CreamyBlood wrote on Dec 14, 2011, 16:05:
I'm looking for a game that's on par with something that set it's own standard almost a decade ago. Perhaps you think lowering the bar is a better way to 'immerse' yourself. I'm all for better graphics but when it's at the expense of gameplay I don't see that as an improvement.

For a guy who says he hasn't even played the game you sure seem to think you know everything about it.

Maybe you like simplified infrantry based combat instead of modern submarines. Perhaps you think more specialized snipers are more interesting than huge war ships, larger islands, expanded maps. Maybe unlocks and achievements float your boat.

Stop being a ridiculous snob, I've been playing Dice games as long as you have if not more so. I love many aspects of the older BF games but just because a feature isn't present doesn't mean the gameplay as a whole has regressed. There's a difference between genre advancement and franchise iteration. I don't expect every single feature from a previous title to make it into sequels, just the ones that defined the game to the majority of players.

Pretty much everything from the old BF games that matters is intact, my biggest problem with BF3 was the mapping philosophy. The release of the older maps finally brings BF3 to a place where I'm happy with my purchase and it has nothing to with unlocks or achievements (I'm a PC gamer dipstick). I'm sorry but not having submarines isn't a big impact on the game and hasn't been for a long time now. The infantry combat in BF1942 -> BF2 was garbage by the way, at least it's playable now and they've managed to finally tighten up the netcode quite a bit.

Anyway good luck finding that game these days. I'll stick with BF3 that is 90% of that game, fun as hell and better than the majority of titles released.

bhcompy wrote on Dec 14, 2011, 17:48:

CreamyBlood wrote on Dec 14, 2011, 16:05:

I'm looking for a game that's on par with something that set it's own standard almost a decade ago.

Which is why one day I'm going to remake Rogue Spear with modern graphics

Well that's a great game but unfortunately you'll need a cast of thousands to make it look like 2005 on the xbox.

CreamyBlood wrote on Dec 14, 2011, 16:05:

I'm looking for a game that's on par with something that set it's own standard almost a decade ago.

Which is why one day I'm going to remake Rogue Spear with modern graphics

Verno wrote on Dec 14, 2011, 12:51:
Ok that's all cool and stuff, I don't know what you're really looking for here though.

I'm looking for a game that's on par with something that set it's own standard almost a decade ago. Perhaps you think lowering the bar is a better way to 'immerse' yourself. I'm all for better graphics but when it's at the expense of gameplay I don't see that as an improvement.

Maybe you like simplified infrantry based combat instead of modern submarines. Perhaps you think more specialized snipers are more interesting than huge war ships, larger islands, expanded maps. Maybe unlocks and achievements float your boat.

I think it's a regreggsion and it's obvious, not sure what YOU want from a game in 2011.

Ok that's all cool and stuff, I don't know what you're really looking for here though. I'm a huge fan of BF games and while this isn't my favorite of all time it's still a pretty great BF game despite them not cramming in 27 maps and whatever. Buy it and enjoy or don't I guess. I'm having fun since they patched up the balance problems, I wish they'd undo the whole implementation accessory system but it's a sign of the times.

I too wish the gaming industry would move away from crap hardware targets and whatnot but it's just a dream.

Verno wrote on Dec 14, 2011, 09:49:

It's just one map, I could understand an expansion, but what?

It's not one map, it's four maps and a bunch of other minor things like weapons and such.

Of course, BF42 had two expansions and came to what? 27 maps and minor additions like 'weapons and such'. Everything from sea battles, coastal breaches, large tank battles to infantry scenarios. Yes, I can hear the arguments now, 'it takes so much effort to build models'. Yes, I realize that, only this is ten years later. It takes effort to cram it into an xbox's 256MB of memory. It's amazing that they can do that, but it's still a step down from ten years ago.

I just looked at a Wake Island video and it looks nice. Except that it's missing a few key components, I suppose that is a step up, or at least a reasonable trade-off for pretty vegetation. That's only assuming that you don't mind trading gameplay for the shiny stuff. After all, are we here for a good time or too look at the pretty waves?

I'll mention Batman this time. He had a hardon for BF2 but the veneer slowly weared away on him as time marched on. I was dazzled too but saw through it after maybe two months, I can't remember how long he trudged on.

