mon, 8th Feb 2010, 5:37pm

Post 12 of 32

Fxhome Dude

Force: 996 | Joined: 1st Jun 2009 | Posts: 927

CompositeLab Pro User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I'm not really referring to the series themselves. They are totally different I agree. I'm simply saying it feels like BFBC2 took the winning MW2 formula, twisted it alittle, and marketed it. That's the opinion of a recreational-plug-in-an-play gamer. An experienced guy like you who's been around gaming for 20 years will probably have a different opinion... wink
Posted: Mon, 8th Feb 2010, 5:45pm

Post 13 of 32

Xcession

Force: 42802 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 1964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User Windows User

SuperUser

Rating: +1

DICE have openly stated in several official comments, that BFBC2 is aimed at taking MW2 off the top-spot, however that doesn't meant they're been designed to be the same game - quite the opposite. The addition of vehicles, the destruction and the huge sprawling maps is enough to quite clearly state that BFBC2 is nothing like MW2. The similarities are the modern setting, the emphasis on the graphical/audio experiences of being in a live battle, and the "ranking up" to attain new weapons and unlocks, but these have all existed long since before MW2.

I challenge you to play Americas Army. Its completely free. It is, without a doubt, the most hardcore multiplayer shooter out there. If you think this is "real", play that. You'll die on the battlefield about a zillion times and die a little more inside each time.

But yes, either way BFBC2 is a superb game. Comparing it to MW2 is obvious, but they're really not the same at all.
Posted: Mon, 8th Feb 2010, 6:26pm

Post 14 of 32

Fxhome Dude

Force: 996 | Joined: 1st Jun 2009 | Posts: 927

CompositeLab Pro User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I believe you about AA. But one look at my computer specs and you can see it's no gaming system. You might think i'm dodging a challenge but there no way I could get it to work.
Other than that I agree that there are designed differences. And I think they add much more to the gmae for it.
Posted: Mon, 8th Feb 2010, 7:03pm

Post 15 of 32

Thrawn

Force: 1995 | Joined: 11th Aug 2006 | Posts: 1962

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

FXhome Dude wrote:

I believe you about AA. But one look at my computer specs and you can see it's no gaming system. You might think i'm dodging a challenge but there no way I could get it to work.
Other than that I agree that there are designed differences. And I think they add much more to the gmae for it.
I played it on a seven year old computer that sucked even when it was brand new on the market. You can play AA. Americas Army is the only first person shooter that I'm actually above average when it comes to skill level. Very fun game.
Posted: Mon, 8th Feb 2010, 9:07pm

Post 16 of 32

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

That game is in my opinion, the total opposite of fun. smile

Though I'd argue that Arma 2 is more hardcore, America's Army is probably the harder to get in to because you're usually thrown up against people who play it religiously. Arma 2 is most often players vs AI.
Posted: Mon, 8th Feb 2010, 9:10pm

Post 17 of 32

Terminal Velocity

Force: 2507 | Joined: 7th Apr 2008 | Posts: 1350

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

What a lot of kiddies seem to forget is that Realism is Boring - Arma 2 (A game I thoroughly enjoy) all too often serves as a reminder that crawling on your belly through the woods for 2 hours before being killed by something you didn't understand isn't a whole lot of fun.
Which is part of the reason I also think that "realistic game" means "realistic graphics/physics and destruction systems", rather than "one bullet can kill you". Because your average gamer finds run-and-gun-bullet-spraying-psychosis is infinitely more amusing.
Posted: Wed, 10th Feb 2010, 3:43pm

Post 18 of 32

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Terminal Velocity wrote:

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

What a lot of kiddies seem to forget is that Realism is Boring - Arma 2 (A game I thoroughly enjoy) all too often serves as a reminder that crawling on your belly through the woods for 2 hours before being killed by something you didn't understand isn't a whole lot of fun.
Which is part of the reason I also think that "realistic game" means "realistic graphics/physics and destruction systems", rather than "one bullet can kill you". Because your average gamer finds run-and-gun-bullet-spraying-psychosis is infinitely more amusing.
So your definition of realistic is wrong, then.
Posted: Wed, 10th Feb 2010, 4:34pm

Post 19 of 32

Terminal Velocity

Force: 2507 | Joined: 7th Apr 2008 | Posts: 1350

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

No, but I think that's what they mean when they say "realistic game". It's not exactly a fantastic selling point that one bullet can kill you, except for those really hardcore gamers who beat CoD4 in ten minutes. It is a selling point to say that you can blow up the entire universe with your bullets. See what I mean?
Posted: Thu, 11th Feb 2010, 5:51am

Post 20 of 32

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I'm not sure I do see - as since when has the ability yo blow the universe up with bullets been an indicator of realism? I've also never seen this game advertised as being realistic - the opposite, I've seen it advertised as the over-the-top action movie explosion funfest that it is.

