BF 2 - my opinion and what do you think about it?

Magnetic · #1 03-07-2005, 14:03

i bought it a week ago and i can say..hm well.. i´m a little dissapointed about the game. which doesn´t mean that it sucks or something, i simply expected more somehow, don´t know how to explain.

i also played BF1942 and Vietnam and loved them. considering i waited so long for this game and looking really really forward to it, it´s not the blockbuster i expected.

though i hope there will be a patch soon, which fixes the buggy MP-Browser and some other bugs like connection problems and so on. cause this is driving me crazy.

what do you think about it?

DABhand · #2 03-07-2005, 14:13

Ive only seen it running at a friends house, compared to BF1942 its superior.

Better gfx offcourse, I feel the map has more feel to it, BF1942 was pretty much bland, but with advents of buildings etc its more realistic.

BF1942 you could hang about and go for a pee and come back and be alive still, BF2 you cant you stand still your dead.

Im not a fan of this type of game, but its a huge improvement, and BF2 wasnt going to be the best game ever made anyways.

People are expecting too much, and they will be disappointed in that sense.

Eagle · #3 03-07-2005, 16:14

it sucks. its basically CS with tanks and choppers.

remember what was promised? destructable terrain, physics, maps that automatically adjust according to the numbers of players... etc.

it contains nothing of above. it is a typical EA product: a full price graphics update.

and gameplay wise its totally unrealistic. hit any chopper with a tank and it still flies. come on! a TANK SHELL!
the bradley is not able to swim, thats bullsh*t. infantry combat is borked, weapon accuracy sucks.

guess im too spoiled from playing soldner. despite its buggy image (where it is bug-free now) it just has superior gameplay. i'm lovin it!

Buck Rogers · #4 04-07-2005, 09:22

Eagle u are damn right...

And what about the single player mode? the cpu sometimes use your mates to shoot u down!! same as bf 1942!!!

as CS, Battlefield lack of reality and accuracy... i still prefer Operation Flashpoint, and the imminent allied assault!

too bad 59 bucks wasted

X-Stuff · #5 06-07-2005, 14:49

"maps that automatically adjust according to the numbers of players... etc."

When you play on a map with like 10 people instead of 50, the same map is alot smaller. So it's totally true what they sad about that.

The commander function is a great improvement in FPS games, like Savage: The Battle of Newert, also have a commander, who can see the map from above an give orders to the created squads.

Imo, it's the best game at the moment, the realism is also, imo, enough for months of fun.

Worth his money...

Eagle · #6 06-07-2005, 15:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by X-Stuff

When you play on a map with like 10 people instead of 50, the same map is alot smaller. So it's totally true what they sad about that.

No. What they said is: If you play with 16 people, you get a small version of the map. And when another 16 people join the server, the map borders (stupid enough, though) _automatically_ get smaller _ingame_.
That is what they promised.