Jayge said: "Jigen said: "Why would you assume such a thing? UT3 = crap, BFBC = great game. UT99 is still the best in that series. I haven't heard too many people consider BFBC to be a bad game. Care you explain what you didn't like about it?"
You can't go prone, the squad mechanics are dumbed down to the extreme, the destruction gameplay is bland and overrated, the classes themselves are totally unbalanced, the gametype is totally uninspired, the maps require no strategy and the entire command structure set up in BF2 was ruined. Overall, it was a step backwards in terms of advancing the large-scale tactical gameplay of Battlefield 2 and what amounts to a console dumb-down for the series that needed absolutely nothing of the sort.
jakob187 said: "brukaoru said: "I hate any company that thinks it's justified in taking staff credits out of their games."
I will say that practices like that aren't cool, and there was a block of time that they did not exactly treat their employees well...and now that John's at EA, you see a lot of great changes.
Nonetheless, doesn't mean they don't make tons of good games.
John Richitealkjoillo or whatever his name is? That guy is a straight up douchebag with no idea what he's talking about. Every time I see him quoted I cringe."
1. You can't go prone, that's right. Didn't know that you needed to go prone in a game that wants to keep you on your feet. That's why...
2. ...the destruction gameplay was implemented. Gold Rush mode was made to PREVENT camping out in one place all the damn time...and it's genius.
3. Squad mechanics are dumbed down...because there aren't 108 keys on the 360 or PS3 controllers. Therefore, what they did was offered up a way for you to be automatically set up in a squad and still spawn up. Would I like it to be more extensive? Sure. Do I mind that it isn't? No.
4. Game type is uninspired? They took what Frontlines did, then did it better. Moreover, again, I point out that this game type keeps you moving ALL THE TIME, and if you aren't, then all the people you play are retarded and probably just pick-up games.
5. Maps require plenty of strategy, because if you got a guy sitting back with a rocket launcher shooting out the crate, you gotta get back there, and with the multiple ways to do so, there's a guy with a gun around any corner. If there isn't, someone can easily blow a hole out of a building and make a way to see you.
6. Command structure was ruined? Yeah, because let me tell you...I love how BF2 commanders always ARTILLERY THEIR OWN FUCKING TEAM!!! I honestly think more retards play BF2 than there are on Bad Company!!!
7. Classes are unbalanced? DER!!! Tell me, how do you plan on balancing out a guy that uses assault rifles and grenade launchers against a support character, whose job is supposed to be laying down heavy machine gun fire and healing your ass?!
All of your reasons are moot. You say it ended up resulting in a dumbed-down version of the game, but it's simply a different and more stream-lined version of the game. The Frostbite engine is one of the most gorgeous engines out right now. Also, the game isn't meant to be SUPER HUGE tactical gameplay. It's meant to be a more controlled instance of multiplayer, yet personally, I still feel like it is a BF game through and through when I play it.
Sorry, I just can't see your opinion as being anything valid without saying "PC ELITEST". I love my PC games, more than any other games in most cases. That doesn't mean I can't recognize this great game as being a great game.
As for John...he's signing off on more original IPs than any CEO since Probst. Sorry, that doesn't seem like a douchebag thing to me.
Log in to comment