So sure, whilst games evolve graphically the imagery on screen grows closer to photo-realism and as a result - more immersion as what you see has the impression of being realistic. But realism is a lot deeper than that.

Here's an advert of the original which pretty much underlines the attitude that Bad Company is pitched at : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dfz96fJepSU

Pure, ridiculous arcadey fun. No realism here! razz I think we're getting way off the point though - and it was started for no reason by silly console gamers who have absolutely no scope of gaming. Not like big ol elitist hardcore gamer me...
Posted: Thu, 11th Feb 2010, 5:56am

Post 21 of 32

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Has anyone else played the demo? I gave it a shot the other day and was hooked instantly. It's probably the most badass online experience I've ever had, although I don't know if that was a result of the team I was on or not. What I do know is that in just a few hours time I had been in tons of incredible, tense near-death situations that I'd never really experienced in a multiplayer setting before. Definitely considering getting this game now.
Posted: Thu, 11th Feb 2010, 5:58am

Post 22 of 32

Terminal Velocity

Force: 2507 | Joined: 7th Apr 2008 | Posts: 1350

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

That's what I mean...it's NOT!
I'm saying that I think:

When people talk about a "realistic game", they mean "a game with realistic physics engines and graphics and destruction systems". Because that is a good selling point. People like being able to blow stuff up, instead of having scenery that just sits there. There's something cathartic about blasting someone's home sky high.

They do not mean "realistic because one bullet kills you". Because that is not a good selling point. People do not like to die (unless they're super-hardcore).

Why we're talking about this, I've completely forgotten. But I can't outline it any more clearly than that. If you don't understand my point this time around, I'm giving up. wink

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

and it was started for no reason by silly console gamers who have absolutely no scope of gaming
neutral I'm not a console gamer. I'm not even a gamer, really. I just comment on them.
Posted: Thu, 11th Feb 2010, 6:51am

Post 23 of 32

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Terminal Velocity wrote:

That's what I mean...it's NOT!
I'm saying that I think:

When people talk about a "realistic game", they mean "a game with realistic physics engines and graphics and destruction systems". Because that is a good selling point. People like being able to blow stuff up, instead of having scenery that just sits there. There's something cathartic about blasting someone's home sky high.

They do not mean "realistic because one bullet kills you". Because that is not a good selling point. People do not like to die (unless they're super-hardcore).

Why we're talking about this, I've completely forgotten. But I can't outline it any more clearly than that. If you don't understand my point this time around, I'm giving up. wink

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

and it was started for no reason by silly console gamers who have absolutely no scope of gaming
neutral I'm not a console gamer. I'm not even a gamer, really. I just comment on them.
You ruined any credibility you might have had with that last sentence, but I think I understand what you said before that well enough. You're saying that public perception of the term "realistic game" is that of a world that, like in real life, can be destroyed, while also looking very pretty. I think that's more like a marketer's perception, and anyone who actually sees it like that is one of the aforementioned uneducated newbie gamers (console gamer isn't pejorative, Hybrid!) who's accepting the writing on the box as fact.

But this is all really irrelevant... Battlefield isn't realistic, it's over-the-top and badass... but a lot more complete than Modern Warfare 2, which I guess is why some people describe it as realistic. It does require more tactical thinking (as in "Don't run into a building without thinking"), as opposed to incredible reflexes and practice, but I see that as an evolution of gaming, as it allows for more accessibility (so long as you think before you act) and much, MUCH more memorable moments and variation in gameplay.
Posted: Thu, 11th Feb 2010, 5:20pm

Post 24 of 32

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I think people just say "That looks realistic" when a games graphics are impressive and it stops there - physics or actual game mechanics aren't taken into account in the average imbeciles analysis of a computer game. razz

I think your analysis of selling points is way, way off too. Splinter Cell, Ghost Recon and Rainbow six sell for the precise reason that they emulate realism pretty strictly. Anyway...

I think console gamer is a pejorative - but don't take that personally, I own both consoles. But I do think the sway towards creating games for consoles is killing the dedicated server and genuine teamwork based communal gaming - the future of gaming is online, the consoles are just lesser equipped to go into this space (currently).

I've been in the PC Beta for this for a while. It's kind of fun BUT... It's clearly designed for the consoles and totally lacks the level of scope and exploration as well as sheer awe that I would usually associate with the battlefield series.

It may just be a side effect of the Rush game mode we're restricted to. Though 24 players and a relatively small map doesn't spell 'Battlefield' to me when I am used to experiencing a huge map filled with 64 players and a large array of vehicles creating large amounts of chaos. Squads of people sneaking off to an unguarded flag and planes bombing buildings.

