70°
8.0

Videogamer Review: Battlefield: Bad Company

Reviews by Tom Orry, he writes:

"As video games become increasingly more realistic our expectations grow. Take Battlefield Bad Company for example. You can totally destroy the side of a building, yet you can't take the whole building down, and that makes us disappointed. For as technically impressive as Bad Company is, we wanted more. That doesn't stop it from being the first excellent single-player game in the Battlefield series. It's an enjoyable, action packed and explosive campaign, and bolstered by some excellent multiplayer, but how does it stack up to current favourite Call of Duty 4?"

o Excellent multiplayer
o Open world levels are great
o Superb visuals and audio
x Twitchy controls

Gameplay: 8
Graphics: 9
Sound: 10

Read Full Story >>
videogamer.com
jkhan6160d ago

Only one game mode? No deathmatch? No team deathmatch? Is it true? I have been so busy with MGS4 I hardly had any time following this game:P

CBaoth6159d ago

one online mode only - more available for free later. Utterly retarded for a game that focuses on MP. Overly sensitive controls, no prone position if you like sniping, open-ended maps and destructible environments (while a good thing) negate the any CQC combat like shotguns, no co-op in the SP campaign - even though the game features 3 persistent AI teammates (WTF?), and DICE would rather give us 30 preview vids of BC rather than fix the atrocious screen tearing present in the SP campaign demo. And I quote from the review, "For the most part, both versions of the game run very well; although the PS3 game seems ever so slightly more solid and suffers from less screen tearing." It took me reading through 10-12 reviews just to find one simple sentence to elaborate if the ST was still present. YEP it is.

My advice - DL the demo and try it.

ThichQuangDuck6159d ago

im going to respond to each of your remarks even though you currently dont seem to know why they did what the did I will explain slowly to you.

1."one online mode only - more available for free later" So what people only play two online modes in COD4 and they enjoy it. BF:MC I only thought it had one mode because conquest was so fun. Or would you like them to make brainless team deathmatch so you can run around like in CoD4.

2."Overly sensitive controls, no prone position if you like sniping,"
You can easily turn down the sensitivity in the menu if you cant find it its under gameplay. No prone position is because they tested it with prone and snipers were too cheap. snipers can hide in bushes or other things that is why the put in the gilly suit. It is harder to snipe than COD4 get used to it or run back to your year old repetitive run and gun with perks(superpowers on).

3."open-ended maps and destructible environments (while a good thing) negate the any CQC combat like shotguns" That statement just doesnt make sense. But from what I can get out of it. Although people blow stuff up for fun they dont blow up everything. I watch my friend and many others get shotgun kills ever day. Maybe your forgetting to look at them.

4."no co-op in the SP campaign - even though the game features 3 persistent AI teammates (WTF?)," Wow I have been waiting to argue this one for months. Certain levels show you in a helicopter or other situations were teammates could not be with you. As cool as co op sounds no one truly played it in Halo 3 so dont complain. Co op is great in gears of war where they make the game ground up built for it but not for a game that is going for something else.

5."DICE would rather give us 30 preview vids of BC rather than fix the atrocious screen tearing present in the SP campaign demo" Havent seen any screen tearing and have played the singleplayer demo 3 times through. maybe you should get your tv checked out.

" And I quote from the review, "For the most part, both versions of the game run very well; although the PS3 game seems ever so slightly more solid and suffers from less screen tearing." It took me reading through 10-12 reviews just to find one simple sentence to elaborate if the ST was still present. YEP it is."

I never experienced screen sharing and if you had to look at 10-12 reviews that probably means it is not a big problem. But I never experienced any in the demo.

"My advice - DL the demo and try it."

My advice to CBAoth before you open your mouth and rant think about what you say. Or go play COD4 we all know it is what your doing right now.

LastDance6160d ago

is there going to be any local multiplayer at all? any1 know?

ThichQuangDuck6159d ago

local multiplayer. Unless gigantic system link party it just wouldnt work so you might as well be playing online

Havince6159d ago

are going to supply extra gamemodes via download after release

also i disagree with the comment about not being able to destrony a building fully, wouldnt be much good would it if you ended up stranded on a level with no cover

ChampIDC6159d ago

All they've announced at this point is the addition of the classic conquest gametype, unless I missed something. That mode made the Battlefield series, so if they just had those 2 gametypes, I'm pretty sure they'd be alright.

yoghurt6159d ago

I disagree with ithe negative comments here, yes, only 1 game mode, but 8 massive maps, loads of vehciles every game I have played (over 9 hours) has been different, its a great dynamic enviroment, loads of modes doesn't always mean better. I read a comment on a review yesterday which said 'only 8 maps' as a negative....uh hello, COD4 had what, 4?

ThichQuangDuck6159d ago

Twitchy controls but you get used to them. He brings up COD4 which isnt really even the same genre but they both have war and guns in them so in reviewers minds their the same. One aims for massive battles the other goes for close quartes/medium battles. And he says there is 7 maps when there is 8 maps did he even play the game or did he play some of it than go play COD4

ChampIDC6159d ago

I don't see how you could say they're not the same genres. Modern war is modern war, whether it's CQB or open battlefields. Yes, they present it in a different way, but it's still the same genre.

