BF3 fits where in the series exactly... ?

#1 Edited by AhmadMetallic (18957 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

im a regular BF2 player and i still dont get what the TWO thing is all about.. BF2 is the third installment in the series after 1942 and Vietnam which should make it Battlefield 3 since they had no sub-name for it.. and after it they released 2142, Bad Company, and are about to release BC2 and 1943...

so... battlefield THREE is the upcoming one? it should be Battlefield 8.... so how does that work? do they divide into cetain groups? i dont think so it doesnt seem like it.. if they do then BF2 should be BF1 since its the first installment in the group of the modern war genre, and the upcoming so called "battlefield 3" should be 'battlefield 2' ...

so ?

#2 Posted by MattyFTM (13805 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

If you think that's confusing, you should try to make sense of the Resident Evil numbering/naming system.

Moderator

#3 Posted by Pazy (2512 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

A lot of series have main series and sub series or seperate series. Such as Final Fantasy 1-14, but theres also Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles thats just how it is. I beleive BF2 is called BF2 because it was the second in the main series while BF:Vietnam wasent an evolution from BF1942. Again BF2142 wasent an evolution from BF2 but BF3 should be based on the name. Modern Combat and Bad Company are side series to the main one and as such have there own numbering.

Just how BF is name.

#4 Posted by FireBurger (1469 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

They use the numbered iterations for the PC games that aren't simply a "re-skin" of an existing game using the same engine. So far each numbered game has had one "re-skin" associated with it: BF1942 (1) / Vietnam, BF2 / 2142, BF3 / whatever DICE decides to milk it with.

The console games are an entirely separate spin-off, though they may end up using the same model: Bad Company / 1943, Bad Company 2 / ?.

As for Modern Combat, that's just an illegitimate step-child.

#5 Posted by Alexander (1652 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

@FireBurger said:

" They use the numbered iterations for the PC games that aren't simply a "re-skin" of an existing game using the same engine. "

Battlefield 1942, Vietnam, 2 and 2142 all run on the same engine.

#6 Edited by FireBurger (1469 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

Is that true? I'm sure it could simply be an updated version, but it would probably still have a different name, similar to Unreal 1-3.

If it is truly simply an updated engine of the same name, then let me amend my answer to say "when there is a significant overhaul of an existing engine."

#7 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18957 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

@FireBurger said:

" They use the numbered iterations for the PC games that aren't simply a "re-skin" of an existing game using the same engine. So far each numbered game has had one "re-skin" associated with it: BF1942 (1) / Vietnam, BF2 / 2142, BF3 / whatever DICE decides to milk it with.The console games are an entirely separate spin-off, though they may end up using the same model: Bad Company / 1943, Bad Company 2 / ?. As for Modern Combat, that's just an illegitimate step-child. "

yes the whole re-skin theory makes sense..

#8 Edited by Mikemcn (6789 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

I think it goes by Engine..... Vietnam and 1942 were built on the same engine but BF2 had its own improved engine..... dont quote me on it, but i heard some dude talking about Vietnam was able to be made because they were now able to create better foliage in their game using the same engine.

However according to wikipedia they were built on the same engine so i dont know...

#9 Posted by Diamond (8634 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

You know what? The only reason they're calling it Battlefield 3 is there's a whole bunch of idiots on forums who want 'Battlefield 3'. All they want is the next 'real' Battlefield game.

Most of those people are going to have a fit when they learn about the game anyways, but if they didn't call it BF3 from the start there's a group of specific fools who would have never been on board.

#10 Posted by Stephen_Von_Cloud (1532 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

@Mikemcn said:

"
I think it goes by Engine..... Vietnam and 1942 were built on the same engine but BF2 had its own improved engine..... dont quote me on it, but i heard some dude talking about Vietnam was able to be made because they were now able to create better foliage in their game using the same engine.

However according to wikipedia they were built on the same engine so i dont know...
"

It's by engine that way. It's the same way that GTA: Vice City and San Andreas weren't GTA IV, they were extensions on 3 because they were built on that engine and weren't proper sequels.

#11 Edited by Jayge_ (10222 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

Something like this. I tried to include all of the major series releases.

*Battlefield*----------------------------       |                                  \ Battlefield 1942                          Battlefield: Bad Company       |         \                                    | Battlefield 2--  Battlefield Vietnam      Battlefield: Bad Company 2       |        \ Battlefield 3   Battlefield 2142, Battlefield 2: Modern Combat (?)