It's just not the same. On first impressions I prefer BF2. Though I've bought it, so of course - I'll be giving the full game some attention just to confirm my suspicions.
Posted: Fri, 12th Feb 2010, 4:36pm

Post 25 of 32

Fxhome Dude

Force: 996 | Joined: 1st Jun 2009 | Posts: 927

CompositeLab Pro User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I just managed to squeak in another hour of gaming and I must I must say, after another intense expirence I'm sold. It's just purely awesome... I can't remember being more hooked on a demo (yes, that includes Batman AA). I predict this will be the COD4 for the battlefield series (the gmae that injects life and money into the franchise).
Say, pooky, what's your Gmr tag? We should hook up sometime in BF. GT: fxhomedude
Posted: Thu, 18th Feb 2010, 9:31pm

Post 26 of 32

gamesmaster369

Force: 410 | Joined: 29th Oct 2008 | Posts: 64

EffectsLab Pro User

Gold Member

FXhome Dude wrote:

I predict this will be the COD4 for the battlefield series (the gmae that injects life and money into the franchise).
Oh yeah, that's true, but unfortunately BFBC2 like many others will be pushed aside after about a month by the Call Of Duty franchise, as yet ANOTHER Call Of Duty is on it's way November this year. I honestly think BC2 is definetely the height of next-gen FPS gaming, but, even the small amount of my friends that have played and thouroughly enjoyed it, have been dragged straight back into CoD and completely forgot about it.

But anyway, I've played the demo probably about 12+ times now, and am definetely getting it on the 5th, especially after the greatness of the 1st game. It's just the epicness of driving a tank across a snow covered road with enemy helicopters and soldiers firing at you non-stop and you sending them scattering into next year with heavy explosives that drags me into it. Also, the calm while sniping until you press the trigger and a very large bang fills the whole map. Probably one of the best games I've ever played (aside from Assassin's Creed 2, ofcourse wink) and reccomend anybody who enjoys FPS' to get it when it's released in March.
Posted: Thu, 18th Feb 2010, 9:55pm

Post 27 of 32

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Am I the only one who thinks the Demo has gotten SUPER LAME now? Both teams just spawn camp the other one, and there's no mechanic for proper teamwork which means you can't build a proper offensive or defensive... it basically ends up being which team has a player that can single-handedle capture nearly all of the points, or which team has an inhumanely gifted helicopter pilot. It just feels way out of balance now that people have figured out how to abuse the game mechanics.
Posted: Fri, 19th Feb 2010, 1:50pm

Post 28 of 32

Fxhome Dude

Force: 996 | Joined: 1st Jun 2009 | Posts: 927

CompositeLab Pro User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Pooky wrote:

Am I the only one who thinks the Demo has gotten SUPER LAME now? Both teams just spawn camp the other one, and there's no mechanic for proper teamwork which means you can't build a proper offensive or defensive... it basically ends up being which team has a player that can single-handedle capture nearly all of the points, or which team has an inhumanely gifted helicopter pilot. It just feels way out of balance now that people have figured out how to abuse the game mechanics.
No. The demo does get old yes. But think. We get one map, one game mode, no talking, and about 8 players. In the actual game we get more maps, campaign, more players, talking, more modes, etc. Yes, the demo does get old but I doubt it's any sign about the actual game.
Posted: Fri, 19th Feb 2010, 7:48pm

Post 29 of 32

FreshMentos

Force: 1667 | Joined: 10th Jun 2006 | Posts: 1141

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

FXhome Dude wrote:

Yes, the demo does get old but I doubt it's any sign about the actual game.
Isn't that the point of a demo?
Posted: Sat, 20th Feb 2010, 4:12am

Post 30 of 32

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

I think you missed my point. It hasn't gotten dull, it's just being exploited by its users, thus taking the fun out of it.
Posted: Mon, 22nd Feb 2010, 6:39pm

Post 31 of 32

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Pooky wrote:

I think you missed my point. It hasn't gotten dull, it's just being exploited by its users, thus taking the fun out of it.
This is a problem with the Rush game mode. Having only one spawn point per team makes spawn killing possible. When you had several bases to spawn at over a large map - it eradicated the ability to be base camped unless you were already essentially losing the game.

And even then, if a team dedicated energy to spawn camping the opposition would be able to easily recapture another point if a single soldier slipped away. Which was easy, considering there were planes and transport choppers.

Ahhh Classic Battlefield. How I miss thee.
Posted: Wed, 10th Mar 2010, 6:32pm

Post 32 of 32

Fxhome Dude

Force: 996 | Joined: 1st Jun 2009 | Posts: 927

CompositeLab Pro User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Well the game has been released and gotten very positive reviews on it's refreshing formula and intense action. Now time will tell if it manages to secure a spot among the most played games early 2010.