Latest posts for the topic "PC guys dont deserve BC 2"

PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Evil_Paladin — Sun, 1 Mar 2009 03:17:32 GMT

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!

Re: PC guys dont deserve BC 2

cobra656 — Sun, 1 Mar 2009 04:07:47 GMT

So we should accept new bf games that are only half the originals? Look, BF was born on the PC with 64 player battles. 1943 I can accept being simplified and downsized because it's just a $20 arcade BF, but in BC2 I and many others are looking for a true sequel to BF2. Have you ever played BF on the PC? If so, you'd realize that it is nothing at all like what EA is giving with the console titles. People had to actually work together to win, 1 player was worth crap by himself no matter how good he was. But in 1943, thanks to auto-health and infinite ammo, Rambo can dominate the game. Now, as long as Rambo stays in 1943, I'm happy. But people want to bring the things that make Rambo's life easy into BC2 (I'm not saying Rambo tactics should be impossible, but it shouldn't be every player running around with a machine gun mowing down people and just shrugging off bullet impacts).

Re: PC guys dont deserve BC 2

BlackListed — Sun, 1 Mar 2009 17:01:31 GMT

then u have never obviously heard of a quickscope sniper......(or shotgun....or smg....or m16....or any gun for that matter....)

and honestly if u seriously r sayin o hey this game is garbage cuz it doesnt have 64 player battles then ur being ignorant. game companies are finnaly starting to realize that the best game sales are on the consoles not the comp any more. the consoles i hate to tell u r going to be the future of gaming.

Re: PC guys dont deserve BC 2

LtLethal1 — Sun, 1 Mar 2009 18:17:35 GMT

I agree with both sides on this one.

I play on the pc and on the gaming consoles so don't go telling me I don't know what I'm talking about. Battefield 2 was a great game and was a true sequal, not a "different skin same game" (not saying bfbc is). I also loved bfbc. Great game, i was kind of angry because of the player count but that really didn't make it any less fun for me.

I think that the new BF should though, at least have 30 players because on those gigantic maps like Harvest or Oasis, 24 jst doesn't cut it. I originally thought there was going to be 24 on each team which would be excellent but I was mistaken.

Battlefield 2 for PC was probably the best fps for PC to date (screw call of booty) . If they would have kept more things the same for console it still would be a great game.

And for the people hatin on Dice and EA: They are a business who's goal is to make money. They are being heavily impacted by the hard times too. They are trying to stay in business by pumping out as many games as they can...How is that a bad thing when we get great games and they stay in business??

Re: PC guys dont deserve BC 2

uzbec911 — Sun, 1 Mar 2009 19:05:22 GMT

DICE knows that PC gamers want a true sequel to BF2. We have been clued many times by Zerk, and DICE that it is coming, but I doubt that BC2 is it. BC2 is a sequel to BC1, face it. Don't criticize the game becuase it is like BFBC, IT'S THE FREAKING SEQUEL.

Re: PC guys dont deserve BC 2

cobra656 — Sun, 1 Mar 2009 23:38:54 GMT

> then u have never obviously heard of a quickscope
> sniper......(or shotgun....or smg....or m16....or any
> gun for that matter....)

Qscope sniper cannot win by himself. Why? Because anybody with an assault rifle will make short work of him by sneaking up from behind before he sees them. And FYI, I have used every one of those guns in BF2 before, and you cannot rambo with them. The shotgun loses to anybody more than a few feet away, same with the SMG, and the m16 is terrible in CQB (the BF2 version was done realistically with 3 shot burst and semi-auto only, meaning you cannot strafe and spray like in BC).

> and honestly if u seriously r sayin o hey this game
> is garbage cuz it doesnt have 64 player battles then
> ur being ignorant. game companies are finnaly
> starting to realize that the best game sales are on
> the consoles not the comp any more. the consoles i
> hate to tell u r going to be the future of gaming.

That's like saying that the future of civilization is to go back to living in straw huts, and calling me ignorant for wanting to keep my air conditioned house and car. Consoles are dumbed down in all aspects from the PC to appeal to the idiotic gamer with 5 brain cells who makes up 99% of their base. Every console game is made easier, simpler, and less skill-intensive than the PC equivalent, and with shooters, they all try to dumb down to the Call of Duty formula of small fights in shoebox maps. I want Battlefield, that means large scale combined-arms battles spanning maps that are a square kilometer large and include tanks, artillery, aircraft, and infantry all fighting at the same time. That's what Battlefield was all the way up through 2142. While BC managed to fake a sense of scale by cramming every one into a tight space on Gold Rush maps, it was painfully obvious how empty the game was once you got on a big Conquest map.

Re: PC guys dont deserve BC 2

zerk16 — Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:02:42 GMT

[i]> DICE knows that PC gamers want a true sequel to BF2.
> We have been clued many times by Zerk, and DICE that
> it is coming, but I doubt that BC2 is it. BC2 is a
> sequel to BC1, face it. Don't criticize the game
> becuase it is like BFBC, IT'S THE FREAKING SEQUEL.[/i]

Yeah, I really have. The PC community won't know what hit them this year, they will be completely shocked with *joy* Just wait.

Re: PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Ronin0ni — Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:34:28 GMT

I wish they would port BF3 to console, won't happen though... and probably ONLY because of the 64 player...

I would love 64 players on console, I don't know why it is so "impossible" to do if they do it on PC's (with half the gamers running machines worse than the 360's or PS3's)

My guess is it has to do with volume... Console gamers tend to swarm 1 game at a time, and so they would need LOADS of servers to handle the load, then move on to the next game (the majority, there are fans that stick to a few games)

Anyways, on PC there is less swarming, and the players tend to stick around longer, in part probably due to the lower volume of PC games, AND that PC games get community modded adding replay-ability.

I bet it is a combination of those 2 factors that allow them to host 64 player pc games, and not console games. Which sux

Re: PC guys dont deserve BC 2

zerk16 — Mon, 2 Mar 2009 12:53:20 GMT

Who said anything about BF3? I suppose it doesn't hurt to speculate a little.

But I find it funny that you're already trying to figure out why a hypothetical game probably won't be ported. LOL

Re: PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Ronin0ni — Mon, 2 Mar 2009 13:24:29 GMT

It's true though.... A proper BF3 will sport 64 players, and unless they change their mind, they won't be offering 64 players to console gamers due to volume, like I said.

Re: PC guys dont deserve BC 2

zerk16 — Mon, 2 Mar 2009 13:38:58 GMT

Well, if they did want to port it, they would just reduce the player size if it was a problem.

Re: PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Ronin0ni — Mon, 2 Mar 2009 14:29:22 GMT

but then the maps would be too big lol

Re: PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Evil_Paladin — Mon, 2 Mar 2009 16:18:41 GMT

> but then the maps would be too big lol

not really, just speculating but if a Battlefield 3 came out and was ported to consoles, they could find a way to make lower player count work I mean coe on this is DICE we are talking about here!!!

Re: PC guys dont deserve BC 2

muss1210 — Mon, 2 Mar 2009 16:53:27 GMT

and in BF2 there was different sizes of maps for different amounts of players, but that took half the fun out of the maps

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Ranger92998 — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 13:44:29 GMT

Paladin, unfortunatley you are way off base. you can say what you want, but consoles are for you cheap guys who cant afford a nice computer. your TV is no comparison. You are limited to the abilities of your premade console.
XBL=400 bucks...my video card cost way more than that. before you shoot your mouth off, Id suggest trying gaming on a real rig. yes, because of the kiddies, consoles do make more money, but pc guys start and finish in the technology dept. where do you think they get the tech for your next gen consoles? computers...duh...
like your graphics? your welcome..Like your Broadband low lag connection? your welcome.
When you have a 26" monitor running 1900x1200 everything peaked out, and framerates above 250, your TVis crap. 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 facial expression 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..
all you can do is play the vanilla version of a old computer game.
you see, we arent complaining about BFBC2, we are complaining that ITS NOT AS GOOD as the old ass bf2 we still play.

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 *** 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 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 hang 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. (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)
when your console can do what mine can, ill fly my car to the moon...

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

xxbigbacon — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:21:58 GMT

well consoles don't deserve a REAL BF game... (1942,bf:v,bf2,2142).

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Shugyosha5000 — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 19:10:38 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.Ranger92998]Paladin, unfortunatley you are way off base. you can say what you want, but consoles are for you cheap guys who cant afford a nice computer. your TV is no comparison. You are limited to the abilities of your premade console....

pc guys start and finish in the technology dept. where do you think they get the tech for your next gen consoles? computers...duh...

[/quote]

So much nonsense in this post that, bearing in mind it's in a forum for a console game I'm tempted to believe it's a troll. But I'll indulge it anyway.

Hey, thanks for that Cell Processor. I'm really glad that you computer guys were generous enough to develop that technology and then hand it down to the consoles. Oh... hang on a sec...

Honestly, I'm a grown man in my early 30s and a Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer, so well versed in the ins and outs of 'real rigs' If I ever get to the point where I feel I have to troll a console forum and boast about the ridiculous amount of my personal time and money wasted on a gaming system, then I'd consider myself to have failed at life.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Ranger92998 — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 20:13:57 GMT

for a MS engineer, you sure are not too bright lol...
BFBC2 IS for PC as well, knucklehead...
so its not a console forum...but, I would have figured
a MS Engineer would have known that....lol
one more thing...
programming and system build are two different things..
I actually have TWO degrees..one in computer electronics, BS
and my second in Electronic Engineering, BA.
so you can keep your six month course on the web...lol

as for my post, it was in defense of us computer gamers.
since, after all the complete BF series WAS for the computer...
as for my life, well Im sure we have different ideas of success,
and since I get paid to work in my own office in my pajamas,
and Im sitting on 100 acres in the countryside, well, to me life doesnt get much better...

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

bigbilly62 — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 12:44:09 GMT

Computer gaming was made for the PC. Consoles just suck. You will always be a slave to there limitations. There are no limitations for a PC. I play BF2 on PC and BC on xbox and I still think BF2 is ten times better than BC for way to many reasons to list here, You consol guys can have it you will never really know what is like to be in a squad under a good BF2 commander, Air and Armor support and just dominate a map. With the right group of guys all on the same vent server you are unstoppable.

BLKOPS bigbilly62

Re: PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Bullheaded — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 17:41:53 GMT

[quote=xbox.Ronin0ni]but then the maps would be too big lol[/quote]

Not necessarily, if I'm not mistaken most the maps from previous battlefield games have all been scalable to player count. In fact BF2 has scaled down 64 player maps to 16, so a port of a presumed BF3 to consoles would most likely work on this premise.

On to the original topic lqtm, i think that PC and console gaming are sort of blending together as far as fanbase and developers. So i don't see why it would be wrong to have any game built for every fathomable system. Yes, consoles are more widely in use because most average gamers do not have a great income to spend on a 4000$ machine to run PC games. I know a decent rig can be made for under 1k but still that is a bit more than a 400-500$ system that is optimized for games.

Plus most gamers these days have at least one PC and one console, and most games these days are being produced for multiple platforms. Give or take a few exclusive titles. So really gamers these days have more choices and it just depends on your preferred platform for whatever reason. I myself don't really care what platform a game is on as long as the gamplay, controls, content(that includes extra Dev content and player made), and customer support are excellent.

So in my opinion PC guys [u]DO[/u] deserve BC 2 because good things should come in many packages.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

MOB712 — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 01:01:45 GMT

All this lower player count for consoles is a bunch of bull****

Frontlines has a max 50 player count on the 360 with dedicated servers and no lag

If EA aren't willing to give us dedicated servers to increase the consoles player count to somewhere between 40 and 48 then I might as well be looking forward to Kaos' next game and Section 8 (Timegate have confirmed dedicated servers and im trying to convince them to raise the 32 player count they're planning for 360)

Please don't screw us over when smaller companies like Kaos and Timegate are can do what we're asking

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Zedrion — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 09:01:37 GMT

I seen this and had to post. Ranger and you other guys... Thanks for taking up for us PC gamers. cracked up when i saw that "this is a consoles forum" whatever it was he said. do some reading up next time before bashing us PC gamers. BFBC2 is coming for PC also. we got good reason to complain about a p*** poor player limit for a PC game. these kick *** gaming rigs can handle alot more then 24 players.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Garandx — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 11:26:59 GMT

Sad state of affairs these days. Console kids who think they know what their talking about. You wouldnt have a Bad Company 2 to have your mom buy you if it wasn't for the PC's.

If Ea and Dice did it right with Bf2 then they can damn sure do it again with BC2 or the Mythical BF3. But seeing as making a game for the consoles and then ignoring the pc and porting it over is all the rage these days, i have no doubt that is what they will do.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

L85A1 — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 18:31:02 GMT

If you guy's really want to see how two faced Evil_Paladin really is go over to total BF2 (TGN)
He is a snake in the grass and also two faced aswell.

LINK BELOW

And here is another one, living a double life

HE IS CALLED EVIL FOR A REASON

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

ebevan91 — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 23:23:27 GMT

We "PC guys" deserve BC 2.