Also, CoD4 set a high benchmark for the perfection of console controls. I felt the same way when I first played the demo. The controls felt twitchy initially, and I did turn down the sensitivity. Of course, getting used to it takes no time at all, so I see no problem with the controls. They're just not as fine tuned at CoD4, which is asking a lot.

Show all comments (16)
70°

The Argument for Battlefield: Bad Company Remakes

With the franchise’s mainline entries failing to find their footing in recent years, now is the perfect time for a Battlefield: Bad Company remake.

Read Full Story >>
gamerant.com
thorstein488d ago

Of course there is no counter argument. This is what fans of the franchise have wanted for years. This and/or BF Bad Company 2.

When asked why there hasn't been another Bad Company:

“There's one thing that lingers with Bad Company that we've been asking ourselves: What is it that the people really liked about Bad Company?" DICE general manager Karl Magnus Troedsson told Eurogamer.

Troedsson says that he and his team can’t put their fingers on what it is that people loved about that branch of the brand. “It's hard for people to articulate what that is, which is actually hard for us,” he says. “It would be hard to remake something like that. Can we do it? Of course. We have our theories when it comes to the multiplayer."

(Source: Game Informer, June 24, 2014)

SonyStyled488d ago (Edited 488d ago )

I always activate the Black Weapon on BFV Solomon Islands for all the BC2 fans who hear/recognize it, thus starting the events of BC2 on BF5 :)

Derrrunnn. Derrrunnn.

RNTody487d ago (Edited 487d ago )

What is so hard to understand for them?

Bad Company 2 is one of the best and most memorable games in the series because:
- It was class-based (duh)
- Heavy focus on squads
- Substance over map size or gimmicks
- Fantastic and realistic gun play
- Well designed maps
- Destructible environments (why has this been minimised so hard in the series? You could demolish buildings in bad company 2 with some well placed C4
- Great progression system and variety in play
- No stupid CoD imitations or focus on the store over the game
- It was *drumroll* incredibly good fun?
- It was unmistakably BATTLEFIELD

INMATEofARKHAM487d ago

Probably should add a fun campaign to the list.

390°

Battlefield Legacy - Sunsetting Announcement

EA: "As we close in on 15 years since the release of Battlefield 1943, and Bad Company™ 1 & 2, we are announcing that their journey is coming to an end."

darthv72775d ago

This reminds me... I have ME on my PS3 hdd. Never really played it, but it was free.

XiNatsuDragnel775d ago

Digital future ppl is good they say nope imo

Eidolon774d ago

And it still says nothing about being able to downloaded even when it's off the storefront, that's a huge ouchie for some who somehow still have it in their backlog...

Shane Kim774d ago

Dont make it an issue when it's not. If you haven't played it in 15 years, chances are you'll never play it.

isarai775d ago

That all digital future sure looks great!

/s

zidane1341775d ago (Edited 775d ago )

Online game servers shut off eventually all the time. Doesn’t matter if you have the disc or not. Even if you have the disc, it’ll be just paperweight unless the game lets you connect directly to a friend or LAN play.

isarai775d ago (Edited 775d ago )

Read the article bro. They are delisting the games, including mirrors edge which is an offline game. Online servers i can understand, not being able to buy/download the games anymore? Completely separate issue, especially seeing as how some these games had lengthy sp campaigns and not just mp.

zidane1341775d ago

@israrai, you can still buy the disc for less then 10$. Hardly a loss.

TheEnigma313775d ago

You shouldn't have to buy the disc, that's the issue.

OhReginald774d ago (Edited 774d ago )

Some brilliant minds created servers to keep these old online games alive. A lot of ps2 and ps3 games that had there servers shut down a long time ago have been restored by fans to keep it going. Warhawk, killzone 2, socom 2/ confrontation, resident evil outbreak series, etc.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 774d ago
DankSinatra774d ago

The disc still exist. I don’t understand the issue. You guys are upset about that “all digital future” yet these games are not “digital only”. Hell digital only is a minority in the gaming world and so far we haven’t moved into it, the only digital only games are games as a service or online only games, which end up failing in the end.

This is no different than a store that stops selling old games, just go and buy a copy somewhere else. So which is it, you hate all digital or you like it? Make up your mind.

isarai774d ago

Talk about missing the point entirely. I'm not going to sit here and explain it to you, figure it out.

DankSinatra774d ago

Talk about whining about something and not wanting to explain from an off handed sarcastic original comment.

I got the point just fine. You’re literally complaining about something that has an easy alternative to it.

ManMarmalade774d ago

I don't think you got the point

DankSinatra774d ago (Edited 774d ago )

@ManMarmalade

No I got it, it has to do with the push towards a future of all digital and reprocussions of losing games. Something I already stayed that hasn’t happened nor is it large enough right now to cause any issues as the games that are all digital are online only to begin with or make up the minority of games

So I’ll say it again, the disc still exists for these games that are over a decade old and can still be played easily. You guys are contradicting the whole “we don’t want a digital only future” crying when the dude I originally responded to stated:

“Read the article bro. They are delisting the games, including mirrors edge which is an offline game. Online servers i can understand, not being able to buy/download the games anymore? Completely separate issue, especially seeing as how some these games had lengthy sp campaigns and not just mp.“

So again, which is it? Do you hate all digital or do you want it?