#12 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18957 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

@FireBurger said:

" . As for Modern Combat, that's just an illegitimate step-child. "

@Jayge said:

" Battlefield 2: Modern Combat (?)

"

im sorry it seems that theres a bit of a misunderstanding, theres no such thing as Battlefield Modern Combat, i was only talking about the BF2 genre since its modern combat and not WW2 themed or set in the future.

#13 Edited by Jayge_ (10222 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

@Ahmad_Metallic said:

"
@FireBurger said:
" . As for Modern Combat, that's just an illegitimate step-child. "
@Jayge said:
" Battlefield 2: Modern Combat (?)

"

im sorry it seems that theres a bit of a misunderstanding, theres no such thing as Battlefield Modern Combat, i was only talking about the BF2 genre since its modern combat and not WW2 themed or set in the future.
"

Yes there is.

#14 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18957 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

@Jayge: And i just made it clear didnt i ?

#15 Posted by Jayge_ (10222 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

@Ahmad_Metallic said:

" @Jayge: And i just made it clear didnt i ? "

No, not really.

#16 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18957 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

@Jayge said:

"
@Ahmad_Metallic said:
" @Jayge: And i just made it clear didnt i ? "
No, not really. "

i said that theres no such a thing as a game called BATTLEFIELD MODERN COMBAT. i only used the term 'modern combat' to describe BF2's genre ... Battlefield 2 IS a modern warfare game isnt it?????

#17 Posted by Jayge_ (10222 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

@Ahmad_Metallic said:

"i said that theres no such a thing as a game called BATTLEFIELD MODERN COMBAT. i only used the term 'modern combat' to describe BF2's genre ... Battlefield 2 IS a modern warfare game isnt it????? "

See how the text in my reply "Yes there is." is yellow? Click on it.

#18 Edited by FireBurger (1469 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

There is a game called Battlefield 2: Modern Combat on PS2, Xbox and Xbox 360. It came out before Bad Company and after BF2.

#19 Edited by Kohe321 (3496 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

It's the true successor of BF2, and it's thus called BF3. I CRACKED IT! YES!

#20 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18957 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

@Jayge said:

"
@Ahmad_Metallic said:
"i said that theres no such a thing as a game called BATTLEFIELD MODERN COMBAT. i only used the term 'modern combat' to describe BF2's genre ... Battlefield 2 IS a modern warfare game isnt it????? "
See how the text in my reply "Yes there is." is yellow? Click on it. "

um, wow, ok, i didnt notice that your reply was a link cuz i read it as a message in my messages

there is such a game? lol ok

anyway when i used the term 'modern combat' i meant what i meant and wasnt referring to the game you linked me to. thanks though haha

#21 Posted by Jimbo (8837 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

I still haven't figured out what the F stands for!

#22 Edited by FireBurger (1469 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

(B)attle(f)ield

If that's the F you're referring to. One-letter acronyms don't sound too good.

#23 Posted by nick69 (625 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

Bad Company is a sub-series of the Battlefield series.

But, I wonder what this game will be like...hopefully it will be something like 2142.

#24 Posted by Kohe321 (3496 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

@nick69 said:

" Bad Company is a sub-series of the Battlefield series. But, I wonder what this game will be like...hopefully it will be something like 2142. "

Hopefully not something like 2142 (imo) :P I hope they keep it modern day.

#25 Posted by FireBurger (1469 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

@nick69: It will definitely be in line with the PC games rather than the console games.

And, yeah, hopefully it stays modern day. Pew-pew lasers don't do it for me.

#26 Posted by CL60 (16906 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

Works the same as GTA

#27 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18957 posts) - 3 years, 11 months ago

@nick69 said:

" I wonder what this game will be like...hopefully it will be something like 2142. "

Get outta here! we're thirsty for more modern day US VS. MEC action!!

#28 Posted by MrKlorox (11079 posts) - 3 years, 10 months ago

@Ahmad_Metallic said:

"
@nick69 said:
" I wonder what this game will be like...hopefully it will be something like 2142. "
Get outta here! we're thirsty for more modern day US VS. MEC action!! "

No, you leave, sir. 2142 was far superior to BF2 for many reasons. Not the least of which was the unlockable items. You can't have all the badass futuristic technology that 2142 allowed into gameplay in a "modern" setting because it would be hella unbelievable. 2142 got a bad rep because of the ultra-fanboyistic BF2 community that felt all butthurt that 2142 was on the same engine and not released as an expansion to BF2. Play BF2 and 2142 back to back and notice the multitude of balance fixes 2142 has over BF2.