We haven't had a real BF game in 2 and a half years. (2142 was a REAL BF game)

The console players got BC 1, now they are getting 1943 (as well as us PC users), AND BC 2. That's 3 BF console games in 2 years.

I just hope that Zerk was right when he made that "[i]The PC community won't know what hit them this year, they will be completely shocked with *joy* Just wait. [/i]" comment.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Meta|UpYourA$$ — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 02:12:23 GMT

I think BC2 being ported to PC is a good idea. The PC guys will have a chance to try the new Frostbite engine on a PC! The important thing is that the port needs to be done well not half assed(excuse my language...couldn't think of another word).

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Rick0Shay — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 05:28:20 GMT

I am highly confused. Battlefield Bad Company 2 is not Battlefield 3 as far as I know. Its a Battlefield sub brand aimed at a slightly different market. It's Kelly Heroes meets BF2. The way I understand it is the primary brand Battlefield (2...3...4) is by definition supposed to be a large scale multiplayer battlefield that closely replicates 'large' scale fully emersive warfare. Clearly DICE wants a slice of multiple markets - they want a slice of the close combat COD4 market and at the same time they want to retain and grow their core BF followers.

Growing the market is easy, simply produce stripped down versions for the console market. The traditional difference between PC and console PC = simulation, Console = arcade game - is gradually becoming blurred. Throw in keyboards and other console controllers along with improved graphics power and the distinction between platforms will become totally blurred - at least from the end users perspective.

From a gameplay point of view it should be a simple menu offering play in 'arcade mode' or 'simulation mode'. Not many games have this option yet but its just a matter of time when there will be a properly unified development platform for both consoles and PC's - that's obviously where MS is headed. The lucrative console market - with its traditional arcade style narrow pathing and simplified gaming environment cannot be overlooked by any developer these days simply because of financial reasons.

However from my perspective it seems DICE has confused the market with their branding and cross platform developments. Clearly this is due to DICE only 'fairly' recently incorporating console development into their platform mix. We had 1942 and BF2 long before the console stripped down versions started coming out. It seems logical that there will be a BF3 for PC's and probably for consoles - they will obviously get together on net and play together. I only hope they don't try to be everything to everyone and end up with a watered down offering that looses its appeal to everyone.

BF3 irrespective of platform imo should be modern warfare, large scale (absolute minimum 32 players) destructive environments team based. It has to have cooperative (LAN and Internet) gameplay so that you can fill your side with AI players if 16 or 32 of your friends don't show up. Coop is the essence of large scale team play. CodWAW showed us just how logical character growth is in Coop mode - it is the future way of doing things, plus it must have all the bells and whistles that were in BF2 - only BIGGER and better. That's the game I'm waiting for - on PC of course

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

HansDons — Fri, 3 Apr 2009 21:12:52 GMT

I am both a PC gamer and an Xbox360 owner. I've got a huge * FULLHD tv and a nice sound system. But come on guys who are we kidding. SHOOTERS ARE FOR THE PC!!! PERIOD!! Stop making shooters on the consoles they sucks monkey butt. I know nowadays it seems like this genre is taking over the consoles since the most successful console games today are shooters (Gears of War, Halo , BFBC, CoD4 etc..etc..). BUT are you people BLIND??? Don't you know that all these games combined are not worth one Good PC shooter? I am always so surprised that people who play these console shooters seem to be completely oblivious to previous PC shooters. They seem to think that the console shooters that been done on the pc many many many many times before, are the first of their kind. I mean come on ..they call CoD4 revolutionary!!! AHAHHA CoD4? It's not even worth the ancient Counterstrike.

I have only one word for the consoles as I posses one (and yes I have been playing for a quit a time now) this word is : PARALYMPICS!! And I apologies to all ably challenged people in advance, cause it's not about you. But the metaphor speaks for itself. If the PC shooters are the OLYMPICS then console shooters are PARALYMPICS. You can be happy about your shooting abilities, but you are still in a "wheelchair" so to speak.

You see the console is limited by just about everything. I could go into any aspect, but the thing that really bugs me is the controller. It simply is anatomically impossible to be just as fast as the mouse (with shooters that is). So the games are slower and overall more frustrating because the control over your characters is not as fast connected to your mind as with the mouse. As a psychologist I cannot help but to discuss this matter. You see we control everything with our brains (as we all know I assume ) But the quicker we can aim the less mental power is needed to guide it. Humans get frustrated when control by the mind is unnecessarily difficult. It means that something between the command and the execution is restrained. Because the faster we control something the closer it is to our will. Naturally we want to turn our thoughts into actions. And the faster this can be achieved the natural something feels to us. The ultimate thing would be of course if you detect someone think of shooting a character, and this characters falls dead. Maybe one day this kind of technology would be available, but at the time the closest thing to mental control is the good old mouse (after enough practice that is). Our fingers are meant to make small movements, our palms a little bigger, and our arms even bigger. So you see controlling a field of vision with just your thumb will simply take more time, than doing so with your palm. Thus the mouse user is faster. You see this has huge repercussions because using the controller becomes a challenge on it's on. The distance between control and execution simply becomes larger.

So the challenge of the game becomes controlling your character. It's like increasing the difficulty level by making your character drunk. Off course that is wrong, controlling your character shouldn’t be difficult. Especially when we already have something better. THE MOUSE!

But to conclude I have to say I am very disappointed at the developments in the game industry and how they port games. I have been doing the BETA testing for Frontlines Fuel of War. Because after the legendary BF2 I thought the only thing that might come close would be this game. Because these guys actually made some of the most successful BF mods. But man was I mistake. All this because the game was made both for the PC and the consoles. You see because of that the game was smaller, uglier , slower, and less accurate. The FAT HUGE * crosshair really bugged the * out of me. It’s just less accurate and the point with which one shoots is thicker. I can understand that such a huge crosshair is needed for the console, but on the PC it SUCKS! And unfortunately this happens to ALL the games that are developed for both the consoles and the pc. I never seen one shooter that could do well on both the PC and console. So I really want a REAL PURE PC SHOOTER! If it’s later on ported to the consoles I couldn’t care less. As long as it’s primarily developed for the PC! So man I hope I’m wrong with BFBC2. But I am afraid I’m right! And yeah maybe pc guys don't deserve BC2, but they shure as hell deserve BF3!!!!!

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

uzbec911 — Sat, 4 Apr 2009 06:56:32 GMT

Before I begin, I want to say I have a gaming PC AND a 360. I own or have owned every BF game ever made.

I really don't see the problem with console shooters. It's just another platform and some people just prefer that platform. Consoles are much more accessible. There are a lot of gamers who either don't have the money for a gaming PC. Now, you could argue that you can get console equivalent graphics from a $500 PC, but that is still more expensive, and the main point of PC's as some of you have argued is to have no limits on graphics. For those who have the money and know-how, PC's are the platform for you. For those who are short on cash and don't want to set anything up, consoles are for you. Developers have been targeting consoles becuase the vast majority of people play on them, becuase of their accessibility.

Besides, on the PC, there is the problem of piracy, which is a huge drag. Just look at the problem with Spore. And just becuase IMO and in the opinion of many others, mouse and keyboards are better than controllers, doesn't mean that is a universally accepted fact. We believe so becuase we started gaming on the PC. There are many who have never known gaming anywhere besides their consoles, and they adore their controllers as much as we adore our mouse and keyboards. I have a friends who can own everyone with a controller, but is awkward and slow with a mouse and keyboard.

The reason BC 1 wasn't released for the PC in the first place is becuase DICE wasn't sure about the engine, and they also wanted to try something new. Now that they have a stable build, they are releasing for PC. PC gamers should feel special. Although, there are plenty of arguements against that. They may or may not deserve it, but they are getting it. And it is not a port. You just assume its a port.

And by the way, what's wrong with a port? Shouldn't it be the same game on all three platforms? And most of you PC gamers have never played BC 1, and just assume that if the game doesn't have 64 players, it is a drag to the gameplay. 64 players doesn't define the game. Stats do not define the game. It is all about level design and whatnot.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

NightDawg7 — Sat, 4 Apr 2009 08:28:53 GMT

Wow someone on a gaming forum with something to say with some sense, outstanding post! I agree with you that some prefer PC and some prefer console; I honestly don't know why it turns into a name calling fest toward console players and the gripe toward consoles in general. I own a good PC but prefer gaming on a console and leaving my PC to other business (documents, research, internet, etc.). Another thing I'm glad to hear someone say is the FACT that the who Mouse/Keyboard Vs. Controller is SUBJECTIVE!

I don't know how many times I've heard some PC guy state the Mouse/Keyboard being superior as FACT when it's not. I know for one that I can't stand the Keyboard/Mouse combo and prefer my controller 100% of the time. I would probably even try PC games but would need a controller I could program.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

CatBird — Sat, 4 Apr 2009 09:27:45 GMT

Let's make things clear;
I played battlefield 1942, vietnam, and i rented BF2 and demo of bf2142 and BFBC Xbox 360.
BF1942 was great, spent hours playing it, while BFV was a huge glitch.
Bf2 was empty running and cruising around mainly because most of the maps were way too big.
Bf2142 was something bettween good and great, at this game maps were kind of messed, you got lost in completely abandoned part of the map pretty quickly, because it was unbalanced.
BFBC is as great as BF1942, you wouldn't even notice the difference in number of players, because the destruction just makes you forget the ''40 lost players''.
For me the console shooters are a a bit better, because at other games such as Call of duty 3 you must turn the stick many times in clock-wise direction to activate a bomb, with that style of play you can feel the bomb in your hands.
Anyway this is just my opinion, so don't take it personal, but quit with the states as: ''because of us you have games'' or ''without us you wouldn't be able to play'', because for making console games you don't really need a machine called PC, you can just make a new machine named Console game maker, or something.

There is also a reason why the Game making companies are abandoning PC gamers. That is piracy. and what's the use of making a game but you don't get any money from it as they spent months/years making a game for you.
Everyone knows that we have a Financial crisis this year, so they have limited sources to make games.
I will explain where your money goes when you buy a game:
You pay the money to the store, the store takes a bit of many to pay the workers so they can feed their families, money also goes to the ''trucker'' who drives the packs of games to the store. a bit of money takes the company wich made the game, so they can pay the workers, so they can (again) feed their families.

I apologize of any language errors, my first language is Slovenian wich is wery different from english.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Bullheaded — Sat, 4 Apr 2009 12:53:47 GMT

Catbird how could you rent BF2 it is for PC? you must have rented the console(dumbed down) version BF2:modern combat. Which was a terrible game in comparison to its predecessor. If you only played the demo for 2142 then you missed a lot the demo map to be honest is not all that great the titan game mode is unique, and assault, conquest, and assault lines game modes are really a lot of fun.

AS for BF2 for PC, BF2142 was just a massive mod from it by the developers so the commander, squads and large scale vehicular fights from those two games are very similar. The biggest change from BF2 to 2142 was the kit customizations and the radically futuristic weapons and vehicles. But the core play style is the same.

uzbec911 we're pretty much on the same page with our opinions. I don't even think my posts even get noticed half the time tho I posted earlier on the 2nd page about mid thread.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

CatBird — Sat, 4 Apr 2009 13:18:07 GMT

[quote=xbox.Bullheaded]Catbird how could you rent BF2 it is for PC? you must have rented the console(dumbed down) version BF2:modern combat. Which was a terrible game in comparison to its predecessor. If you only played the demo for 2142 then you missed a lot the demo map to be honest is not all that great the titan game mode is unique, and assault, conquest, and assault lines game modes are really a lot of fun.

AS for BF2 for PC, BF2142 was just a massive mod from it by the developers so the commander, squads and large scale vehicular fights from those two games are very similar. The biggest change from BF2 to 2142 was the kit customizations and the radically futuristic weapons and vehicles. But the core play style is the same.

uzbec911 we're pretty much on the same page with our opinions. I don't even think my posts even get noticed half the time tho I posted earlier on the 2nd page about mid thread.[/quote]

I didn't acutally rent bf2 i bought it and then sell it because it wasnt good.
And i played it on PC

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

cobra656 — Sat, 4 Apr 2009 13:18:26 GMT

[quote=BF_SUB.uzbec911]And by the way, what's wrong with a port? Shouldn't it be the same game on all three platforms? And most of you PC gamers have never played BC 1, and just assume that if the game doesn't have 64 players, it is a drag to the gameplay. 64 players doesn't define the game. Stats do not define the game. It is all about level design and whatnot.

[/quote]

And what about those of us who have played BFBC 1 for many hours, experienced the full spectrum of its gameplay, and concluded that its low player count takes away from the game. Much of BFBC felt as though it was centered more on CoD style shootouts and less on really big battles as in previous BF games. With 24 players (12 per team) you barely have an infantry squad left after all the tanks and helis are crewed up, even more so if you put a guy on the tank's MG. BFBC needed Gold Rush because it pushed everyone together into a tiny space to mask the low player count.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

HansDons — Sat, 4 Apr 2009 13:29:09 GMT

[quote=BF_SUB.uzbec911]

Besides, on the PC, there is the problem of piracy....

