Battlefield 3 seems extremely similar to Battlefield: Bad Company 2, but that's not such a great thing. Find out why this means you're likely to find a better experience elsewhere.
Three reasons of crap.
Ummm hello it's written by a Call of Duty fanboy. This is what I'm talking about. Call of Duty fans complaining about other games not playing like Call of Duty. "but the reason a game like COD succeeds more as a shooter (competitive or recreational) is because the guns aren’t realistic. One gains a sense of gratification after picking off an enemy from 100 yards away…with a pistol. What does this have to do with Battlefield 3? Well, it definitely won’t convert any seasoned Modern Warfare fans unless it cuts back on the gun physics" All have to say to this quote is if DICE makes the guns exactly like CoD it would result in CoD fans calling BF3 a CoD copycat so they might as well play the original. It would result in BF3 pissing off their original fanbase cause them to not support the game. The author's reasons are nothing but BS. He claims that Battlefield: Bad Company 2 "ISN'T a shooter" rofl. Therefore, Battlefield 3 is automatically a bad shooter since it plays similar to Battlefiled: Bad Company 2. He puts gunplay being realistic as a bad thing. Has the author ever thought that he can have both MW3 and BF3. One you play to have have fun and the other when you want a realistic experience. He also puts huge maps as a bad thing. Once again not everyone likes small maps. Huge maps and realistic gunplay are seen as a positive for some gamers lmao. If unrealistic gun physics and small maps are good thing why doesn't Activision advertise that? Because it would made the game look silly. "Buy our game unrealistic gun phsyics with small maps" lmao. His last reason "what's the fuss about?" My response to that question is what's the fuss about Modern Warfare 3? The authors reasons are ridiculous as someone can just make the opposite points for MW3 and claim them to be a negative aspect of the game. He is no position to claim that BF3 has unfortunate similarities to BFBC2. He isn't a BF fan. He wouldn't be able to tell the KEY differences that a true BF fan could easily point out.
If DICE had copied Call Of Duty i wouldn't even consider it. Everything, in COD is noobish, i even played MW2 the other day and it was forcing my aim on an enemy (auto aiming). So in COD you don't have any control over anything.. not even your aim, nor the vehicles the you drive everything that you do is assisted! I mean Activision must be laughing at everyone who still buys their yearly cash-ins lol
I always said that it just comes down to what you like. But here's the thing, a lot of people here at N4G seem to be under the impression that you can only like one or the other. Some BF fans think that if you like COD then you are a noob, 12 year old. Some COD fans think that if you like BF then you are a boring, fuddy-duddy, too slow to keep up with COD. Huh? Alright, so which category does a person like me fit into? I like both DIFFERENT styles of gameplay and I play each according to my mood. When I want quick, dirty, jump in-jump out gameplay, I play COD. When I want a more team-based, objective oriented, cerebral gameplay experience, I play BF. Both will be getting my money this fall because both keep me entertained in their own way. Some people think Activision or DICE are laughing at us for buying their same iterations everytime but if we're having fun, so what? Game on, gamers.
article's author=zoolander. see video.
@raWfodog bubbles to you. I am right there with you. I dont know why everyone needs to "take a side" on this. I have both pre-ordered..and will enjoy both based on what I have seen so far. Regarding the article... The author makes valid points for his likes in a game, but I am not 100% sold on what he is trying to sell regarding the map sizes. BFBC2 maps actually felt pretty good for the game modes offered. If anything I would have liked them to widen the maps, maybe make them not as long... and offered a variety of attack points for modes like Rush. As is...you pretty much always know from which direction attackers are coming. Edit: I also happen to think the Author has a point. If you didn't like BFBC2 you more than likely are not going to like BF3. Nothing I have heard so far tells me the gameplay is going to be changing drastically from BFBC2 especially on consoles. Really the only real "new" thing coming to the console is the ability to go prone and jet fighters and a change in setting. I also am a bit curious as to why single player has not been discussed outside of the first demo level they showed off. We know nothing about the single player game really...no characters, no purpose to a mission... nada from what I can tell. I just know earthquakes will play a part and its set in the middle east.
