32 Player Rush in Comparison to 24 Player Rush

#1 Edited by Seppli (9766 posts) -

First of all, the greatest thing about the PC version is, besides the technical upsides, the serverbrowser with its queue function. Queuing up for a favorite 'good rep' server, rounds are always full and keep filling up instantly. On consoles, that ain't the case. During peak hours servers fill up to 10 vs 10 usually. Few matches are full 12 vs 12 rounds due to matchmaking mechanics, without a queuing option for 'always fully manned' servers. Often the playercount is even lower. On average I'd say 8 vs 8 during most hours.
 
This disparity in playercount; a reliable 16 vs 16 experience on PC versus half that many on consoles on average, creates a very differently paced gameplay experience. Evenly matched teams playing each other on PC is glacial. There's no room for 'Rambo' tactics. It took me the better part of 30 ranks to get used to the 'campy-ness' of the PC experience. Moving from cover to cover, best under the cover of smoke, never allowing the squad to be entirely wiped out. Keeping a glacial momentum going, building pressure until the defenders lose control. Exploiting those few openings which allow for taking the objectives.
 
It's like good rounds play out on consoles - just in stop motion. It's way more tactical and needs a whole lot more patience and way more competent players for a good and fun dynamic to develop. A single squad of likeminded players may not be enough, if everybody else lacks that glacial drive and ambition. Either the tickets melt away too quickly or the people are content with camping without pushing for the objectives. The Rush experience on consoles is way more about swift manouvers and is less a war of attrition. Even the slow rounds feel a whole lot different because there's just more wiggleroom.
 
It's hard to decide which experience I prefer. There's upsides to both. Ultimately, Rush is most fun on a full 24 player server, which only happens during peak hours on consoles. On PC, I usually end up in 32 player rooms and I've come to love its glacial playstyle, at least as long as the teams are evenly matched. A team without drive is hell though. 32 player servers full of idiots give me the fits. There's a difference between glacially pushing forward, stacking up behind every cover, and just camping on the spot (or worse even, out of bounds). Chances are, I might end up in such a room from time to time. God give me the strength to quit such servers before my BF-rage gets out of hand. I hate when such a mishap does spoil a BF:BC 2 session.

#2 Posted by Matthew (1910 posts) -

I was sooooo close to buying the BF:BC2 pack during the steam sale...but then figured I'm not going to be turning away from Battlefield 3 anytime soon, since BF2 is still being played. I've been absent the PC gaming scene for the past few years. Right now I'm just waiting to see if there's going to be a price drop on a GTX 580. If not, I'll pull the trigger and buy. Either way, I'm looking forward to it all.

#3 Posted by vonFlampanker (322 posts) -

Mostly just wanted to second your points, Seppli, especially about a single squad not being enough to motivate a team to break a deadlock. I find Rush a lot more stressful overall, but it's not due to the combat, it's due to anxiety over whether the team is going to cooperate. DICE builds in and requires a lot of different methods and tools and a good percentage of the time my team will sit back and snipe rather than pop smoke and advance (or even drive an APC up for covering fire). I prefer Conquest because of this but when Rush works, it REALLY works.

#4 Posted by DelroyLindo (387 posts) -

glacial

#5 Posted by RandomInternetUser (6788 posts) -

All I'm going to say is that I fucking love BF:BC 2 on PC.  Amazing game.  
 
I guess I'll also say it is AMAZING to have a squad of all great players.  I was in a squad where we all worked together perfect as a team of recon, assault (me), medic, and engineer and dominated the entire other team.  It is so so so very fun when that happens.  It is however, quite an annoyance to play with an entirely incompetent team.

#6 Posted by m0rdr3d (474 posts) -
@Matthew said:


                   

I was sooooo close to buying the BF:BC2 pack during the steam sale...but then figured I'm not going to be turning away from Battlefield 3 anytime soon, since BF2 is still being played. I've been absent the PC gaming scene for the past few years. Right now I'm just waiting to see if there's going to be a price drop on a GTX 580. If not, I'll pull the trigger and buy. Either way, I'm looking forward to it all.