And by the way, what's wrong with a port? Shouldn't it be the same game on all three platforms? And most of you PC gamers have never played BC 1, and just assume that if the game doesn't have 64 players, it is a drag to the gameplay. 64 players doesn't define the game. Stats do not define the game. It is all about level design and whatnot.

[/quote]

This exactly the kind of talk one would expect from a console gamer. I'm not patronizing you, just observing. because my whole point was that shooters are not good for consoles. I am not talking about other genres. For instance there is no better platform than the console imo for fighting games and racing games. Even though in the past I have done both on the pc, I can say easily that doing them on the console is more pleasant. But you see shooters require fast (relative large) movements. It's silmpy not possible to do with the controller at the same pase. Why you think consoles use some sort of auto aim? It's simply PARALYMPICS!! lol

And again ports do suck. The quality of the overall game is dumbed to the console version. Often they only improve texture resolution for the pc and that’s it. But it's just inaccurate. The way the crosshair feels. And about piracy, well my friend I am a pirate on the xbox360! And I have played BFBC pirated version :p It sucked!

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

unit_one — Sat, 4 Apr 2009 15:27:29 GMT

I hate platform wars....no, really.

The current generation consoles can provide mouse+keyboard control. (I dont know about X-Box360, but my friend plays Unreal Tournament this way on his PS3)

I think everybody deserves the games they love.
And every faction, be it PC gamers, MAC users, Nintendo, X-box or Sony players - they all have normal people and "trolls"

So, if We are also talking about piracy, that means that only PS3 will get BC2, becawse it has not been hacked yet? I don't think so! And there are two types of people here also! One are saying that they do not have mutch money and bang the games and hardware for being too expensive - they are usually using pirated stuff, but who knows maybe they do not have any choise?? For me, I prefer to buy games, and I feel more satisfied when looking on a beautiful box art, and some bonus stuff that comes inside, like maps or manuals. (I agree, that some of them might be boring)

So, the developers must answer the new question then? Do the console players deserve to have a keyboard control? xD

oh, yea ... [b]REMOVE THE AUTO-AIM!!!!! !!!!!! !! !!!!!!!![/b]

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

TVI Mr Smith — Sat, 4 Apr 2009 18:45:20 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.HansDons]
But you see shooters require fast (relative large) movements. It's silmpy not possible to do with the controller at the same paste. Why you think consoles use some sort of auto aim? It's simply PARALYMPICS!! lol
[/quote]

You're saying PC's are better because console controllers can't react fast enough for huge sudden movements?

When [i]was[/i] the last time you swung a fully loaded .50 cal support gun round in a 180deg arc in 0.1 of a second? In real life?

I think the movement restrictions enforced by using a controller combined with the designers attempt to make each gun handle in a slightly different way based on weight, length etc, actually[i] increases [/i]the realism of the game.

Keyboard/mouse combinations are simply too fast to be even slightly realistic. So I'll stick with my controller thanks

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

HansDons — Sat, 4 Apr 2009 20:28:44 GMT

[quote=xbox.TVI Mr Smith]

You're saying PC's are better because console controllers can't react fast enough for huge sudden movements?

When [i]was[/i] the last time you swung a fully loaded .50 cal support gun round in a 180deg arc in 0.1 of a second? In real life? [/quote]

When was the last time that you were shot through your scull, decapitated ripped limb by limb and teabagged only to reincarnated within 10 seconds and proceed ? lol My point is realism is not always a good thing in videogames. There need to be some sort of balance between realism and good gameplay. If handling weapons slowly, somehow contributes to gameplay then its ok. But when it’s a cause of frustration simply because something easy is unnecessarily hard, then there is no point. Especially when we already got better equipment. But I hear this argument pretty often, the only problem is people don’t think through. We play games because they are unreal, for realism I got my boring life : )

So I'll just keep my mouse and keyboard thank you and I challenge anyone with a controller to beat me in any shooter we'll see! But don’t get me wrong controllers have their uses, like I already said there is nothing like a good fighting game or a racing game on a console. But shooters suck balls. And my main problem is because we simply have something already that’s way better. The pc!

And to people who say there is a mouse and keyboard for the consoles. I can tell you these games are not designed to be controlled by the mouse and keyboard, that’s why I have a problem with it. I already discussed the thick crosshair and inaccuracy. It’s very simple actually I’m not against consoles and everyone should get the game they like sure I don’t care if you are happy with something good luck. But you see you shouldn’t use an axe to repair watches. It’s not the right tool. Mouse and keyboard are at the moment the only right tools for shooters! And hey if they actually manage to make a shooter for all platforms that maximizes the potential of all the platform I’d be honestly the last to complain. But this is simply not the case. All ports dumb down some factor. And usually the PC gamer suffers the consequences.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

zerk16 — Sat, 4 Apr 2009 23:15:17 GMT

[quote=xbox.Bullheaded]

AS for BF2 for PC, BF2142 was just a massive mod from it by the developers so the commander, squads and large scale vehicular fights from those two games are very similar.[/quote]

I don't know why this bothers me when people say that 2142 was just a mod... but it does! Does anyone else feel that way too?

It must be because I know how much work really went into 2142...

They are two different games. For whatever reasons that you say that about 2142, you could also apply that "idea" to BF2 and 1942, that BF2 was just a massive mod of 1942, when they are obviously two different games.

Just sayin'

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

cobra656 — Sat, 4 Apr 2009 23:34:21 GMT

[quote=MAIN.zerk16][quote=xbox.Bullheaded]

AS for BF2 for PC, BF2142 was just a massive mod from it by the developers so the commander, squads and large scale vehicular fights from those two games are very similar.[/quote]

I don't know why this bothers me when people say that 2142 was just a mod... but it does! Does anyone else feel that way too?

It must be because I know how much work really went into 2142...

They are two different games. For whatever reasons that you say that about 2142, you could also apply that "idea" to BF2 and 1942, that BF2 was just a massive mod of 1942, when they are obviously two different games.

Just sayin'[/quote]

IMO, they are very similar, almost to the point where you would think 2142 is a mod, but then there are things like active camo, titan, etc. that no BF2 modder could create no matter how hard they tried because they cannot be put in BF2's engine. The only real problem with 2142 is the Camp Gibraltar cancer (half the populated servers play this one map most or all of the time) and the fact that most of the players now are complete noobs and the game becomes painful to play because either your team is stuck with their heads up their ***es, or the other team is basically asleep and you can defeat all of them with little effort.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

CatBird — Sun, 5 Apr 2009 04:07:48 GMT

Listen smart-PC-asses i'm in the army and i pretty damn know how the weapons work and wich games are closest to reality. and i have to say that consoles have more realistic weapon handling, and on a gamepad you need more skill. there is another advantage on consoles, and that is about games crashing. they allmost never do, while on a PC they do a hundred times, and the installing is just wasting time and space on your pc.

2. someone said that keyboard and mouse are made for shooters-wrong, keyboard is made to write, and mouse, well, you know what you use it for. to navigate.

and i'm saying again, consoles don't need PC's to make games. they just need a macine with abilities to edit and create.

Oh and speaking of realism, COD4 is the closest and most acurate simulation of modern weapons used.

3.if you play on a gamepad for a long time you will be allmost as acurate as a mouse-keyboard player, because a human have incredible abilities to learn, and we all know it.

I apologize for any type errors.

I will not answer any unreadable and/or primitive and agressive comments.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

unit_one — Sun, 5 Apr 2009 09:40:27 GMT

So true there mister CatBird. but you will have some feedback from people explaining the installing and crashes of the games...(The PS3 installs most of its games, but some of the fantastic ones don't! Like COD4 and Killzone 2 , and they are one of the most beautiful games ever. And for the weapon handling comparing consoles and computers, with mouse you have more freedom to do 360 turns with any weapon in a matter of moment, but with controller you will "feel" the weight. One of the best games is showing realistic weapon handling and physics, this is Metal Gear Solid 4 Guns of the Patriots.
And yes people do learn to use different types of gadgets and controls, when I started to play Bad Company the control feel was different from Orange Box, but after some time I got used to them. And did'nt you guys read my previous post about keyboards on a console?

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

1sht4kills — Sun, 5 Apr 2009 09:59:51 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.CatBird]Listen smart-PC-asses i'm in the army and i pretty damn know how the weapons work and wich games are closest to reality. and i have to say that consoles have more realistic weapon handling, and on a gamepad you need more skill. there is another advantage on consoles, and that is about games crashing. they allmost never do, while on a PC they do a hundred times, and the installing is just wasting time and space on your pc.

2. someone said that keyboard and mouse are made for shooters-wrong, keyboard is made to write, and mouse, well, you know what you use it for. to navigate.

and i'm saying again, consoles don't need PC's to make games. they just need a macine with abilities to edit and create.

Oh and speaking of realism, COD4 is the closest and most acurate simulation of modern weapons used.

3.if you play on a gamepad for a long time you will be allmost as acurate as a mouse-keyboard player, because a human have incredible abilities to learn, and we all know it.

I apologize for any type errors.

I will not answer any unreadable and/or primitive and agressive comments.[/quote]

Being a cook in the Army doesn't count CatBird , haha j/k.

I agree that people have their own opinions on what platforms they utilize. None of the PC/Consoles & accessories are any where NEAR the real deal nor any of the simulators we use (yes I am prior Army myself and have not only used your basic military weapons but ones that most soldiers don't get the opportunity to). I even worked as a Unit Armorer as well (worked on them) at one point.

Some games I prefer one platform over the other (I own a PC/PS3/Xbox 360/PS2/PS1..even the oldies of Artari 2600/VECTREX (if anyone knows what that is haha)/commodor +4 and 64/Sega and Dreamcast/Intellivision. So, yes I am a little older haha...but have experienced a whole bunch of different type of game setups.

BF2 is (to me) a better game in the long run than Bad Company and Call of Duty. Because I like the free roaming/squad abilities/different views/ and the different maps and such. You aren't having to follow one script or a story arc. You can play several different types of soldiers..medic/support and many others. Plus being able to get into a vehicle/aircraft whenever you want (well when they aren't already taken haha).

Can't wait for BF3 or even the new patch

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

CatBird — Sun, 5 Apr 2009 10:09:02 GMT

[quote=GAMESPY_SUB.1sht4kills][quote=cem_ea_id.CatBird]Listen smart-PC-asses i'm in the army and i pretty damn know how the weapons work and wich games are closest to reality. and i have to say that consoles have more realistic weapon handling, and on a gamepad you need more skill. there is another advantage on consoles, and that is about games crashing. they allmost never do, while on a PC they do a hundred times, and the installing is just wasting time and space on your pc.

2. someone said that keyboard and mouse are made for shooters-wrong, keyboard is made to write, and mouse, well, you know what you use it for. to navigate.

and i'm saying again, consoles don't need PC's to make games. they just need a macine with abilities to edit and create.

Oh and speaking of realism, COD4 is the closest and most acurate simulation of modern weapons used.

3.if you play on a gamepad for a long time you will be allmost as acurate as a mouse-keyboard player, because a human have incredible abilities to learn, and we all know it.

I apologize for any type errors.

I will not answer any unreadable and/or primitive and agressive comments.[/quote]

Being a cook in the Army doesn't count CatBird , haha j/k.

I agree that people have their own opinions on what platforms they utilize. None of the PC/Consoles & accessories are any where NEAR the real deal nor any of the simulators we use (yes I am prior Army myself and have not only used your basic military weapons but ones that most soldiers don't get the opportunity to). I even worked as a Unit Armorer as well (worked on them) at one point.

Some games I prefer one platform over the other (I own a PC/PS3/Xbox 360/PS2/PS1..even the oldies of Artari 2600/VECTREX (if anyone knows what that is haha)/commodor +4 and 64/Sega and Dreamcast/Intellivision. So, yes I am a little older haha...but have experienced a whole bunch of different type of game setups.

BF2 is (to me) a better game in the long run than Bad Company and Call of Duty. Because I like the free roaming/squad abilities/different views/ and the different maps and such. You aren't having to follow one script or a story arc. You can play several different types of soldiers..medic/support and many others. Plus being able to get into a vehicle/aircraft whenever you want (well when they aren't already taken haha).

Can't wait for BF3 or even the new patch [/quote]

Well they're saying (DICE) that BFBC2 will be a hit because in BFBC1 they were making the engine and the game itself at the same time, thats the reason they made it so... well you see.. Great but not best.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

HansDons — Sun, 5 Apr 2009 11:41:19 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.CatBird]Listen smart-PC-asses i'm in the army and i pretty damn know how the weapons work and wich games are closest to reality. and i have to say that consoles have more realistic weapon handling, and on a gamepad you need more skill. there is another advantage on consoles, and that is about games crashing. they allmost never do, while on a PC they do a hundred times, and the installing is just wasting time and space on your pc.

2. someone said that keyboard and mouse are made for shooters-wrong, keyboard is made to write, and mouse, well, you know what you use it for. to navigate.

and i'm saying again, consoles don't need PC's to make games. they just need a macine with abilities to edit and create.