I think BFBC2 is a fantastic game, the campaign was actually great, theres something missing from it, dont know what, but that didnt keep me from liking the campaign. I've probably thrown 100 hours on PS3, and for sure 50 on PC (recently got GTX 570 :P) The multi is one of the greatest I've played of shooters. It doesnt make me mad when i die. Magical.
@raWfodog You're absolutely right. I'd be right there with you but after Infinity ward fell apart I'm worried that mw3 will as buggy as treyarch COD games. I've loved COD since COD4 came out but black ops really ruined it for me. It was almost unplayable at launch on the ps3. This time around I'll be sticking with bf3 only but I can understand why people will still get both.
You know why they take sides? Cause they suck at one or the other. Gamers with skills know these games are really great at doing FPSing but in different ways. The author probably hates BF cause it has proper hit detection and large maps. Spraying fools in small maps is fun but you aint gonna get far in BF sprayin at peoples legs. something COD rewards you for doing. Kill cams show the proof COD is not about precision, its about killstreaks and run and gun. Both are great when you are a flexible gamer, but you will pick one or the other if you are one dimensional like the author.
You know why I don't care if they're similar? Because BBC2 was great too.
I disagree completely. I'm not bad at ANY shooter I've played since I started with WaW this gen. However, I grew to prefer... almost anything over CoD. Killzone, Halo, Resistence. Hell, even Crysis. Simply put: CoD has not changed. If you want another reason, it's TOO casual. Things like noob-tubes, quick-scoping, and spawn killing require ZERO skill, and even a skilled player can get his ass handed to him by a team that only employs such tactics.
if BC2 and BF3 are similar them all CoD's are axact same game
All I got from reading the article in question was that the author obviously sucked at BF and kept getting shot in the back. You can't play it like COD! You must have disipwin! and use teamowoooorkuuuu !!
"Some people think Activision or DICE are laughing at us for buying their same iterations everytime but if we're having fun, so what?" If this is the case, then they are not laughing at you... they are laughing with you; just for completely different reasons!
I dunno. I am not a CoD fanboy but BFBC2 and BF3 look a lot alike to me. But then again I played the BC games on the PC so maybe that is why I think they look so similiar? Someone should do a screenshot comparison of BFBC2 on PC (in DX10) against BF3. It would be interesting to see the difference. The destructible terrain/buildings all looks exactly the same to me from all the videos I have watched.
In BF3's defense, the only videos we've seen are alpha videos...
Be honest though...have the CoD games progressed graphically since MW1? They all look the same to me, with the same gameplay. Ignore the single player and MW2 and Black Ops could have easily just been done as expansion packs for MW1. The slight changes in killstreaks and perks were largely superficial.
I love how fanboyism brings out what people are really like. One year the BF fanboy's are the most mature of all gamers and then the next year they act even WORSE than COD fanboys. Seriously Battlefield and COD are VERY alike. One is slightly faster paced than the other and one has destructable enviroments.
I have BFBC2 on the PC also and I still notice a definite increase in graphics quality. Granted it's probably not as much as some are making it out to be (probably because they play on consoles like you mentioned) but there is improvement.
Seriously Battlefield and COD are VERY alike. No, no they are not. -trip neg COD- poor hit detection, small maps, no real vehicles, killstreaks, 6 man squads. BF - large maps, real gun phyisics like bullet drop, vehicles, 4 man squads, no killsteaks. I could list more differences
There is only a single Bad Company on PC which is BC2. And it actually looks amazing in DX11, right. But seriously BF3 even expands on the good graphics BC2 had, with the advanced destruction, the new ANT animation system and the damn lightning man. It still looks a lot better, and that's just alpha footage. And about CoD, I just tried to play MW2 few minutes ago, and holy shit, I absolutely hate it, you feel like you are floating and not actually walking on the ground, and when you shoot someone in the foot they tell you it's a headshot? lol?