So yes, make it pretty, kill the gameplay, ignore the bugs and then make a sci-fi version! Whoo-hoo. I tried the 2142 demo, it was broken and that was the last of my BF experiences. I heard they made some free-to-play console versions and now we are all blessed with a four pack map addon to a what? BF6? that according to EA's website, many people can't play even though they paid for it. Wonderful.

Where do I sign up for this nonsense?

I for one would be quite happy with a 1942 remake and expansion, perhaps with improved graphics. Unfortunately that's not going to happen soon.

Some things are a lot better than the older BF games, I for one will never miss the old clunky movement and weird netcode problems.

DICE has never had hitscan or non-clunky netcode. I think their 'to-hit' code has always been based on a cone of randomness and with their modern and deliberate 'RPG-lite' factor it's even worse. Personally, I think it's because they can't program a multiplayer game with the precision that id has. Or at least initially. The scope of the game and fun factor made up for it back then. As I understand it, new players are gimped on purpose, so the people that are new are not only fighting experienced players, but ones that have slightly more accurate weapons than them.

I thought that the Enemy Territory model was better. You can level up over four maps, get some minor upgrades, then it resets again and everyone is on the same level.

Anyways, I wish someone would make a good SP or MP FPS again. Tired of this monetized console crap. It's the year 2011 for fff sake.













This comment was edited on Dec 14, 2011, 11:56.

necrosis wrote on Dec 14, 2011, 08:59:
And I thought Origin was made to streamline things like this.

Origin is amusingly clunky, I'm constantly surprised at this sort of quality from a company like EA. I still have 2 old betas in my games list that can't be removed, the client can still knock out of a game for a notification despite disabling them and its patch functionality seems limited to running installers.

It's not godawful or something but I keep hoping they will improve on it and haven't really seen any sign of that happening.

It's just one map, I could understand an expansion, but what?

It's not one map, it's four maps and a bunch of other minor things like weapons and such. It pretty much brings BF3 to parity with BF2 and in some ways BF1942. Some things are a lot better than the older BF games, I for one will never miss the old clunky movement and weird netcode problems. I miss the sub hunters, aircraft carriers and whatnot too but the gameplay still has a lot to offer and in many ways has improved from the old days. It's just a shame that they had to bring back old maps to really nail that home.

This comment was edited on Dec 14, 2011, 10:02.

I remember in the old days when we'd buy the game on a CD, type in the code and play. A while later the patch would come out, then another that included a bunch of maps for free. You could download them fast from places like filefront or 3dgamers.

You could also setup your own server on a linux box or whatever and moderate it yourself. Stats were tracked by fans on different websites if you gave a shit about having your name in lights, there were no 'unlockables' or 'achievements'. You could use the in-game browser or third party browsers to find games by ping, users, maps, or whatever you liked. It was easy.

Battlefield 1942 was a blast for me, a great change. Then they came out with BF2, killing the subs, aircraft carriers, shrinking the maps, adding super fast planes on those small maps, slowing down infantry and sucking the 'hilarious' out of it. I believe it was still a PC game at that time but it was obvious that the same hacks and cheating were going on and since the servers weren't moderated (you had to buy them from a certified EA distributer, or some shit like that) I bailed within a few months.

I'm not sure why they did that and can't imagine going through the red tape described in the above post to play a nerfed down, hollow shell of everything that made Battlefield fun in the first place. I was really, really thinking of trying it out a little while ago, but what is this? Does it split up the community? It's just one map, I could understand an expansion, but what? How many hoops do I have to jump through to play the game with an extra map?

Whatever, I suppose I can wait another year until they sort it all out. Just not interested anymore.

And I thought Origin was made to streamline things like this.

MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Dec 14, 2011, 02:28:

Non-Preorder + Bought Back to Karkand in Origin -> Log OUT in browser, then log back in.

Yeah, a buddy of mine was having the same problem but I don't think he knows about this. Thanks

Yet another Origin fail. I bought it through Origin, after wavering on the fence and not pre-ordering BF3.

The Browser interface says I have Karkand enabled, yet I cannot join any games... luckily I googled before I raged, EA Forums and most other places are full of complaints about this shoddy system.

Also luckily, the fix is easy, if really, really indicative of poor implementation.

Non-Preorder + Bought Back to Karkand in Origin -> Log OUT in browser, then log back in.