Oh and speaking of realism, COD4 is the closest and most acurate simulation of modern weapons used.

3.if you play on a gamepad for a long time you will be allmost as acurate as a mouse-keyboard player, because a human have incredible abilities to learn, and we all know it.

I apologize for any type errors.

I will not answer any unreadable and/or primitive and agressive comments.[/quote]

I disagree, if you really want realism go for Operation Flashpoint games or its clone Arfa. I been living in war for 2 years in Abkhazia that is. I been around weapons all my life. CoD4 is not realistic at all. The weapons look like they are pulled towards the screen. Controller is a drag not a useful tool for shooters, again that’s the reason auto-aim was invented! The thing I find fascinating about BF2 is that it's the only game that could at least come close to some degree to the fear and chaos of a real war (bit off course in this case in a good way lol).

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

HansDons — Sun, 5 Apr 2009 12:08:14 GMT

[quote=GAMESPY_SUB.1sht4kills]

I agree that people have their own opinions on what platforms they utilize. None of the PC/Consoles & accessories are any where NEAR the real deal nor any of the simulators we use (yes I am prior Army myself and have not only used your basic military weapons but ones that most soldiers don't get the opportunity to). I even worked as a Unit Armorer as well (worked on them) at one point.

Some games I prefer one platform over the other (I own a PC/PS3/Xbox 360/PS2/PS1..even the oldies of Artari 2600/VECTREX (if anyone knows what that is haha)/commodor +4 and 64/Sega and Dreamcast/Intellivision. So, yes I am a little older haha...but have experienced a whole bunch of different type of game setups.

BF2 is (to me) a better game in the long run than Bad Company and Call of Duty. Because I like the free roaming/squad abilities/different views/ and the different maps and such. You aren't having to follow one script or a story arc. You can play several different types of soldiers..medic/support and many others. Plus being able to get into a vehicle/aircraft whenever you want (well when they aren't already taken haha).

Can't wait for BF3 or even the new patch [/quote]

Very true ! For me the thrill of BF2 hasn't been replicated yet. And I still don't get how people prefer controllers over mouse and keyboard (for shooters) lol. But I guess they haven't experienced it on the pc. Who need auto-aim, the mouse is more accurate than any controller out there. Using your thumb to locate a target doesn’t sound realistic to me. But anyway I've got an xbox360 and it's a great console for other games. Just bring the BF series HOME TO DADY!!!

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

unit_one — Sun, 5 Apr 2009 12:32:39 GMT

omg, the game is coming to ALL platforms! Everybody deserves it! It will be The BEST Battlefield game ever! Can we stop argue? And maybe join forces and conduct a plan to supress the Trolls and Bacement dwellers, so they will not ruin our gameplay?

PC guys dont deserve BC 2

noodlesocks — Sun, 5 Apr 2009 12:51:51 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.Evil_Paladin]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![/quote]

Console gamers and PC gamers like different type of games. You can't make a game for console gamers and expect PC gamers to like it just as much. I'm pretty sure it will be a decent and fun game to play, even on the PC but it won't be what fans of the series, like about the series.

After all, wouldn't you be pissed if Halo or Gears of War (or whatever your favourite franchised was) was dumbed down and turned into a Wii title for casual gamers? This is what PC gamers see when they look upon Dice's recent entries into the battlefield series.

PC guys dont deserve BC 2

HansDons — Sun, 5 Apr 2009 13:30:00 GMT

[quote=CC_SUB.noodlesocks]
Console gamers and PC gamers like different type of games. You can't make a game for console gamers and expect PC gamers to like it just as much. I'm pretty sure it will be a decent and fun game to play, even on the PC but it won't be what fans of the series, like about the series.

After all, wouldn't you be pissed if Halo or Gears of War (or whatever your favourite franchised was) was dumbed down and turned into a Wii title for casual gamers? This is what PC gamers see when they look upon Dice's recent entries into the battlefield series.[/quote]

EXACTLY!! You sir understand and can put it in correct words! lol Ports and games developed for all the platforms are just not the same quality, I wish they would be, but they are not. It's not about consoles vs. PC's it's about good quality games designed for their platform. BF series belong to the pc because that is where they had the best quality. And I don't even want Halo on the PC. It's a console title you guys keep it.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

CatBird — Sun, 5 Apr 2009 13:34:42 GMT

[quote=ps3.unit_one]omg, the game is coming to ALL platforms! Everybody deserves it! It will be The BEST Battlefield game ever! Can we stop argue? And maybe join forces and conduct a plan to supress the Trolls and Bacement dwellers, so they will not ruin our gameplay? [/quote]

He's got a point here, but PC gamers started to complain about it.

Anyway I wont be posting anything here anymore so that means no replys on my posts.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

US Revenge — Sun, 5 Apr 2009 15:34:05 GMT

the best BF was the one for the original xbox, the 360 version sucked. then BFBC came out and it was decent, but took out what made BF a team game and made is a solo game. hopefully BFBC 2 will be more like the one for xbox but with better graphics more weapons and enviorments that blow up

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

XxKolchakxX — Tue, 7 Apr 2009 20:39:26 GMT

Revenge has it right. Modern Combat on the Xbox was actually better than BF2 on the PC and BFBC. In BF2 on the PC, you alone didn't count for much, mainly because the game gave you a very restrictive and simplistic loadout no matter what class you chose. You ended up being hobbled by the game to keep you from being a threat by yourself. The soldiers were wearing full BDUs, they feasibly had space for more items but you were stuck with a primary weapon, a pistol and a secondary tool. There was no good reason to make Engineer and Demolition into two separate classes, same for medic and support. By consolidating the classes they gave players more options for what they could do. This was one thing that was brought over to BC, but along the way, they lost sight of something much more important. Large scale maps and matches that take more than 5 minutes to complete. Part of the fun of Modern combat was that no matter when you joined, as long as the teams were even, you had a chance to turn the tide in your favor. With the * poor version of conquest that was patched into Bad Company, these kind of matches disappeared, replaced by matches that were literally less than two minutes long.

As for PC vs Console, there's only one difference and it's answered by this question: What can you afford in the span of 5 years? A lump sum of 300-600 bucks or anywhere from 1200-5000 bucks with a more flexible payment schedule? When it all comes down to it, no matter what anyone says, a console is just a specialized PC made for nothing but gaming. Has all the same chips and components with the added bonus of not having to crack the thing open every couple years for upgrades. PCs can be more up to date (I'm not counting the people with more money than braincells who fully upgrade their computer every other month. They're not the typical PC gamer.) but every update means more money. Personally, I go for a compromise, every 2-3 years I either buy a console, or I throw together a 5-year comp.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

HansDons — Wed, 8 Apr 2009 05:38:33 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.XxKolchakxX]Revenge has it right. Modern Combat on the Xbox was actually better than BF2 on the PC and BFBC. [/quote]

These days a PC is not that expensive. If you already got a monitor and speakers, with 500 euro (I don’t know how much bux) you can make your pc handle any multiplayer game. Remember that multiplayer games are usually not that graphically advanced, as they also have to run on servers and simultaneously on many computers. And to me the main difference between a console and a pc is between OLYMPICS and PARALYMPICS (yes I’m gonna condition you with this metaphor). :p But essentially it comes down to the slow controller and limited accuracy.

But why I do not agree with you on BF2 and MC is because what you fail to notice is that BF2 did not force you to any combat style while MC did. Now this style might be the way you like it, but I find it boring at a certain point I want something more. And BF2 had this, because if you choose another class you have a different experience. In BF2 you could go and have air shootouts like dogfights, suicide attacks in jeeps , slow pace combat with the sniper or all out war with the spec-ops. As anti tank you are chasing vehicles and as a medic searching and hoping for the dead bodies. It is not forcing you to behave in a fixed manner. You can have many experiences within one game, that’s the reason why I still play it. Sure not everything was as well done as it should have been, but CoD4 MC should not be compared to BF2. MC is basically the same experience with every class just a different animated weapon with a slightly modified functions and sounds. But the experience of the game is EVERY time the same! It’s fun but not fore more than 6 months. That’s why they poop a CoD game every year.

You see it doesn’t matter whit what equipment you are making someone’s life bar go down (a shovel or a rocket launcher, the result is the same), in the long run it matters how many different experiences a game has to offer. In MC you just have much less to do. This is what seperates BF2 with cod4 MC. Also don’t forget BF2 is a much older game, so yes MC looks better, but the experience that MC provides has been done on the PC for decades. Counterstrike is the same game play basically. So this again proves my point how excited console gamers are with games that have been outdated on the pc for ages. As if they never seen any better.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

uzbec911 — Wed, 8 Apr 2009 13:09:35 GMT

BF2 was much better than MC. All I'm going to say about that.

PC version of this game will not be a port. So, there is really nothing else to say about this topic until more details about the PC version are released.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

cobra656 — Wed, 8 Apr 2009 15:06:38 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.XxKolchakxX]Revenge has it right. Modern Combat on the Xbox was actually better than BF2 on the PC and BFBC. In BF2 on the PC, you alone didn't count for much, mainly because the game gave you a very restrictive and simplistic loadout no matter what class you chose. You ended up being hobbled by the game to keep you from being a threat by yourself. The soldiers were wearing full BDUs, they feasibly had space for more items but you were stuck with a primary weapon, a pistol and a secondary tool. There was no good reason to make Engineer and Demolition into two separate classes, same for medic and support. By consolidating the classes they gave players more options for what they could do.[/quote]

They limited you on purpose. You're not supposed to be able to do everything alone; the limitations of the kits are there to make you rely on your teammates to do what you cannot accomplish alone. I think they gave the console kits more individual power because they were trying to win over people used to to the "one man army" gameplay typical of shooters on the console. However, PC Battlefields are the real thing, no "one man army" kits, and the team is the most important element in winning.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Elite_Rebel — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 19:04:35 GMT

ZERK16!!!! This message is primarily for you because you seem to be connected with EA/Dice

First of all, good job on bf2142, i liked the uniforms, the maps, the titans, the vehicles, etc., they all looked very well and the gameplay is very fun

however i have one criticism: if you ever make another futuristic fps, fire the designer for the weapons in bf2142 because the weapons (the guns for the soldiers i mean) were horrible looking, they were big,bulky, un-symmetrical, and just outright retarded looking

Second, pleeeeaaaaasee!!!!!!!! make a BF3, just like BF2 with modern everything but better, if you truly want to make an awesome game you must take a look a these points:

-good graphics, like Cod 4 good or better
-big maps, at least 64 players ( the more the better)
-customization of weapons
-many weapons, especially new ones or ones in development: XM8, G36 series, Bushmaster ACR/Masada Mapul, bullpup, SIG series, bullpup/AUG, Famas, SCAR series, ak-1xx series, etc.
-customization/upgrades to body armor,helmets, uniforms ( no one has done this yet and it would be awesome! if EA/dice did it)
-VEHICLES! at least trucks/jeeps, apcs, tanks, anti-air vehicles, and helicopters (extra points if you use cool looking ones).....planes would be nice but i wouldn't be too upset without them
-squad play (Cod4 was really lacking in this one)

So there you go, what I and i'm sure many others would like in a game (preferably BF3 :] ).....Cod 4 had the good graphics, lots of players, and customization which made it awesome.....but its small maps greatly detracted from it, it felt like playing in a shoebox, and after a while it became a little repetitive.....

BF2 was seriously the best fps shooter ever created for its time. period. In highschool i got a job at a supermarket and saved up for a year just to buy a computer to play it, it was that addicting... Bf2 has what cod4 seroiusly lacks: big maps, vehicles, squads.....The reason why bf2 was the best was becuase of the freedom and possibilities it offered:

you could take a tank out and devastate infantry in jeeps, you could hide on foresty hills taking potshots at other guys in the base below, you fly jets through the tunnel in the base of the kubra dam, drive a boat while trying to dodge and defend against a persueing helicopter, and then land and make a beach assualt on a flag

all these things made an exceptional game, whether you like to be in a squad, to be a lone wolf, or whatever, you could do it with bf2

the only thing cod4 had over bf2 was its graphics and customization. thats it. you suped up ur gun and played in a showbox just like counterstrike

If dice/EA could just combine the best elements of bf (big maps, many players, squads, vehicles) with customization and graphics at or above Cod4's level in a BF3 game i guarantee ull wipe activision/infinity ward off the face of the earth

So please! seriously consider these points/relay them to the EA/Dice team
We pc gamers need a BF3

Sincerely,
Elite Rebel

p.s. I like the destruction of buildings idea but watch out for noob tubers chaos, that's apparently what ruined the Frontlines Fuel of War game, which was very promising looking

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

unit_one — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 06:53:13 GMT

I started to think, that They do not listen...and Zerk is not saying anything at all.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

xxbigbacon — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 11:55:57 GMT

I'd buy BC2 for PC. I'd like a nice Single Player game.