JsonHenry, I have BC2 on PC and play it at 1080p, DX11. There is a HUGE difference in graphics with BF3. Far better lighting, more detailed textures, WAY better destruction. Overall a much more realistic look. If you are not a COD fanboy like you claim, then you need to make a trip to the eye doctor asap. Watch this and tell me BF3 looks the same as BC2 http://www.youtube.com/watc...
I said similar. Not the same. And the point of the article was to point out they are indeed very similiar in both gameplay and gfx.
Are BC2 and BF3 similar in gameplay? Well it depends on how you look at it. Sure they both have Rush and Conquest modes so on the surface and to players who are not thinking tactically, yes, they would be very similar. But BF3 has jets, different spawn system, larger maps, different classes, etc. All of which make huge changes in gameplay, strategy and tactics. For the fans who have only played BC2, the spawning on the Squad Leader only is going turn their world upside down. The roving squads of medics with LMGs killing and reviving like crazy are now gone. The Assault guys creeping around solo for long periods of time are also gone as they will have no way to replenish their ammunition. The prone ability is going to make sniping easier and take sniper/counter-sniper operations to a new level compared to BC2. And those are just a few, seemingly simple, changes on the surface that are going to have a huge impact on tactics and teamwork and therefore, gameplay. It remains to be seen if there will be destructible assets like in BF2, how much control over rocket artillery the snipers will have versus the ability to call in mortars every few minutes, etc. I also have not seen if the tracer darts will make an appearance yet or if we will go back to the BF2 style of missile lock. I'm also dying to see some more maps and how that will effect gameplay. As far as graphics, I can't say yet. What I have seen of BF3 so far looks great but I'm not going to judge Alpha grade graphics as there may be a lot of changes before it goes Gold.
As i've said before BF:BC2 is the best FPS out now in my eyes. therefore, if BF3 is similar in any way it would definitely be a good thing. Why would DICE take everything from BF2 anyways even though the game was good it wasn't perfect(No game is) and BF:BC2 did alot of things right so why not take the best from both?!
Agreed. I think a lot of people are going to be happy with BF3. A lot of BF2 fans are going to miss the Commander, larger squads and a few other things and I know a lot of BC2 fans are going to not like the more teamwork oriented squads and Squad Leader spawning but I think overall it will be a good combination. I love BC2 but hate some bits and pieces since it allows some pretty "lone wolf" gameplay without consequence and it frustrates me how ignorant of the obvious some players on BC2 can be but it's a lot of fun when it all comes together with a good squad and a competent team. I also miss a lot of the things BF2 did right but I'm hoping for a natural evolution from BF2 with some elements of BC2. In the end we will probably have to wait until at least September to find out exactly what we are dealing with.
The guy who wrote the article, Ryan Perez, there's no words to describe this guy. A Battlefield veteran could write a 6000 page essay on why BF is a better series, and he'll just continue to debunk it. Have you seen Ryan's responses? It's the same thing. "BF3 too realistic" "I dont care, i just think BF3 is too realistic"
Yeah the guy doesn't get it. His article could have been condensed into a single sentence: "I don't like Battlefield's gameplay, so it is bad and nobody should like it." What a turd.
He makes some decent points tbh. However, he's wrong. I'm buying Battlefield 3 for exactly what he said to be wrong with the game - The fact that it's so open world and not run 'n gun. It makes gameplay so much more tactical than MW3. Bad Company 2 was amazing, he finds it bad due to the same reason, the open world gameplay. The guy is more into run and gun COD gameplay. Battlefield is pretty damn fun if you know how to play properly, that means, not COD style. It's just pearsonal perference. Run'n gun MW3 (which I'm buying, also) or heavily tactical gameplay.
Agreed 100%. Everything he dislikes is the reason I loved BC2 and have no interest in COD. That's the nice thing about competition. Those of us who want tactical gameplay can look forward to BF3. People who want a more arcadey shooter (not my thing but there's nothing wrong that) can pick up MW3.
I don't see anything wrong with Battlefield 3 feeling similar to BFBC2. BFBC2 is a great game.
