PC guys dont deserve BC 2

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 09/13/2009 16:14:09

Not directly.

What made the PC BFs fun was not the Player Amount itself, but more the action and feeling that the player count brought to you.

And due to the new map layout, the gamemodes, the destruction and the new spawn system you get even an better experience without that high player count.

Its obvious it was not the player count because you did not always run into ALL enemies at the same time. The chance to run into some enemies was just higher when the player count was higher.

But this is not necessary anymore because the new gamelayout leads to the same result: running into many enemies.

cem_ea_id.NapBF wrote:Not directly.

What made the PC BFs fun was not the Player Amount itself, but more the action and feeling that the player count brought to you.

And due to the new map layout, the gamemodes, the destruction and the new spawn system you get even an better experience without that high player count.

Its obvious it was not the player count because you did not always run into ALL enemies at the same time. The chance to run into some enemies was just higher when the player count was higher.

But this is not necessary anymore because the new gamelayout leads to the same result: running into many enemies.

I, Not having played BC1, don't know how Rush mode plays out. I also heard Conquest on BC1 wasn't great. So my worries are that if BC2 will have well made Conquest maps, variety, and player cap. To me the difference I see is that the higher player count results in many ppl in different areas. In conquest, you hardly had battles in one flag. I just hope the 32 player cap is good enough. In bf2, I usually played in servers around 32 to 48 players depending on the map. I'll have to see when the game comes out though to really judge the game. What I'm most excited about is the graphics, destruction, and awesome sounds quality. I'll judge the gameplay when the game comes out.

I know a lot of gamers out their for the console dedicate their time to their games (as do I), but when you play a console game, its for bursts of fun. When you sit down for a PC game, then you're in for a long strategic battle. It's just because a PC can handle more than a console. But PC gamers refuse to believe that we can be as hardcore as them. I do agree to some extent because as they have a higher player count, it does mean there may be someone watching you wherever you go, but with the destruction, it also makes the game just as intense. If a walls blown out, then you have exposed yourself to a pesky sniper. Destruction adds new lines of sight and gameplay options, so it keeps the frantic gameplay, but with a lower player count. I probably will get the next Battlefield game for the PC (not BC2, that's for my Xbox) just to see how far it goes.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 09/13/2009 21:08:21

cem_ea_id.NapBF wrote:Not directly.

What made the PC BFs fun was not the Player Amount itself, but more the action and feeling that the player count brought to you.

And due to the new map layout, the gamemodes, the destruction and the new spawn system you get even an better experience without that high player count.

Its obvious it was not the player count because you did not always run into ALL enemies at the same time. The chance to run into some enemies was just higher when the player count was higher.

But this is not necessary anymore because the new gamelayout leads to the same result: running into many enemies.

Have you ever played conquest mode on BC 1? Yeah, play that and tell me again that it doesn't need more players. Sure BC 1 had pretty good action, that was because the rush mode, made it more narrow. There isn't much distance between objective 1 and 2, and basically your enemies knew where you were coming from. Also what about the vehicles, you don't think that BC 1 didn't have jets, sam trucks, and howitzers just because they didn't feel like putting it in there?! No, they did it, because the player amount doesn't support it. If you don't get the wide veriety and diversity of vehicles, then it's not the true battlefield, or at least the kind that PC was getting.

The close combat that you saw in BC 1, is pretty much the same jibberish being fead to the console community with games like COD 4 and Halo over years now. I think I speak for every console fan, that we would like to see Battlefield being more vast like it was on PC.

Heres my 2 cents on the issue: Everyone deserves a good game. My thoughts on PC vs. console are that they are two different systems. The mouse and keyboard is an easier controller to use, and PCs can support more players, not to mention the community modding and making their own maps and servers, it's all great. Now for the consoles, you can play from your couch, you have a big screen to see, your controller is pretty comfortable, you have less hackers, and your hardware is a lot simpler. But most of all, consoles are cheaper. I can't afford nor do i want to go through the hassle of taking apart a computer so that I can upgrade it to keep up with other dedicated PC gamers. If I had more money and tech savvy, I would definitely use a PC. I don't understand why people fight so much about this, it's all just a big fight about people trying to feel superior. I do not think that the PC version will be a port, as much as some people like to bash DICE for some reason they will make a quality game. The fact of the matter is that DICE and EA need to make money, and the average gamer has the more accessible console, thus they are trying to win at the market. I don't think that consoles are just for kids or racing games, and computers aren't just for games. And Teamwork DOES exist in the consoles. BC2 will be a great game for all systems. I am however disappointed that they aren't increasing the amount of players in a game. MAG will have 256 player games, for god's sake! If they could get badco 2 dedicated servers and even run 20 on 20 it would be the best multiplayer experience for consoles ever. Hell, I think it will still take that title. These are just my opinions.