I liked the first when I got to play it at community day but I don't own an xbox or ps3 and I wouldn't buy one for just one game.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

uzbec911 — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 16:52:06 GMT

[quote=ps3.unit_one]I started to think, that They do not listen...and Zerk is not saying anything at all.[/quote]

Maybe becuase this thread is pointless and there are plenty of others that are filled with comments asking for BF3 and other features (nothing wrong with that). There is an official feature request list in the feedback and help section that will be e-mailed to DICE later on. If you really want to be heard, that is the place.

PC guys dont deserve BC 2

VastShadowz41 — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 09:00:22 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.Evil_Paladin].
Sure, DICE and EA want a profit but they want to also [b]make good games[/b].

[/quote]

I laughed at the bolded part. The only good game I've seen EA come out with last year was Dead Space, and I only played the demo to it. Even the Mirror's Edge demo was fun but the final game was short too. And don't get me started on Bad Company. DICE had a lot of problems on their hands and complaints when BC came out and the only crucial thing they fixed was the dog tag lag and release a few free maps. They never addressed the squads, the mics comms, or clan support. They ALWAYS gave the freakin run-around answer "We're looking into it" MONTHS after the game was out and interviewers were dogging them for responses.

Now DICE could've just came out and said, "We'll put it in the next Battlefield game" and an apology but they didn't. I'm sure there are quite a few people pissed at the lack of support they have gotten after the game came out. These forums are just as terrible as Ubisoft's. No communication with the developers, just your middleman community managers who spew propaganda.

PC guys dont deserve BC 2

M0t0rBreath89 — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 13:42:57 GMT

You have to remember. The developers are making the games as we speak, so they can't really be here 24/7. I do agree though that they need to inform the community for often and they are heading in the right direction by going into the forums and stuff. If you head over to the EA uk forums, they are more likely to post there than here. Also you get faster replies from the community than here.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

VastShadowz41 — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 18:09:06 GMT

That's exactly what I did when I was a early supporter of BF:BC but it's ridiculous you should have to go to forums of another country in order to get responses. Whatever DICE developer that was there to answer our questions disappeared after a week or two. I swear it's written somewhere in EA's/DICE's contract that they are forbidden to communicate with their fans on these forums.

We're they're best source of feedback and potential paying customers and they could certainly start earning my trust if the game's developers pop up on here every now and then. It doesn't have to be everyday, that'd be great though but *, look at what Bungie does, they release weekly newsletters. Volition has been on their forums for Red Faction: Guerilla everyday answering people's questions and concerns, and not just their community manager, but members of the team from programmers to Quality Assurance people. Those are the companies that get my money and trust because they listen to their fanbase. Those are the companies I uphold and support.

PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Croctercopter — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 12:04:47 GMT

[quote][b]"[quote=cem_ea_id.Evil_Paladin]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. [/b][/quote]

EA does not care about making a good game for people who love them, its all about the money nothing more, Dice maybe but even then
Any battlefield remake or new release for the console is just giving the bottom feeders(console gamers) a chance to see what battlefield is like subtracting the skill,variety of vehicles, commanding abilities and the actual team play.
The fact console humpers cant accept is that a console is a dumbed down version of a PC.WHY is this people may ask? Well its because people are either lazy or too stupid to install a game on a PC or afford a decent computer. Now i dont mid console gaming i like it myself, but to go and say a PS3 or Xbox is better then a PC is down right stupid. PS3 and Xbox is just a PC without an OS and the best parts of 2005 PC hardware subtract other features.
IF console gamers want 64 player maps/games they should buy a bloody PC for crying out loud. Enough of hardware talk now the game

Alright the game now. I would assume that anyone who plays(present tense) BC has never played BF2. If hardcore console gamers knew a damn thing about console limitations they would know that if you tried to play a big map like Dragon Valley on a damn console not only would it lag your xbox or PS3 would explode(Not really but it would overheat fast) Lets be realistic so the maps which are massive,+ aerial support(jets and choppers)+commander assets and abilities aswell as the squad and commander interface is not compatible with consoles. Now if you just want 64 maps for consoles then you can go F*** right off cuz thats not what BF is all about. Personally i enjoy 40-50 player maps on BF2. I have piloted heli's and jets in BF2 and if it is already a difficult challenege for non-expert then flying on a console would be like driving a car without a steering wheel(in other words impossible). For PS3 players flying in any BF game is nothing like WarHawk.
And lastly PC gamers have every right to be pissed right off. Considering its been about 3-4 years without any news is definately something to be annoyed by. And do you know why they wont admit to making a BF3? Probably because there wont be one for some time even if they claim it. In terms of buisness a big company like EA isnt going to sit down for tea and discuss what the player wants. It would be a lie to say EA hasnt made or released good games, but to soil the name and remake it to be todays standard shooter, regen and rampage. The thing that made BF2 amazing was that the lack of a team would result in utter defeat. When it comes to a game like COD4 sure its fun but any game that one player can carry the team is just bad, you may be skilled but a game that allows that isnt good. I dont always smile at the fact that BF2 is based on alot of team work but it fits the game.

THE POINT IS, console gamers can cry or preach ignorance, but to be honest i dont think any 10 year old can dish out insults to PC gamers.
in conclusion-console gamers think console gaming is better only because it needs little or no maitnance.
PS-sorry this post was in quote form

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

whatzshankin — Tue, 26 May 2009 12:19:03 GMT

If you want to play a remake of an old game that came out 6 years ago then be my guest. Go buy BF 1942. I'm pretty sure you could afford it since the complete collection is only 9.99 at best buy. If i remember correctly they already tried to bring BF2 to the consoles. X-box and PS2 anyone? I recall that game being a complete flop that was total garbage. Console gaming will never stack up to PC Gaming. Hardware and gameplay wise. WW2 is played out and futuristic games aren't so great either. I think console gamers have it too good. They like to have things handed to them on a silver platter. PC Gamers are BUYING customers too. Don't hate on us because you have to pay 5-20 dollars for DLC. We basically get new maps, patches, add-ons, etc for free. If you have ever played BF2 on the PC you would know that. Since that's the only way to play on ranked servers. Personally I've always enjoyed playing BF2 more than COD 4. Dice and EA should get their heads out of the console gutter asap. I'm sure there are a lot of PC gamers out there that would agree with me.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Dr J McLoven — Tue, 26 May 2009 13:35:24 GMT

Im a PC owner who played every BF game out there.

And Bad Company is the best by far

And ya i do see alot of PC fanboys basically say BC 1 is trash.

But they still want to throw in their 2 cents about how BC 2 should be more like BF 2.
I think the OP was to harsh and bashed PC gamers. But the same time, i really dont want BC 2 to change that much, so as to please people who love BF2.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Nightmare1 UHQ — Tue, 26 May 2009 14:17:11 GMT

[quote=ps3.whatzshankin]If you want to play a remake of an old game that came out 6 years ago then be my guest. Go buy BF 1942. I'm pretty sure you could afford it since the complete collection is only 9.99 at best buy. If i remember correctly they already tried to bring BF2 to the consoles. X-box and PS2 anyone? I recall that game being a complete flop that was total garbage. Console gaming will never stack up to PC Gaming. Hardware and gameplay wise. WW2 is played out and futuristic games aren't so great either. I think console gamers have it too good. They like to have things handed to them on a silver platter. PC Gamers are BUYING customers too. Don't hate on us because you have to pay 5-20 dollars for DLC. We basically get new maps, patches, add-ons, etc for free. If you have ever played BF2 on the PC you would know that. Since that's the only way to play on ranked servers. Personally I've always enjoyed playing BF2 more than COD 4. Dice and EA should get their heads out of the console gutter asap. I'm sure there are a lot of PC gamers out there that would agree with me. [/quote]
Now you got a head up your butt. We deserve to have a decent battlefield game, just as anyone on here, regardless of console. Hate to break your ignorant bubble, but console battlefield can be almsot as good as the PC one, if the developers try a little harder. It has nothing to do with the gameplay, if it does, why don't you tell that to Codemasters who are making OFP: DR, maybe they can teach you a lesson or two about how weak the consoles are.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

xSpyder124 — Wed, 3 Jun 2009 08:31:23 GMT

I don't think the console gamers know what a great service the PC Battlefield series is doing them. Console gamers will now get to experience Battlefield like it should be. It's worth noting the Squad, class and unlock system that EA are announcing for BC2 is [b]exactly[/b] what has been the norm in Battlefield 2142 for the past two and a half years. Gameplay aside (BF2 vs BF2142 is always an ugly argument), this system was by far the best they have developed in any of the Battlefield games to date. Not to mention the rock/paper/scissors balance. I've also read that the PC Version will support 40 players, only the consoles will be restricted to 24. So what we should have, [i]hopefully[/i], is a game that takes all the modern warfare aspects that are so great about BF2, combine it with the balance and unlock system in BF2142 to create a well evolved Battlefield title in Bad Company 2.

I for one will be buying this game for my PC. Hell, I'll probably even upgrade my PC to get the very most out of it. I can tell you for damn sure I won't be getting it for my 360 though, how anyone can shoot using a thumb stick to aim is beyond me.

So instead of having this PC vs Console debate (as most of us have both anyway), why don't we just embrace this title and give EA as much feedback as possible to create what we all want?

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

markz2468 — Wed, 3 Jun 2009 11:19:21 GMT

PC guys deserve BC 2, BC 2 can play PC,PS3,XBOX 360, I bet you just dont have a PC.

Re: PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Paz30 — Wed, 3 Jun 2009 18:15:24 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.BlackListed]then u have never obviously heard of a quickscope sniper......(or shotgun....or smg....or m16....or any gun for that matter....)

and honestly if u seriously r sayin o hey this game is garbage cuz it doesnt have 64 player battles then ur being ignorant. game companies are finnaly starting to realize that the best game sales are on the consoles not the comp any more. the consoles i hate to tell u r going to be the future of gaming.[/quote]

Offcourse consoles are not the future of gaming, because: 1 it cant be upgraded so, a pc gets faster every week. 2 pcs are the design and test platforms for all games offcourse also consoles, and the pc can handle more then a console can ever do. This is just fact. As for bf fans talking down on console owners, thats because all the console games are so easy that its that fact that makes some people look down on them. Like no teamplaying etc. I personally believe consoles are for kids, but thats my opinion. I do respect console players so i dont mind EA and DICE making bf titles for it, but we want bigger then 64 people maps, squad based team playing, just like bf2, but bigger better slicker and just as difficult haha..

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Paz30 — Wed, 3 Jun 2009 18:16:52 GMT

[quote=MAIN.xSpyder124]I don't think the console gamers know what a great service the PC Battlefield series is doing them. Console gamers will now get to experience Battlefield like it should be. It's worth noting the Squad, class and unlock system that EA are announcing for BC2 is [b]exactly[/b] what has been the norm in Battlefield 2142 for the past two and a half years. Gameplay aside (BF2 vs BF2142 is always an ugly argument), this system was by far the best they have developed in any of the Battlefield games to date. Not to mention the rock/paper/scissors balance. I've also read that the PC Version will support 40 players, only the consoles will be restricted to 24. So what we should have, [i]hopefully[/i], is a game that takes all the modern warfare aspects that are so great about BF2, combine it with the balance and unlock system in BF2142 to create a well evolved Battlefield title in Bad Company 2.

I for one will be buying this game for my PC. Hell, I'll probably even upgrade my PC to get the very most out of it. I can tell you for damn sure I won't be getting it for my 360 though, how anyone can shoot using a thumb stick to aim is beyond me.

So instead of having this PC vs Console debate (as most of us have both anyway), why don't we just embrace this title and give EA as much feedback as possible to create what we all want?[/quote]

Nicely said, amen to that, and indeed playing a FPS game with a controller is also beyond me, better that they dont make mixed servers cause a mouse will dominate

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

xSpyder124 — Thu, 4 Jun 2009 01:43:25 GMT

[quote=BF_SUB.Paz30]Nicely said, amen to that, and indeed playing a FPS game with a controller is also beyond me, better that they dont make mixed servers cause a mouse will dominate[/quote]

Actually, I don't know about that. I've played my son on Halo and he f***ing pwns me! Whenever we lan 2142 I pwn him right back, so I guess it's whatever you're used to.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

strontKLONT — Thu, 4 Jun 2009 02:58:48 GMT

the thing is bad company is a console game... im fine with them brining it to pc but just keep it the same as the console and dont change it to the pc guys bf2 needs... its bad company not bf3
if they have to give the pc guys more players then thell just have to figure out a way to do it on the console aswell
id hate it if the pc version were diferent from the console game...
so yea if they are going to change 1 bit about the game just becouse the pc gets it aswell ... i completely agree with the first poster! if not then i dont mind

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

xSpyder124 — Thu, 4 Jun 2009 05:15:24 GMT

I'm not having a shot at you, but have you even played Battlefield on the PC?