Hey guys, if I try to sell stuff and put something like "If you like COD, buy this item Im selling" that it will work? I mean even if its a watch with mickey mouse on ebay, you think COD fans would buy it? I just wanna know how it feels to be activation and watch someone buy anything because of the name brand. No Im, actually kind of serious... but anyway, this isnt about COD. On topic, BF3 looks good to me. If it was too similar to BFBC why arent more players complaining? You'd hear a ton of sh** about it. Agree or Disagree if you Agree
The Battlefield series is really meant to be played with at least 64 players. It's just not a battle when it's 2 teams of 12 players. You just miss out on the Chaos, Confusion and all the LOL moments.
Yea but sometimes the Chaos and Confusion can be a detriment. I've found that sometimes when a game has a smaller player count, 24 or 32, it becomes a bit more tense and thrilling. I've actually had the most enjoyable matches when its been like 4v4 or 8v8. At the end of the day, the teamwork mechanics in Battlefield makes the game so enjoyable.
If the author didn't like Battlefield for its realistic feel then he probably crapped himself when he played Killzone. That is probably the most realistic feeling game I have played.... http://amzn.to/rrXtF8
All shitty. BF has bullet drop - COD does not BF2 is modern and has huge maps as will BF3 - COD will not BF3's graphics far surpass COD's dated Quake tech.
you know, when people critique films, do they compare them to Transformers? no, they compare them to good films.
Transformers is a good film. Dont follow the dumb critics since they are always cranky because of how many movies they have to review. Easily most of the people that I have talked to(in person) say the transformers movies are good.
I wouldn't say the Transformers movies are good, but they satisfy (except for Transformers 2, that was one of the worst movies I think I have ever seen) Transformers 1 was the best but then it went WAAAAYYY downhill for Transformers 2 (there was so much ridiculous action that at certain points it was just practically a blur of metal and robotic crunching noises). Transformers 3 was kinda in the middle of 1 and 2 just OK. Except this time instead of speeding everything up and zooming in on the fights (like they did with 2), they zoomed out and made the damn movie slow-motion.........
"Transformers is a good film. Dont follow the dumb critics since they are always cranky because of how many movies they have to review. Easily most of the people that I have talked to(in person) say the transformers movies are good." ...It's a Michael Bay film. Enough said. We pay to watch random explosions and robots kick ass. From a review perspective, Transformers is terrible. It's terrible, yet... enjoyable. "Good" film is stuff like Oldboy and Requiem for a Dream. But I am also insanely in love with Sucker Punch (critics hated it), so kill me now.
come on, there are times that call for films like City Of God or Hotel Rwanda. Highly acclaimed films which are amazing in their own right. But you have seriously lost all touch with youth if you don't like to see HUGE FRICKEN ROBOTS TRANSFORMING AND MASHING SHIZ UP!!!!! I for one LOVE THAT SH1T!
Can shotguns in Battlefield 3 be used like sniper rifles like in Bad Company 2?
I hope so, that slug ammunition was BEAST. It wasn't easy to use, though, but that's why it was so rewarding.
if for some reason you want to snipe without a scope then yes
Most likely yes, because slug ammo can actually do some damage at quite a distance in real life, accurately depicted in the games.
Leave him alone he thinks shotguns all shoot only buckshot ala COD. Sad.
i love the second reason... pure genius /s
So where are these unfortunate similarities you speak of?
First "point" is so dumb, he complains that the shooting is so realistic that you can't hit anything, has he played the game? Sure doesn't seem like it. BC2 let you take people out pretty damn far with an smg or LMG. Lol, second "point" is he complains about getting shot in the back too much because the levels are so "sprawling". Because that never happens in other games, especially COD....LOL Does the third "point" even make sense?
in COD you get shot in the back all the time because the spawn system is broken. also i dont have trouble hitting people in BF, the same goes for a large majority of people so i dont know what he was smoking
LOL BF has realistic recoil, it causes noobs to over shot their target. He must just hold that button down and pray. Athird of my kills in BF are headshots. I dont snipe much at all guns are just that acurate.