#29 Posted by Jayge_ (10222 posts) - 3 years, 10 months ago

@MrKlorox said:

" @Ahmad_Metallic said:
"
@nick69 said:
" I wonder what this game will be like...hopefully it will be something like 2142. "
Get outta here! we're thirsty for more modern day US VS. MEC action!! "
No, you leave, sir. 2142 was far superior to BF2 for many reasons. Not the least of which was the unlockable items. You can't have all the badass futuristic technology that 2142 allowed into gameplay in a "modern" setting because it would be hella unbelievable. 2142 got a bad rep because of the ultra-fanboyistic BF2 community that felt all butthurt that 2142 was on the same engine and not released as an expansion to BF2. Play BF2 and 2142 back to back and notice the multitude of balance fixes 2142 has over BF2. "

Balance fixes mean jack shit if the game is made less fun to play. That is why a large part of the BF2 community told it to go fuck itself.

#30 Posted by MrKlorox (11079 posts) - 3 years, 10 months ago

@Jayge:
Fun is subjective. The BF2 fanatics didn't give it a chance. I find it a thousand times more fun than BF2, even though I play BF2 more lately (still haven't ranked up to max level, unlike in 2142 and other BF games).

#31 Posted by Jayge_ (10222 posts) - 3 years, 10 months ago

@MrKlorox said:

" @Jayge:
Fun is subjective. The BF2 fanatics didn't give it a chance. I find it a thousand times more fun than BF2, even though I play BF2 more lately (still haven't ranked up to max level, unlike in 2142 and other BF games).

"

That is also subjective. Myself and many people I knew gave it a chance, it just couldn't live up to the Battlefield name. In our opinions, of course.

#32 Posted by Out_On_Bail (1545 posts) - 3 years, 10 months ago

It's all irrelavant, as nothing will ever compare to blasting Ride of the Valkyries while droppin in low in a Helo trying to shoot the runners. Nothing I say.

#33 Posted by JJOR64 (18113 posts) - 3 years, 10 months ago

I'm waiting for the release of Super Battlefield 1942 2 Turbo to come out.

#34 Edited by MrKlorox (11079 posts) - 3 years, 10 months ago

@Jayge: I felt the exact same about BF2. Sucks how the userbase is split on 2142. You never find anybody who was indifferent about it. Now that Ben Cousins (who was the head of BF in the BF2 era) is working on Heroes, we're stuck with the 2142 lead (Gordon Van Dyke) for the forseeable future. Which I am satisfied with. Heroes can keep Cousins if you ask me.

What I find no fun is being shot by a guy with perfect accuracy who's in the middle of a dive/roll.

#35 Posted by PureRok (4230 posts) - 3 years, 10 months ago

@FireBurger said:

" @nick69: It will definitely be in line with the PC games rather than the console games. And, yeah, hopefully it stays modern day. Pew-pew lasers don't do it for me. "

Because 2142 was FULL of lasers.

#36 Posted by FireBurger (1469 posts) - 3 years, 10 months ago

@PureRok: Alright, whether there are lasers or not, I think that firing real-world weapons feels much more visceral than some highly-stylized conceptual weapons of the future.

#37 Edited by FuzzYLemoN (1593 posts) - 2 years, 9 months ago

The numbering comes from the engine that each game uses. Vietnam used the same engine as 1942, and the gameplay was nearly identical, so it could be considered more of a spinoff than a true sequel. BF2 was a brand new engine, hence the '2'. 2142 was to BF2 as Vietnam was to 1942. BF3 will most likely use a new engine (or at least new to the main BF series), hence the '3'.

Edit: I just realized this thread has been dead for over a year. Piss.

#38 Edited by Mikemcn (6789 posts) - 2 years, 9 months ago

I posted a response to this more than a Year ago?

Where the hell did time go? And i still dont have an answer to your question.

Battlefield 3

Battlefield 3 is DICE's third numerical installment in the Battlefield franchise. It features a single player and co-operative campaign, as well as an extensive multiplayer component.

Comment and Save