Inverno775d ago

On PC I don't think it's much of a problem but I'm sad to see BF43 being shut down. I haven't played it in a while since it's stuck on PS3, but i preferred it way more over BF3. It was the lack of invisible barriers which made it better for me.

badz149775d ago

BFBC2 was still the best overall package offered by the franchise so far IMO

porkChop775d ago

Absolutely. BC2 was such a great game. It's a shame we never got BC3.

P_Bomb774d ago

I had a great run on Bad Company 2. Pound for pound, as solid a BF package as there’s been.

InUrFoxHole775d ago

Does anyone play the last BF anymore? I searched crossplay servers and it was 20 people the most on all the servers? Can never find a game

SonyStyled775d ago

The last BC you mean? I was still able to find 10v10 on ps3 2 years ago on NA servers during the evenings. I have all the free and paid dlc installed, but there want any matches in the Vietnam dlc.

Show all comments (35)
230°

Battlefield 2042 Is More Than Enough To Prove We Need Bad Company 3

With this multiplayer experiment going every way but right, it's time for Battlefield to return to what made it so great - a fun single player mode coupled with classic multiplayer.

Read Full Story >>
thegamebutler.com
DaCajun1255d ago

Yes, because there is no way they could screw up a BFBC 3 like they just did the last 2 Battlefield games, right?. /s

They're not the same DICE devs they used to be they're just EA puppets. You will just keep getting COD/APEX/SEIGE BF games now, because idiots keep throwing money at EA for this garbage.

seanpitt231255d ago (Edited 1255d ago )

BF is dead especially after this abysmal release.. what have EA done to this beloved franchise.. it’s really upsetting they are so far disconnected from what the actual fans want from this series.. such a same

If they would of made BC3 and stuck to the same formula as BC2 but gave it the next gen treatment it would of been a massive hit

LucasRuinedChildhood1255d ago (Edited 1255d ago )

Tbh, I think BF 2042 was a battle royale, and then they changed direction mid-development and didn't have enough time to finish it properly before EA's deadline. Specialists make more sense in a br, for example.

Like Halo Infinite before its delay, it needed at least an extra year of development. When you think about it, Infinite had 6 years and BF 2042 had just 3 years. It seems that's just not enough time to make a high quality AAA game anymore.

LucasRuinedChildhood1255d ago (Edited 1255d ago )

Here's evidence for BF 2042 originally being a battle royale game, heavily influenced by Apex Legends:
https://gamerant.com/battle...

ChubbyBlade1255d ago

It did start as a battle royale. It’s pretty obvious. All the pieces are there.

isarai1255d ago

Thing is i dont think they're capable of capturing what made those fun/different anymore.

Fluke_Skywalker1255d ago

They actually admitted that in an interview a while back. They quite openly said they had no idea what made those games so popular and how to recapture it.
Maybe if they actually went and played BC2 they would find out.

RetroCaptainSteve1255d ago

I mean, if they can bring back fun Star Wars single player games, anything's possible, yeah?

Gardenia1255d ago (Edited 1255d ago )

I think that says more about the people working on games nowadays. They have no idea what they are doing and aren't true gamers themselves. Because gaming is a billion money industry they follow the orders of the business men and investors who only look at making maximum profit of games.

Look at the beta and the launch of Battlefield 2042 alone; how can you not see the negative reactions of the community coming? That alone tells us enough of the people involved in making the game.

Yppupdam1255d ago (Edited 1255d ago )

Really? They don't understand what made the Bad Company games popular, or they just don't want to admit what made them popular...That is most likely what the creatively bankrupt writers of the Disney made Star Wars films say about The original trilogy. They don't want to admit that the people before them were just better and that ALL the things that make the Bad company games great are the same things that they probably deem "problematic". Just think how they would destroy Haggard if they made a new game? Everything about his character makes modern game developers sob and run for the first safe space filled with teddys and the soothing voice if Anita Sarkeesian piped in from a speaker in the ceiling.

Sheppard7t31255d ago

Like Ubisoft and the recent Splinter Cell rumors, I don’t trust EA/DICE in its current form anymore. They’d find a way to ruin Bad Company 3.

Azurite1255d ago

Bad Company 2 was amazing but I'm afraid they'd mess it up with a new game.

Ninver1255d ago

Better yet remake with new engine and new coat of paint. Plus all the bells and whistles of next gen

badz1491254d ago

BFBC + BFBC2 remasters for next gen. skip last gen altogether. lower chance for them to screw it up rather than trusting them to make a new BFBC3

annoyedgamer1255d ago

EA knows players want BC3 the same way Activision knows players want MW2 back. They will not make it because the goal is to make games built around MTX and Battle Royale.

Ninver1255d ago

Very strong point. I see the light

Show all comments (34)