I've done both, and whilst Bad Company is terrific, it lacks the sort of squad interaction required to be successful on the PC versions. I think DICE have recognized this and hence the changes that are being made steer Bad Company 2 towards the PC variety of Battlefield, not the slightly watered down version that is for console. Like I've stated previously, I'm confident that Bad Company 2 will have the best of console and PC melded together. All the destruction and visual appeal of the console and all of the team work and precision of the PC variety.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Late Goodbye — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:17:00 GMT

I think the problem in this discussion is, that Console-Gamers and PC-Gamers (I'm one the last group) have a really different view on the battlefield games, which is connected to their way of playing them.
PC-Gamers play witch mouse and keyboard, they can aim very accurately in every direction and the have many buttons, which can they use.
I dont know how Console Gamers like to play, but I think they like it a bit faster and maybe less precise.

I think PC Gamers see in the new Battlefield a new possibility to get a teambased FPS with a strategy part, while Console gamers want an action game witch military scenario

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Neanderthal — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 14:20:55 GMT

[quote=MAIN.Late Goodbye]I think the problem in this discussion is, that Console-Gamers and PC-Gamers (I'm one the last group) have a really different view on the battlefield games, which is connected to their way of playing them.
PC-Gamers play witch mouse and keyboard, they can aim very accurately in every direction and the have many buttons, which can they use.
I dont know how Console Gamers like to play, but I think they like it a bit faster and maybe less precise.

I think PC Gamers see in the new Battlefield a new possibility to get a teambased FPS with a strategy part, while Console gamers want an action game witch military scenario[/quote]

I have CoD4 on both PC and Xbox. I tend to play similarly on each platform, though I will agree that it is much easier to aim with the mouse.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Orcacam07 — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 20:39:55 GMT

This PC vs Console thing really needs to end...There is seriously no point to it besides making each other mad. There isn't any point in arguing, considering no matter what you do people will argue. Seriously, the point of these Console games are to test out the future of Battlefield. And well, if you PC gamers dont like it, just dont PLAY it! Nobody said you have to! As lame as this sounds, this is almost like a civil war (lol) The point of Battlefield from the start was for endless hours of fun, not endless hours of arguing.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Mass One — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 01:17:47 GMT

The PC guys really don't need it because if you don't want to play BC2 don't buy it ; stay away from this forum and just wait for BF3. Their is no need to trash talk the intelligence of Console players just becuase they don't fell like paying a whole week's paycheck on the newest graphics card. Consoles are cheaper plus the same problem with the PSP probably is going to happen to the PC " no one is going to buy the games when you can just download them from bit torrent or other P2P programs"

Little Fact 41% of all PC software is pirated Source [url]http://www.downloadsquad.com/2009/05/12/study-41-of-all-pc-software-installed-is-pirated/[/url]

Consider this ; If you have a console your family and friends can just sit around on the couch and play with you or try to huddle around the one chair next to the PC and watch you play . It is alot easier to bring a console to someone else's house then to call U-Haul and move that 800 Ibs PC (exaggeration)

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

M0t0rBreath89 — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 01:25:15 GMT

There are both pros and cons for console and PC. I like the fact that consoles can be played almost anywhere, but lack in other areas. The PC has many things that make the game easier and have more control over it, but for some may cost more than a console. I think it really depends on your own style. Personally I like playing PC games more than consoles, but consoles is a more relaxed type of playing and something like just sitting on the couch.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

MATHERman — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 07:08:18 GMT

I love when people on here say "STOP FIGHTING!" then go on to say PC gamers GTFO!!! It makes for an enjoyable read. You do make a point though about people just not willing to listen. These forums are the worst i have ever seen, when it comes to console gamers unwilling to listen. PC gamers are getting the game as well and we want it to be an enjoyable game that will last for years. Not a game that we play for five minutes then take it to gamestop for the next best thing... oh wait...

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Grumdor — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 07:46:45 GMT

Console vs PC war, ah a classic.Well reality 101 here,deserving or not better or not the battle has been won and thrawned and not by the BF fans^^.

It's a demographics thing ppl.And clearly it tips in the consoles favor.Console are cheaper thus more fans.So it's not a question of which platform is better for the games,who as been a loyal fan,ect,ect its all about the money.

So fight all u want in the end it's all about the money^^.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Cyber_shot — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 08:31:15 GMT

lol, what are you on about OP? "EA have to make money but they also want to make good games" - PC players consider it a bad game if it doesn't have enough players. So it doesn't make sense to suggest that EA ignore the PC player's requests and just get on making a 'good game', coz if they ignore some of those requests, it won't be a good game.

many PC players like how BF was so much more strategic than ordinary FPS games and this whole thing of less players, more self-sufficient players etc is just taking it to be like any other FPS but this one happens to have vehicles as well. The first few BF games were to be commended because they had an excellent balance of vehicles, FPS and strategy all in the one game. I hope BC2 doesn't lose the strategic aspect but so far it's looking very likely

[quote].Console are cheaper thus more fans[/quote]
that's not quite right - everybody has a PC even if they're not going to play games. You should be comparing the price of a console with the cost of upgrading to a gaming PC. Then you'll find that PC is in fact cheaper

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Mass One — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 10:20:50 GMT

[quote=GAMESPY_SUB.MATHERman]I love when people on here say "STOP FIGHTING!" then go on to say PC gamers GTFO!!! It makes for an enjoyable read. You do make a point though about people just not willing to listen. These forums are the worst i have ever seen, when it comes to console gamers unwilling to listen. PC gamers are getting the game as well and we want it to be an enjoyable game that will last for years. Not a game that we play for five minutes then take it to gamestop for the next best thing... oh wait... [/quote]

Unwilling to listen. Really . because from what I see the PC can't hear because their up on their highhorse talking down to everyone.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Neanderthal — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 11:01:29 GMT

[quote=BF_SUB.Cyber_shot]
[quote].Console are cheaper thus more fans[/quote]
that's not quite right - [b] everybody has a PC [/b] even if they're not going to play games. You should be comparing the price of a console with the cost of upgrading to a gaming PC. Then you'll find that PC is in fact cheaper[/quote]

I'm on a Mac.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

cobra6566 — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 13:50:08 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.Neanderthal][quote=BF_SUB.Cyber_shot]
[quote].Console are cheaper thus more fans[/quote]
that's not quite right - [b] everybody has a PC [/b] even if they're not going to play games. You should be comparing the price of a console with the cost of upgrading to a gaming PC. Then you'll find that PC is in fact cheaper[/quote]

I'm on a Mac. [/quote]

That puts you in the minority of people. PCs are the most common computer platform in the world.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Mass One — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 14:32:27 GMT

The PC is not necessarily cheaper. [url]http://www.joystiq.com/2008/02/22/financial-analysis-looks-at-pc-vs-console-costs/[/url] Feb 22 2008

Re: PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Mercenary Nox — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 19:02:35 GMT

Couldn't agree more with the OP because all i have to say for most of the PC guys.

Then play a freaken different game! Things change sorry, it happens. *, some of you people need a life, its JUST A GAME, a GAME! If we were debating some kind of huge change in congress or ballistic nukes be launched alright whatever, but I have also noticed how the PC community are probably the most whiney i've ever seen. They rival PETA.

Holy *, they didn't make BF2 again! Oh no, they changed it, now its horrible. Aw crap they decided to move on and make some serious cash by going to consoles. Too bad. There are plenty of other amazing PC games out there right now, many better then BF2, 1942, or any of DICE's creations could hope to be (Though they are definately capable). "Its not exactly the same so I'm not going to buy" See ya later, because no one is going to miss you.

Not to mention BF3 is in the works, this isn't BF3, were sorry. When they create a forum for that you can spend your entire day making sure everything is in check.

If it was the consoles whining so much, I'd say the exact same thing. Move on or get the hell out of the way. I say that because I own a PS3, 360, AND PC(obviously). How? Because I did what some people here need to do and got a good paying job.

All this goes beyond BF and many other titles for PC turned console aswell. Also like i said, this goes for MOST PC gamers, not all. As some of you are very constructive and the like.

PC guys dont deserve BC 2

hongpan1986 — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:58:19 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.Evil_Paladin]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![/quote]
u console boy just doesn't understand what commercial is... sigh.....

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

beejay75 — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 09:47:52 GMT

I started playing BF on the pc but moved to the xbox and now im a 360 player and lately ive been playing BF2 on the pc because my TV is busted & it can be really good fun playing on the pc,having 60 players going at it is top * but to be totally honest you pc guys cant shoot 4 * all you do is throw grenades all the time & the only time you get shot at is from behind or if some 1 is useing an aimbot,they need to change the FPS to FPG just 4 the pc.That was the reason i stopped playing BF on the pc because i want to shoot not throw grenades.
AND YOU ALL KNOW ITS TRUE

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

VoraciousBear — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 15:10:58 GMT

How about you console guys STFU with the console superiority thing there is no reason why PC's should not get this title.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

hongpan1986 — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 10:00:46 GMT

[quote=MAIN.VoraciousBear]How about you console guys STFU with the console superiority thing there is no reason why PC's should not get this title. [/quote]

dude.. who ever made this threat is just stupid, brain-underdeveloped kid...

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

AlexoEx0 — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:08:24 GMT

50 on 50 battles you say? Try MAG on the PS3 (only PS3) 128 thats 128 versus 128, yes thats 256 player battles all battling it out. Your saying PC's should be aiming for 50v50 but PS3 is bringing out 128vs128

There you go.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Gortheur — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:55:29 GMT

How about deal that every platform get every game. That is fairest i think (don't get the 10 yo fight from best and deserving games)

The gamestyles that were mentioned before are true. Those are different between consoles and PC, but i think that we will see more similar gamestyles in future cause the new gen consoles are having/getting mouse and keyboard support (PS has and i think Xbox will get)

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Nightmare1 UHQ — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:01:19 GMT

I don't really care about PC players getting this game, what I care about is us getting the real BF series, like the 3 that is production, I want the whole package, not some dumbed down crappy version that consoles been getting in past years.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

strontKLONT — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:45:39 GMT

couldnt care less about pc fanboys hating on the console.. bad company 1 was awsome and 2 will be even better!! if people want to play no game if it doesnt have 64 players well whatever .. your loss lol!

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Alanus — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 22:05:51 GMT

1. consoles are way too touchy with aim (like like to hit my target)
2. a lot of good games are ONLY going to console (ps3 specificly)
3. i want to destroy stuff
that is why pc gamers should get bfbc2 and consoles should just die (not the console gamers though)

Re: PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Alanus — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 22:13:56 GMT

[quote=xbox.Mercenary Nox]Couldn't agree more with the OP because all i have to say for most of the PC guys.

Then play a freaken different game! Things change sorry, it happens. *, some of you people need a life, its JUST A GAME, a GAME! If we were debating some kind of huge change in congress or ballistic nukes be launched alright whatever, but I have also noticed how the PC community are probably the most whiney i've ever seen. They rival PETA.

Holy *, they didn't make BF2 again! Oh no, they changed it, now its horrible. Aw crap they decided to move on and make some serious cash by going to consoles. Too bad. There are plenty of other amazing PC games out there right now, many better then BF2, 1942, or any of DICE's creations could hope to be (Though they are definately capable). "Its not exactly the same so I'm not going to buy" See ya later, because no one is going to miss you.

Not to mention BF3 is in the works, this isn't BF3, were sorry. When they create a forum for that you can spend your entire day making sure everything is in check.

If it was the consoles whining so much, I'd say the exact same thing. Move on or get the hell out of the way. I say that because I own a PS3, 360, AND PC(obviously). How? Because I did what some people here need to do and got a good paying job.

All this goes beyond BF and many other titles for PC turned console aswell. Also like i said, this goes for MOST PC gamers, not all. As some of you are very constructive and the like.[/quote]
dude, some of us just wanted to destroy * in bfbc1 and now get to in bfbc2 so my minority is happy

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Hman242 — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 22:39:39 GMT

why all the hating? you can even tell buy the title that this was gonna happen. i think that pc, ps3, & 360 should all get the title.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

natonio94 — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 05:09:18 GMT

pc is where bf started i like it and i want to play BFBC2 on console because the game will need required specs so the game release for consoles is goin towards people who dont have powerful computers i want cross platform multiplayer like lost planet

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

natonio94 — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 05:10:29 GMT

[quote=bfheroes.AlexoEx0]50 on 50 battles you say? Try MAG on the PS3 (only PS3) 128 thats 128 versus 128, yes thats 256 player battles all battling it out. Your saying PC's should be aiming for 50v50 but PS3 is bringing out 128vs128

There you go.[/quote]\

lets try WoW more players than MAG even if the game isnt released

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

strontKLONT — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 06:58:52 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.natonio94][quote=bfheroes.AlexoEx0]50 on 50 battles you say? Try MAG on the PS3 (only PS3) 128 thats 128 versus 128, yes thats 256 player battles all battling it out. Your saying PC's should be aiming for 50v50 but PS3 is bringing out 128vs128

There you go.[/quote]\

lets try WoW more players than MAG even if the game isnt released[/quote]

lol WoW is the most ugly game in the world if played it for 3 years and if experienced more lagg and disconnects there as in any other online game.. and wow isnt a shooter nor is it heavy on the servers

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

T1M-95 — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 02:28:10 GMT

This is pathetic. I own both consoles and a pc, and play both.

I think this is want they want to hear:

PCs are superior.

