"   @Mooshu said:

" Right, whatever.  Wake me up when Battlefield 3 is announced, or at least a Battlefield game that allows for more than 32 players... or whatever the hell BC2 is touting as its player limit these days. "

Try again dude. BC2 is coming out on PC and will likely have up to 48 players. BF3 still is a long way off... Holiday 2011 at absolute earliest.

Can't wait for this one, as for the player count, I don't really give a rat's ass if its still 24 players. In the first game it felt like there were more players. If the 24 player count can give an illusion and atmosphere of having a large battle, that's all that really matters. Plus with 64 players, it gets kind of disorganized.

" @Mooshu: Sigh. You said more than 32 players, not equal to 64. Also do you really, seriously not see why I mentioned the PC in response to your playerlimit notation? "

" That almost looks like one of those pre-rendered promo videos except done in a much less transparent way. I'll have to watch it a few more times. If that IS actual real-time game gameplay, then I don't know what to say. I didn't think I could get any more excited for a Battlefield game than I am for BC2.  The destruction in Battlefield is anything but a gimmick. It keeps you thinking on your toes as camping is rarely ever an option. "

" And second, the maps will still be designed with 48 players in mind, thus making the ability for more players moot. "

" In the first game it felt like there were more players. If the 24 player count can give an illusion and atmosphere of having a large battle, that's all that really matters. Plus with 64 players, it gets kind of disorganized. "

Ever notice how someone will post something like this in the forums and then GB puts it on the front page leaving the original to die...

" @Mooshu said:

" And second, the maps will still be designed with 48 players in mind, thus making the ability for more players moot. "

 
@FrankCanada97 said:

" In the first game it felt like there were more players. If the 24 player count can give an illusion and atmosphere of having a large battle, that's all that really matters. Plus with 64 players, it gets kind of disorganized. "

This. Well actually, the maps are about the same size, but the out-of-bounds borders are proportionately scaled to the new smaller playerlimit. Sure, in BC the GoldRush levels could have been filled up with 64 players in conquest mode if they kept the original GR-mode borders, but even if they did that the consoles would have trouble keeping all the action smooth with the limited RAM they both have. This is why they're giving the option for up to 32 players in BF1943 PC, since the hardware can handle more than 24, but the actual maps can't handle the action of more than 32. Since they're islands and not open land, increasing the borders wouldn't have made any difference.  BC2 hasn't shown any island maps yet. "

Granted, the maps are noticeably smaller in 1943 than they are in 42, but I don't see how they can't increase their size to allow for the old 64 player limit.... Seeing how they delayed the PC version... TWICE. "

Looks pretty good.  I liked what I played of BF1943, but not enough to get a full game.

" I think it will be a great game, but I don't think it will blow Modern Warfare 2 out of the water.   "

Noticeably is a bit of an understatement. 64 players in 1943 maps is like putting 170+ players in 1942 maps. "

meh

The *meh* can't stand. Bollocks! Between this and anything else out there - Battlefield : Bad Company 2 will reign as King!

Looks pretty.  Plays like CoD.  Might have to rent the first 1 now.  Could always use more MW, even if its just a copycat game. 

It looks like a proper Battlefield game, so, that's good. I think the best part of it was the sounds, much more convincing and atmospheric feel than say, Battlefield 2. The visuals weren't more improved than you'd expect from a game coming years later after BF2, but nice particle effects. Maybe the PC version will be spiced up further.

"First one was bad really bad, so I will hold my judgement "

" @PeasForFees said:

"First one was bad really bad, so I will hold my judgement "

You're an idiot don't make ignorant comments the first one was great. "

What really makes the whole thing come together is the sound design.  Hearing the guys your rolling with spout shit with missles and bullets whizzing by. 
 
Looks damn good.

I'll play a normal battlefield game, but this isn't for me. 

Whoa man, no need to pop a woody. Game looks good.

If the graphics look this good on the 360 it is the best looking 360 game Ive seen yet. I hope they improve the tank handling further in this, it is my favorite part of bad company 1 for sure. I wish this game was getting more coverage i don't quite understand why it is that IGN and other sites will put up a front page article every time COD MW 2 so much as farts. This games quality simply looks amazing, at least to me that is and i cannot understand the hype around MW2 versus this. This and Halo Reach i see owning 2010 for me.

This game looks very good i loved the first game and this seems to be a great improvement  

 The idea that all PC Battlefield players hate Bad Company is entirely false. 
 
Also 2142 was an excellent game. :)