hey whats up guys i wanna tell you about this crazy site that lets you get battlefield badcompany 2 for free all you have to do is register and play games to win points and pre order your copy today before there all gone i got mine already ordered so i figured i could let everyone else know now also if you really wanna get it faster then just playing games then do simple daily surveys too good luck and see you on the battlefield!

www.points2shop.com/?ref=uin1247218052

cem_ea_id.freebadcompany wrote:hey whats up guys i wanna tell you about this crazy site that lets you get battlefield badcompany 2 for free all you have to do is register and play games to win points and pre order your copy today before there all gone i got mine already ordered so i figured i could let everyone else know now also if you really wanna get it faster then just playing games then do simple daily surveys too good luck and see you on the battlefield!

www.points2shop.com/?ref=uin1247218052

lulz another guy to report -.- sigh thats rly pefetic

I owned and played BF 1942, Road to Rome, Secret Weapons, BF Vietnam, and BF2. And I gotta say, even though I loved playing all those on my pc, the most fun I've had in a Battlefield game was in Bad Company and 1943 on my xbox.

Bigger just means boring, the inensity that is in BC and 1943 is unmatched. I love it. Even though you have less than half the players in a match, the level and game design makes the matches more intense, more dramatic, and more fun.

I don't think 64 ppl would work in BC.

cem_ea_id.Evil_Paladin wrote:Before I start, remember this is controversy what all Im about to say. These are opinions stated by me and only me and Im asking to either be set straight or a friendly debate. Constructive critism on both parts are welcomed. When EA and DICE announce 1943 and BC 2 and later info were released on them. I notice PC fans mostly had a problem with it, degrading console games and console friendly games. They dogged EA and DICE and all EA DICE wants to do is make great games. Well the PC guys dont deserve it! Sure it started with them but cant they see now days consoles and PC can share the lime light.

But no, instead they want to hate on it. I have been talked down to by PC guys and watch my upcoming fav 1943 be dogged and I am mad as hell and Im going to stand up for it! Sure, DICE and EA want a profit but they want to also make good games. PC guys are always like if it isnt 64 players then Im not buying, without even giving it a second glance. Not all PC guys are like this but most of the ones I met are. They downgraded, spit in the face and hated on 1943 and BC 2 without knowing more info on BC 2. Im going to catch hell for this, but I got to speak up!

EA and DICE just focus on the console market because most of us appreciate what you do. Some of us but not all are later generation battlefield fans and we understand the need for new things. We are more accepting. If the PC community cannot get the picture, then maybe they dont deserve battlefield. Im a paying customer and I have a lot of respect for battlefield. I just want the PC guys to stop bashing the games and give them a chance, if you did that maybe I wouldnt post what I did!

Im so glad that u got owned. no prone for u. oh yeah. keep bullshitting now. that's what you get if u say thing like a idiot.

I think that your post is the problem with the contention between console and PC gamers.

I am both. I have played both, but I started on PC and will continue playing serious FPS competition on PC as opposed to console primarily due to familiarity with the controls. I am good at both, but feel a lot more comfortable with mouse and keyboard.

The bottom line for me is this...they are both two different experiences with their own benefits and limitations. On PC, there are things that you can do with game that you cannot do with a console port and vice-versa.

Everyone just needs to settle down, stop with presumptions about what should have been...and just enjoy the fact that we're all going to be able to play BFBC2 and it's going to be awesome.

On both sides, there are great arguments for and against having a game on both console and PC, but really...I'm just happy to have been able to play the demo at PAX 09 and really look forward to this release.

-that's my 2 cents-

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 09/21/2009 17:54:46

I knew nothing of PC bashers until this post. I am a console gamer 100% and Console Battlefield is all I know. Regardless of anything, Bad Company is the best game I have ever played. It's the team experience I've always wanted from a game. (Prolly would have played it on the PC if I knew about it) I've had xbox live since the original xbox, and this was hands down the best multiplayer experience I've ever had. I don't even understand why PC gamers would complain about not having enough players or the fact that battlefield is moving onto console.

Everybody should be able to enjoy the awesome games DICE makes.

cem_ea_id.Ranger92998 wrote:like your graphics? your welcome..Like your Broadband low lag connection? your welcome. Why thank you I didn't know you designed the graphics card on my xbox... You must make a lot of money since you designed the hardware in my xbox. I can't thank you enough.