I play Operation 7 for the EXACT same reason. I get quite a few headshots with my customized FN-Fal, using an extended 20 round clip and a fluted barrel for better accuracy. It's funny because we have far fewer games with realistic recoil than games with arcade style gun physics. I'm glad some people here at N4G at least appreciate a good shooter.
Yeah when BC2 launched the shotguns were stupid. My friend headshotted a helicopter pilot with one. Shotguns don't fire in a straight cylinder path!
If you have the slugs specialization, they are surprisingly accurate. Even in real life.
shitty article written by a cod fanboy.. and the chat thing doesn't make sense, if you are in a squad you will hear only the squad members, not everyone.
Come on, how is a COD fanboy? This guy actually tried it out, he has more hands on experience then almost all of us. I think everyone should shutup and wait for the real reviews.
Something tells me he hasn't played it at all or hasn't played it enough to really understand the points he was trying to get across. Like Caffo01 stated, you can only talk to your 3 other squad mates. yet this guy claims you can talk amongst all 64 players. And maybe he simply stinks at shooting games, he shouldn't blame the guns for being too realistic.
I agree that there is a possibility he hasn't played too much or sucks in general, but my main point is just because he isn't head over heels for this game, doesn't make him a COD fanboy, like Caffo01 stated.
He doesnt even know what he's talking about. Example: "Have you ever been in a chat room with 64 people in it?" You cant hear everyone (especially when 32 of them are on a different team (retarded point)). "it definitely won’t convert any seasoned Modern Warfare fans unless it cuts back on the gun physics" Umm, it's BF, it's not COD. They have, and always will have different styles of gun play (also how does that relate to BFBC2?) I could go on, but basically this article and the author are just spouting crap.
I still don't see the "unfortunate" similarities.
Probably the worst article I've read in a while. The author sounds like they worship COD, but hey, whatever floats your boat.
This is just an article to get hits, people will read this and complain or agree and all the while the author writes a story that generates a lot of website traffic. Anybody who makes points and reasoning like this are just whoring themselves out. Being a huge BF fan and being in the alpha trial, I can tell you it's incredibly different from BC2.
"I think people also want something different, even if it’s potentially worse." - WTF? I want some of what this guy is on. People want what they like - See all COD games.
What a load of toss. Call of Duty is a good shooter and Bad Company 2 isn't?? What is this moron smoking? Sure as hell isn't Pineapple Express.
so what sucks about battlefield according to this guy is that the guns are realistic, the maps are big, and the graphics look good.....
... lol thats what i love about battlefield.
The gun realism point is a little stupid considering they do not feel that realistic. Sure there is bullet drop but once you fired a rifle standing/kneeling position you realise hitting targets is hard even if your know the marksmanship principles. I am glad they are in the happy middle group. Some realistic qualities but still have that arcade edge to it. You do not buy BF for realism but it still has an identity which is why you get a different experience to COD
The article is okay i guess, its his opinion and he can at least write an okay opinion. My opinion how ever is my own of course. I will not be buying mw3 this year i am completely staying away from it. I'm done buying the same game every year and wasting 60 bucks. I will however be picking up BF3. I really enjoyed Bad company 2 way more than any game call of duty game that has came out with in past 3 years. For me BF3 will be miles better than MW3. And how do i know this being that i haven't played either of them? BF3 will be a different experience, something new. It may not be a completely fresh idea, but trust me MW3 will be more of the same. I just want something different and dice has the best answer for that. The last good call of duty game was MW1. In my honest opinion.
. ...oh...oh...oh...I have a question??? What if the graphics aren't as purdy as they are saying, like say on the consoles, for example. :) " If you didn't care about Battlefield: Bad Company 2, then you certainly have no reason to care about this presumed messiah of shooters."... Oh no you didn't...lol...did you say messiah??? It's nice to see some point out the OBVIOUS. Still waiting for the other shoe to fall...the beta on consoles...Can't wait.
You are such a troll. I assume you think realistic gun physics and big maps are faults? Who cares if the graphics aren't good. I thought it was about game play? Oh no I didn't?