Consoles are more fun.
---------------------------------
This is what every body else hears:

PC: Sheez, i'm getting lonely. Pass the mountain dew.

Console: OMG! LOLWUT! PWNED! DID YOU SEE THAT?!? REPAIR +15!

End of argument.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

strontKLONT — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 06:31:35 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.T1M-95]This is pathetic. I own both consoles and a pc, and play both.

I think this is want they want to hear:

PCs are superior.

Consoles are more fun.
---------------------------------
This is what every body else hears:

PC: Sheez, i'm getting lonely. Pass the mountain dew.

Console: OMG! LOLWUT! PWNED! DID YOU SEE THAT?!? REPAIR +15!

End of argument.[/quote]

hmm superior.. or more fun .. Such a hard choice
il take the easy fun way ty

PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Major_Rich — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 09:05:50 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.Evil_Paladin]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![/quote]

I can gladly say i agree with nothing in this post. This guy clearly knows nothing about how games work and just sits on his console all day playing hello kitty island adventure, praying for battlefield games to come out on consoles only. Us PC gamers are the real gamers, who know what it takes for a game to be succesful. This lard * knows nothing about the history of battlefield games, and the mistakes EA and dice made while patching the games. Yes EA and Dice make decent games, but its keeping them decent which is their problem. Sucking up to EA and Dice claiming you have loyalty is utter trash. These companys don't care about pleasing the different markets, they just want to make maximum profit.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Goggzyboy — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 09:08:31 GMT

[quote]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!

I can gladly say i agree with nothing in this post. This guy clearly knows nothing about how games work and just sits on his console all day playing hello kitty island adventure, praying for battlefield games to come out on consoles only. Us PC gamers are the real gamers, who know what it takes for a game to be succesful. This lard * knows nothing about the history of battlefield games, and the mistakes EA and dice made while patching the games. Yes EA and Dice make decent games, but its keeping them decent which is their problem. Sucking up to EA and Dice claiming you have loyalty is utter trash. These companys don't care about pleasing the different markets, they just want to make maximum profit.

[/quote]+1

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Goggzyboy — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 09:09:14 GMT

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Dr J McLoven — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 13:11:19 GMT

What sucks about listening to PC fanboys. is that they want BC to be like BF2.
BF2 BF2 BF2 BF2..

Dice stick to your guns. BC 1 was amazing. So do the same with BC2.

BF3 is coming out, so PC fanboys got that.

By the way im a PC fanboy also. Played every single BF game.

But BC was the best. And i want BC 2 to go off what BC 1 offered.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

strontKLONT — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 18:05:21 GMT

[quote=xbox.Dr J McLoven]What sucks about listening to PC fanboys. is that they want BC to be like BF2.
BF2 BF2 BF2 BF2..

Dice stick to your guns. BC 1 was amazing. So do the same with BC2.

BF3 is coming out, so PC fanboys got that.

By the way im a PC fanboy also. Played every single BF game.

But BC was the best. And i want BC 2 to go off what BC 1 offered.[/quote]

what he said... you know most console gamers dont even care that bc2 is coming to the pc they just dont want the game to be changed just becouse its a battlefield game doesnt make it the next battlefield 2

bad company was awsome and im sure 2 will be just as cool

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

20037626 — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 21:01:17 GMT

Wtf...these forums suck now. Truly, IMHO, it's full of whiny little kids, or so it seems. You should've seen this post before I had a drink and re-started.

First off, to the creator of this thread, * off. We deserve a good battlefield game, as we've been waiting for it for FIVE (or two, if u played 2142), YEARS. BF2 doesnt see anymore support, still waiting for 1.5, and we're tired of playing cod4 crap. It's annoying!

Second, who cares what platform you play on. It doesnt matter, you can play on a Mac or just an ordinary PC, that's why they invented GRAPHICS OPTIONS. You can max it out to 1900 x 1200 with Full Anti-aliasing, or play on 800x600 with medium graphics so you can shoot people normally. I played Cod4 TWL, and I knew a few really good players who played PC with a gamepad, so stop talking about it.

Third, yes. Battlefield really really should have 32v32 MINimum. So what? 128 v 128 is just STUPID.

Fourth, liking my theme of numbers yet? Console players just want to wander around and shoot *. No joke, you can argue...and hell, it's fun too! But honostly...

[b][i]The Main Reason PC Players are posting here is that we want TEAMPLAY in the game. We dont want a CONSOLE version. We're taking a chance at a great game and putting our experience into it.

Still, this forum has given me nothing but disdain for the future of battlefield, and a bias towards console players.

R.I.P. BC2 forums.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Spartan117nTN — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 22:19:08 GMT

Port from PC to consoles instead of the other way around.

Re: PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Beasty Drummer — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 23:02:47 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.Evil_Paladin]> but then the maps would be too big lol

not really, just speculating but if a Battlefield 3 came out and was ported to consoles, they could find a way to make lower player count work I mean coe on this is DICE we are talking about here!!![/quote]Look at OPF DR. Consoles are only haveing 4v4 with 4 person AI firing squad for each person. That means 32 total online for that game. [b]BUT THEN [/b] if you look at PC version, it will be 32 vs 32 and they will also have 4 person AI firing squad so your looking at 256 total online for PC Imagine how boring and slow online will be for consoles in that game.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

DaSackRatist — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 01:21:06 GMT

I'm not trying to be an as shole here, but when the PC guys post, I sense so much hate and jealousy in their typing.
They seem like they want to get back at the console gamers for something they didn't do.

They should be complaining to EA and DICE for not supporting their system. Not to the console players. That's just pointless.

I am one of the more sophisticated console gamers, but yeah, everyone on any console game is clinically retarded.
But on PC it's all about exploiting the game's physics in any way possible and hack hack hack.

The PC guys shouldn't be here. If I where * ed about the new BF's not being on PC then I'd grab THE ENTIRE PC COMMUNITY AND TELL THEM TO SEND AS MANY HATE MAILS TO EA AS POSSIBLE.

^^^ come on PC guys. You know you want to.

And well.... You know we had to say this:

Arguing on the internet is just like the special olympics, even if you win, you're still retarded.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

MrRandom004 — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 03:43:14 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.DaSackRatist]
Arguing on the internet is just like the special olympics, even if you win, you're still retarded.
[/quote]

exactly

Okay seriously this thread had fanboy flame wars written all since the beginning and i think it needs to stop or get locked, either way it needs to die

Console Battlefield fans
You do have to appreciate how different Bad Company 1 was from the rest of the franchise, yes it is still fun but there's less vehicles, less players and the emphasis on team play is so much less, it doesn't hold a candle to the core franchise and maybe the PC players have concerns

PC Battlefield consoles
While i respect the position many of you come from,[u]some[/u] of you resort to calling all console players idiots, constantly pound it in console players faces how PC gaming is infinitely superior and present arguments which are more like complaints than developed concerns (I did say [u]some[/u] of you)

Lets take this calmly shall we, there's so much we have yet to know about this game, infact its possible that the previously fabled 40 players from the Official Xbox Magazine preview, if i'm not mistaken there will be a third game mode that might support 40 players though i might be being a bit optimistic there
Even so Battlefield 3 was confirmed about a month back and since it's got a nice, big 3 in it's title and so far it appears to be PC exclusive so hopefully the PC gamers will get the Battlefield experience they've been waiting for

Anyways more to point there are so much more constructive ways to address concerns about this game in regards to its PC adaptation so can we let this unnecessary thread die off now please

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Cyber_shot — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 09:09:12 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.DaSackRatist]
The PC guys shouldn't be here. If I where * ed about the new BF's not being on PC then I'd grab THE ENTIRE PC COMMUNITY AND TELL THEM TO SEND AS MANY HATE MAILS TO EA AS POSSIBLE.

^^^ come on PC guys. You know you want to.

[/quote]lol, wtf - you discredited your own suggestion when you made it; sending bitchy emails about new games is the typical problem-solving strategy of console players. Just look at the BF1943 forums; it's only come out on console so far and there are so many * threads. Maybe PC players are more mature or something; thankfully there never seems to be as much aggression from the PC players.

Btw, has BF3 actually been confirmed? - all that I've seen so far is one website saying that somebody else confirmed it and a whole bunch of other sites are linking to this one. There's also some shoddy pdf document doing the rounds. Since there's nothing on DICE's website, I would presume that the game is in fact not in development

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

MrRandom004 — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 09:39:43 GMT

[quote=BF_SUB.Cyber_shot]
Btw, has BF3 actually been confirmed? - all that I've seen so far is one website saying that somebody else confirmed it and a whole bunch of other sites are linking to this one. There's also some shoddy pdf document doing the rounds. Since there's nothing on DICE's website, I would presume that the game is in fact not in development[/quote]

[url]http://uk.games.ign.com/articles/993/993655p1.html[/url]

It was confirmed by a EA executive though he did not provide a fiscal year, only that he has seen the game's progress and is really impressed, and this was at a EA conference not to mention no one else from EA or DICE refuted the claim. I believe it is legitimate

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Grumdor — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 09:48:55 GMT

FFS this thread in't closed yet.It should be.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

DaSackRatist — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 09:58:56 GMT

[/quote]lol, wtf - you discredited your own suggestion when you made it; sending bitchy emails about new games is the typical problem-solving strategy of console players. Just look at the BF1943 forums; it's only come out on console so far and there are so many * threads. Maybe PC players are more mature or something; thankfully there never seems to be as much aggression from the PC players.

Judging by how pissed off you some of you seem to be, I actually thought you'd do that.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

TrECeNTeRs — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 16:39:27 GMT

I played every BF game up to date .... I switched over for awhile from PC to XBOX .. its very hard to switch from mouse/kb to controller. I bought a Sniper XPFS to use a mouse on xbox it was total crap ... don't buy it.

Anyone who argues over this is dumb... I have gotten the hang of BF1943... Its different even from 1942 for pc.

Although I enjoy playing it I have owned on it because I love BF and I have adapted.

I am looking forward to BC2 for both console and pc.. My home friends play xbox and my out of state friends play PC...

Its just that simple... Whoever is on or whatever has the most ppl playing BF2 pr bf1943 that I know I play..

1943 has problems with the whole team based unless you got some good gaming friends. Alot don't get the aspect of flag capture is better then kills cause most have been on COD4&5.

I teach them and I am waiting for the day BF3 comes out ... or call it BF2:Something...

2142 didn't get my attention ...neither did halo... Lol

So anyways keep pushing for BF3 and consolers get off of the pc guys male genitals. We are old school at BF and deserve a true squeal.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

pomppaduur — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 16:47:10 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.Spartan117nTN]Port from PC to consoles instead of the other way around.[/quote]
+1

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Peacem8ker — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 17:19:02 GMT

Amount of players in the game doesn't make the game better. Most the time in battlefield games i prefered 32 player games because 64 player games were just too crazy and you had a really hard time getting you hands on a vehicle. You could play a whole game with 64 players and never come into contact with some of the poeple on the other team which kinda makes it pointless. I would enjoy a smaller more focused gameplay like COD4 which had you looking for cover and stuff like that.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

VoraciousBear — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 23:15:48 GMT

[quote=BF_SUB.Peacem8ker]Amount of players in the game doesn't make the game better. Most the time in battlefield games i prefered 32 player games because 64 player games were just too crazy and you had a really hard time getting you hands on a vehicle. You could play a whole game with 64 players and never come into contact with some of the poeple on the other team which kinda makes it pointless. I would enjoy a smaller more focused gameplay like COD4 which had you looking for cover and stuff like that.[/quote]
Did you seriously mention COD4 on the EA Battlefield Bad Company 2 forum???? I hope I am not seeing what I am actually just seeing. We will not dumb down to COD4!

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

MrRandom004 — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 03:20:15 GMT

PLEASE

Can we let this pathetic thread die, or can zerk PLEASE lock it

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

IntrebuloN — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 08:16:58 GMT

I dont see what y'all are arguing about.

Comparing PC games to Console games is comparing apples and oranges.

Consoles are for people to get some quick NSA gaming fun after school/work.

PC's are for hobbyists, or in other words, people that take their gaming seriously. It's a full time hobby, akin to golfing or skiing or travelling the world, but much less expensive.

Personally I can't help but being a little miffed that console players got BF:BC exclusively, but stuff happens.

But it's not a big deal, because I know that the next flagship BF title that comes out on PC will be an exclusive to PC. Why? Because even next gen consoles couldn't possibly handle the computing demands of that release.

To the guy that tried to say the PS3's Cell CPU didn't come from PC technology, do you even know who designed it and why?

It was designed by IBM and Toshiba for supercomputing. Sony only got involved because they were in the market for a CPU for PS3. These processors were around before the PS2 was released so I don't understand why you would try to give the impression it was designed by Sony exclusively for the PS3. The exact same architecture has been used in high end HDTV's for years. That's right, your console is using an HDTV processor that is very good for vector graphics processing and number crunching, but little else. Even the cheapest netbooks have processors that are easily 4-5 times as powerful.