When you have a 26" monitor running 1900x1200 everything peaked out, framerates above 250, no life, a victoria's secret magazine for a girlfriend, and no money left since you have to buy a new graphics card every week, an xbox looks like something a person who doesn't live in their mother's basement would have. I have XBL on my sony 60" XBR, and doesnt even come close. Do you have 7.1 digital surround? nope.
can you talk to 47 of your buddies who are in the same server playing? nope..can you see your buddies rub their * as you blow him away or knife him when he least expects it? nope.. (oovoo 6 way vid conferencing)
can you control your server and kick out the cheaters or tards? nope.. Can you play with hackers? nope.. Can you buy thousands of dollars worth of hardware to play a game? nope..
all you can do is play the vanilla version of a old computer game.

there is an absolute difference in Console and PC gaming, and if you dont understand the difference please dont make stupid blanketed statements. what you dont understand is that in PC gaming , the game is only half the fun.
its the clanplay that makes the difference for most of us. while your *** (what is that? self censorship... What a noob) off your family by taking up the tv time, and hearing nothing but the game and the family yelling, us PC guys are laughing, joking, talking to eachother.
we have more fun in teamspeak (skype is free jackass) than in the game itself...and it also develops some strong friendships as well.
Every year my clan meets. we take up a whole floor of a hotel, and let it all out for a weekend. I have friends in scotland,canada,us, germany,UK, even france. the computer and the online gaming definitely makes the world a smaller place. when you understand that, then post.
Until then enjoy your outdated hardware, and wait for them to make a new console with even more outdated hardware (so your saying that the future xbox is going to have ps2 or gamecube hardware??? I es confused...). (forthe record I run a intel q9550 quadcore, 8 gigs ocz plat ram, BFg 280gtxoc2 vid, Xfi fatality pro sound, 2 150gb velociraptor hd in raid, Blu-ray,DVDburner on a 1 gig network..25meg dl, 7 meg up internet, 26" 2ms monitor,22" 2 ms second monitor) With that kind of money you could buy a girlfriend, you * me off...
when your console can do what mine can, ill fly my car to the moon...

Holy geez ,this crap thread still up FFS,trolls give up anybody with the money can get it since when you need to deserve a game.

So if everybody is done with the p*ssing contest can we let this dumb a*s thread die already in what this thread inform us about the game or help DICE to make a better game.The only thing i've learn for this thread is who's an idiot,who's a troll,who's a smartass thats it LET THE THREAD DIE ALREADY

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 09/22/2009 05:53:10

cem_ea_id.hellfromabove123 wrote:My thoughts on PC vs. console are that they are two different systems. The mouse and keyboard is an easier controller to use, and PCs can support more players, not to mention the community modding and making their own maps and servers, it's all great. Now for the consoles, you can play from your couch, you have a big screen to see, your controller is pretty comfortable, you have less hackers, and your hardware is a lot simpler.

Why is it so hard to understand that you can play a PC from a couch too?

And you can use a screen on PC that is just as big as on your console. Any TV that is compatible with Xbox360 or PS3, is compatible with a PC as well.
And As a matter of fact, you can use much more higher resolution on a PC than on a console. Currently the highest resolution on the PC (that a normal guy can afford) is 2560x1600, while on a gaming console the resolution limit is 1920x1080. But be aware that most Xbox360 games use a resolution of 720p or even smaller! (up-scaled)

And by the way, you can plug in the xbox360 controller in to a PC, and calibrate it to work with just about any game out there.

So basically the only good thing about consoles, is that it's cheaper.

BF_SUB.pomppaduur wrote:

cem_ea_id.hellfromabove123 wrote:My thoughts on PC vs. console are that they are two different systems. The mouse and keyboard is an easier controller to use, and PCs can support more players, not to mention the community modding and making their own maps and servers, it's all great. Now for the consoles, you can play from your couch, you have a big screen to see, your controller is pretty comfortable, you have less hackers, and your hardware is a lot simpler.

Why is it so hard to understand that you can play a PC from a couch too?

And you can use a screen on PC that is just as big as on your console. Any TV that is compatible with Xbox360 or PS3, is compatible with a PC as well.
And As a matter of fact, you can use much more higher resolution on a PC than on a console. Currently the highest resolution on the PC (that a normal guy can afford) is 2560x1600, while on a gaming console the resolution limit is 1920x1080. But be aware that most Xbox360 games use a resolution of 720p or even smaller! (up-scaled)

And by the way, you can plug in the xbox360 controller in to a PC, and calibrate it to work with just about any game out there.

So basically the only good thing about consoles, is that it's cheaper.

Many people know that, but most people also work at the pc so therefore it needs to be at a desk you can really work at. If you would like to play a short round on the couch, you would have to move the whole PC Case, cables etc. to the couch which is too much effort for a few short rounds, especially if the couch is in another room or on another floor.

Electronic Arts

Highlighted Game

Battlefield: Bad Company™ 2