                   

               

I'm about to pull the trigger soon too.  But is there something wrong with the 570 I'm not privy to?  It's comparable and fairly affordable. 
 
On topic:  I'd like to see some more PC players give opinions cause I'm coming from the console Bad Co. 2.  The thing with PC that I love is how much more responsive the camera is when controlled by mouse.  It actually feels more first person as opposed to the "walking turret" feel of console FPSs
#7 Posted by RandomInternetUser (6788 posts) -
@m0rdr3d said:
@Matthew said:


                   

I was sooooo close to buying the BF:BC2 pack during the steam sale...but then figured I'm not going to be turning away from Battlefield 3 anytime soon, since BF2 is still being played. I've been absent the PC gaming scene for the past few years. Right now I'm just waiting to see if there's going to be a price drop on a GTX 580. If not, I'll pull the trigger and buy. Either way, I'm looking forward to it all.



                   

               
I'm about to pull the trigger soon too.  But is there something wrong with the 570 I'm not privy to?  It's comparable and fairly affordable.  On topic:  I'd like to see some more PC players give opinions cause I'm coming from the console Bad Co. 2.  The thing with PC that I love is how much more responsive the camera is when controlled by mouse.  It actually feels more first person as opposed to the "walking turret" feel of console FPSs
It definitely feels like a whole different set of shooting mechanics (in a good way) on the PC.  Honestly, I think Bad Company 2 on PC has my favorite shooting mechanics of any FPS I have ever played (And I've played a shit-ton).
#8 Posted by Riddell (342 posts) -
@m0rdr3d said:
@Matthew said:


                   

I was sooooo close to buying the BF:BC2 pack during the steam sale...but then figured I'm not going to be turning away from Battlefield 3 anytime soon, since BF2 is still being played. I've been absent the PC gaming scene for the past few years. Right now I'm just waiting to see if there's going to be a price drop on a GTX 580. If not, I'll pull the trigger and buy. Either way, I'm looking forward to it all.



                   

               
I'm about to pull the trigger soon too.  But is there something wrong with the 570 I'm not privy to?  
 
GTX 570 will run BF3 beautifully. What monitor size are you using? 580 is wasted on 1080p.
#9 Posted by m0rdr3d (474 posts) -

Well I'm hooked up to my TV, but I'm looking at monitors for when I build my new PC.  Any suggestions for around $400?
#10 Posted by Matthew (1910 posts) -
@Riddell Yeah, I'm going to be running at 1080, but I'm going to be getting a 2nd monitor somewhat soon. Plus, I've heard through the grapevine they ran all the pre-alpha footage on a 580. And if I can get it looking as good as the pre-alpha videos, im good to go.
#11 Posted by Jackel2072 (2228 posts) -

The thing i hate about rush (360) is people never set charges. they just park a tank 2 miles down the road and shell it until it blows ups. i always felt this was the downside to the rush mode. also one of the reasons i stopped playing it. every game i got into a game it was so one sided.

I just got the game about 2 weeks ago on the PC and by leaps and bounds its better at team management then the consoles. ( a benefit of servers) on the 360 so many fucking time you run into a room of 4 vs 10 or something stupid like that. the game would never auto balance and the loosing team would never populate because people would just leave. on the PC it solves almost all my issues with the game. teams are auto balanced. in some case the teams will be scrambled at the end of a round to never allow one team of great players vs one team of lesser. and some servers (but i dont care for this option but realize why its there) will cap how many snipers can be on one team at a time.

My only gripe at this point is a personal problem. on the 360 i am lvl 22 on the PC im lvl 2... i forgot just how long it takes to rank up in that game. also having a hard time sniping with a mouse again. really on the xbox there is little to no aim assist (which is why i loved it) but for the last few years my brain is use to thumb sticks. i have gotten better. i just need to practice. but it is all coming back to me.

#12 Posted by ShockD (2381 posts) -

I think it's not the player count that makes the game fun, but the players' skill.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.