I've seen how the latest games run at HD resolutions on PS3. The gameplay is not even close to as fluid as it would be on a PC. The hardware limits of current consoles have already been reached and I'm playing games at much higher resolutions then any console player and my machine isn't even breaking a sweat. 10x the performance at twice the cost, with the ability to do things with it besides gaming is a no brainer for me.

Consoles are toys, not serious computing machines and you are paying premium for the hardware involved. It will be another decade before consoles even come close to closing the technology gap PC's have on them.

To be honest, console's probably don't even WANT to match computer performance, because the price would be higher then a similarly appointed PC. There's a lot more people buying computers out there then consoles.

It cost Sony $800 per console to put the Cell processor in it. At that time I could build a gaming rig for that price that would play all the latest games at reasonable quality, certainly better quality then a PS3 could ever handle and at much higher frame rates.

I have nothing against consoles (or their fans). They simply aren't good enough for my gaming needs, and most likely never will be. And the cost of owning a console is simply too much. Pretty much everyone has a computer in their house. Even if you bought the bare basics, imagine tacking the 500-600 dollars you spent on your console onto the price you or your family spent on your family computer?

Considering that the average pre-built costs around 600-800 dollars, and the next gen consoles coming will probably cost in the 450-750 dollar range. Why would I spend 1050-1550 dollars on two seperate devices, where the performance of either one is only average for it's respective purpose, when I can spend the ENTIRE amount on a gaming computer and get a machine that performs far better at either task? Again, no brainer to me.

The console companies are gouging the hell out of you.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Grumdor — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 08:24:57 GMT

[size=24]DIE STUPID THREAD DIE!!!![/size]

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

pomppaduur — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 08:30:35 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.IntrebuloN]I dont see what y'all are arguing about.

Comparing PC games to Console games is comparing apples and oranges.

Consoles are for people to get some quick NSA gaming fun after school/work.

PC's are for hobbyists, or in other words, people that take their gaming seriously. It's a full time hobby, akin to golfing or skiing or travelling the world, but much less expensive.

Personally I can't help but being a little miffed that console players got BF:BC exclusively, but stuff happens.

But it's not a big deal, because I know that the next flagship BF title that comes out on PC will be an exclusive to PC. Why? Because even next gen consoles couldn't possibly handle the computing demands of that release.

To the guy that tried to say the PS3's Cell CPU didn't come from PC technology, do you even know who designed it and why?

It was designed by IBM and Toshiba for supercomputing. Sony only got involved because they were in the market for a CPU for PS3. These processors were around before the PS2 was released so I don't understand why you would try to give the impression it was designed by Sony exclusively for the PS3. The exact same architecture has been used in high end HDTV's for years. That's right, your console is using an HDTV processor that is very good for vector graphics processing and number crunching, but little else. Even the cheapest netbooks have processors that are easily 4-5 times as powerful.

I've seen how the latest games run at HD resolutions on PS3. The gameplay is not even close to as fluid as it would be on a PC. The hardware limits of current consoles have already been reached and I'm playing games at much higher resolutions then any console player and my machine isn't even breaking a sweat. 10x the performance at twice the cost, with the ability to do things with it besides gaming is a no brainer for me.

Consoles are toys, not serious computing machines and you are paying premium for the hardware involved. It will be another decade before consoles even come close to closing the technology gap PC's have on them.

To be honest, console's probably don't even WANT to match computer performance, because the price would be higher then a similarly appointed PC. There's a lot more people buying computers out there then consoles.

It cost Sony $800 per console to put the Cell processor in it. At that time I could build a gaming rig for that price that would play all the latest games at reasonable quality, certainly better quality then a PS3 could ever handle and at much higher frame rates.

I have nothing against consoles (or their fans). They simply aren't good enough for my gaming needs, and most likely never will be. And the cost of owning a console is simply too much. Pretty much everyone has a computer in their house. Even if you bought the bare basics, imagine tacking the 500-600 dollars you spent on your console onto the price you or your family spent on your family computer?

Considering that the average pre-built costs around 600-800 dollars, and the next gen consoles coming will probably cost in the 450-750 dollar range. Why would I spend 1050-1550 dollars on two seperate devices, where the performance of either one is only average for it's respective purpose, when I can spend the ENTIRE amount on a gaming computer and get a machine that performs far better at either task? Again, no brainer to me.

The console companies are gouging the hell out of you.[/quote]
Good Post

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

strontKLONT — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:24:16 GMT

[quote=ps3.Grumdor][size=24]DIE STUPID THREAD DIE!!!![/size][/quote]

this

PC guys dont deserve BC 2

mike1146l — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:07:10 GMT

I'm on both sides

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

DAMNCLOWNZ — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:59:46 GMT

I have to agree with both sides on this.. As a PC/Console Gamer i like both but spending the money on my comp was hurting me.. I have no problem with the console nor pc gaming..

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Hman242 — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 16:36:47 GMT

which is why nobody should dig up threads like this so more raging can insue

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

ebevan91 — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 18:52:27 GMT

I find it dumb that people are saying "DIE THREAD DIE" when they are trying to let a thread die while they are clearly bumping it when they post that.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

VoraciousBear — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 22:36:35 GMT

OK how about anyone who posts after me does NOT want the thread to die and is a * of all proportions.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

strontKLONT — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 10:05:47 GMT

[quote=MAIN.VoraciousBear]OK how about anyone who posts after me does NOT want the thread to die and is a * of all proportions.[/quote]
Mu... must r..resist

im sorry it was to tempting TO TEMPTING DAMMIT!!

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

k1ll8 saurav — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 09:21:36 GMT

Really, PC games and console games are different. PC gamers are mostly hardcore that dedicate their time to their games, and console gamers just have fun with their friends. Sure, we all want 64 player matches, but then, DICE would have to remove Frostbite. Next gen games don't deserve to take a step back. And maybe if DICE can handle it, they can add 64 players to each match on the PC. PC gamers are just so conceded and think every PC FPS should have 64 player matches and extreme teamwork, to the point if one guy doesn't do his job, your team just loses. Be a little more open and just accept that hiding behind a wall with a shotgun while the entire 64 player enemy team is just barging in isn't all that great. DICE is most likely already working on trying to find out how to get the servers updated so they can support both Frostbite and the big player counts. If you don't want BC2, then don't buy it. BC is like a sub-series than a true sequel. I like console games for their mindless fun that it just takes away all the stress from you, but I agree that PC games are much more capable and will be fun when played to their fullest potential. Just relax. And I can't believe I just relived this thread.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

strontKLONT — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 09:56:59 GMT

[quote=xbox.k1ll8 saurav]Really, PC games and console games are different. PC gamers are mostly hardcore that dedicate their time to their games, and console gamers just have fun with their friends. Sure, we all want 64 player matches, but then, DICE would have to remove Frostbite. Next gen games don't deserve to take a step back. And maybe if DICE can handle it, they can add 64 players to each match on the PC. PC gamers are just so conceded and think every PC FPS should have 64 player matches and extreme teamwork, to the point if one guy doesn't do his job, your team just loses. Be a little more open and just accept that hiding behind a wall with a shotgun while the entire 64 player enemy team is just barging in isn't all that great. DICE is most likely already working on trying to find out how to get the servers updated so they can support both Frostbite and the big player counts. If you don't want BC2, then don't buy it. BC is like a sub-series than a true sequel. I like console games for their mindless fun that it just takes away all the stress from you, but I agree that PC games are much more capable and will be fun when played to their fullest potential. Just relax. And I can't believe I just relived this thread.[/quote]

i disagree im a hardcore bf bc player and i dedicate my time to my game and im on xbox btw

Aw:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

NapBF — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 11:41:57 GMT

As a real (!) Battlefield Fan I just bought an XBox 360 to play BC1 (BF1943 followed recently) and I am alright with it, althought I will buy the PC Version of BC2. Its just fun and rating a judging a game just on player count is in a way nonsense.

I played BC2 and the atmosphere, the action and explosions going on and the feeling were much more intense than 64 BF2 Servers. Not even the stupid nade spam at the beginning of Strike at Karkand can top this on explosions and action. BC2 offers seriously epic battles.

And I am sure that BF3, as the real sequel to BF2, will push the whole Battlefield Experience even further, so you don't have to worry about the future of Battlefield on PC if you ask me.

And for those PC Gamers: BC2 will have 32 Players on release and if they can do it they will even increase the player count, so there is really no need to worry. And the experience I made with BC2 were a) Pre-Pre-Alpha and b) only 24 Players. So you definitely have something you can be looking forward to.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Nightmare1 UHQ — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 14:42:50 GMT

Last time I checked, the player capasity for PC was up to 40 players, but what do I care!? PC was always Dice's little baby. It's time for consoles to start aquiring some real taste of BF, and I'm not talking about adding this destruction, while keeping the game slightly narrow comapared to it's predecessor. Don't get me wrong, I like the destruction and other bells and whisles that Dice is feeind to this game, but what made Battlefield fun on PC, was it's vast player size and huge diversity and veriety in vehicles. That's what I like to see for a console BF. I think we can cross out BC 2 being this game, but hopefully we might get BF 3 on consoles, and hopefully it won't be as dumbed down as previous Modern Combat titles were.

Aw:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

NapBF — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 16:13:43 GMT

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.

Aw:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

M0t0rBreath89 — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 16:26:32 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.NapBF]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.[/quote]

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.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

k1ll8 saurav — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 18:35:18 GMT

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.

Aw:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Nightmare1 UHQ — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 21:06:30 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.NapBF]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.[/quote]
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.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

hellfromabove123 — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 22:17:52 GMT

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.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

freebadcompany — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 23:17:52 GMT

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

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

strontKLONT — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 02:38:29 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.freebadcompany]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[/quote]

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

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

sb andrew — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 17:07:37 GMT

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 [i]more[/i] intense, [i]more[/i] dramatic, and [i]more[/i] fun.

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

PC guys dont deserve BC 2

hongpan1986 — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 19:37:35 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.Evil_Paladin]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![/quote]
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.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

HoL3Y — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 14:30:39 GMT

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-

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Skalten — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 17:51:26 GMT

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.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

CoreyMcL — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 19:54:07 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.Ranger92998]like your graphics? your welcome..Like your Broadband low lag connection? your welcome. [b]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.[/b]

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 *** [b](what is that? self censorship... What a noob)[/b] 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 [b](skype is free jackass)[/b] 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 [b](so your saying that the future xbox is going to have ps2 or gamecube hardware??? I es confused...)[/b]. (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) [b]With that kind of money you could buy a girlfriend, you * me off...[/b]
when your console can do what mine can, ill fly my car to the moon...[/quote]

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Grumdor — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:22:27 GMT

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

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

pomppaduur — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 05:50:23 GMT

[quote=cem_ea_id.hellfromabove123]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.[/quote]

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.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

NapBF — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 07:31:49 GMT

[quote=BF_SUB.pomppaduur][quote=cem_ea_id.hellfromabove123]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.[/quote]

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.[/quote]

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.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

pomppaduur — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 08:25:18 GMT

Never heard of 20 meters long VGA or DVI cables?
That with a secondary monitor (TV), and a cordless gamepad.

If you really want, you can make PC gaming really close to console gaming (Media-PC etc), but most PC gamers like it as it is, a keyboard and a mouse.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Gunner8919 — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:46:45 GMT

Soooo,...If I can't afford a +$4000 system (er,...or dont want to spend to play VIDEO GAMES) I am scum and don't deserve BC2 right?

I use to be a huge RTS junkie, so I've played a lot of PC games, but you guys just sound bitter.

Well,....I guess I would be too if I spent +$4K and was still bottom of the barrel.

Lol, come to think of it , thats pretty funny. These guys who dump all of this money an gaming systems are an afterthought for most gaming companies todate.

Sorry guys, supply and demand.

Ohhh,...I can't wait for the RAGE!

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

pomppaduur — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 14:03:04 GMT

I thought the thread was about "PC guys dont deserve BC 2", not about should console gamers have it.
At least for me, gaming and PC "tuning" are a full-time hobby.

By the way, you can play Crysis at high settings on a $500-600 PC.

I love how those console gamers always think that if you want to play on a PC, the rig needs to be worth $4K.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

Her0icPlane — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 14:56:14 GMT

I figured this thread would have been killed off awhile ago. The flaming in this thread is quite palpable. I think Pc gamers deserve BfBC2 as much as the as anyone else. The only problem I see with PC gamers is they can get really cocky at times.

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

DonutDude — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 22:49:22 GMT

Saying pc gamers dont deserve it is just mean... they deserve it as much as us if not more... what they dont deserve are the special perks like prone chutes free dlc whereas consoles might not get that... you cant change the game for different consoles thats biased. that would be like 1 gun on ps3 only then xbox get 300. dont you think that would be unfair and basically make it an exclusive?? the name of this thread could be changed to compare the differences cuz the title is almost stereotypical kinda like saying asians cant play this game cuz i said so...

PSN: DonutDude

Re:PC guys dont deserve BC 2

zerk16 — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 12:01:54 GMT

Locking thread.

I was hoping it would turn into a constructive discussion thread... oh well