Well since it's BC3 not BF5 I hope they ditch the gameplay they've used in the mainline series since 3.
I really miss the gameplay of Bad Company 2.
I really miss the gameplay of Bad Company 2.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Rumor: Battlefield 2018 to be Battlefield: Bad Company 3
- Thread starter Theorry
- Start date
Wow... Thanks for reminding me why I never read threads about FPS games.
I love Bad Company but without the people who made Bad Company what it was will it even be the same? I do think that BFBC2 is the second best battlefield game right behind the goat BF2. Great maps and gameplay. I miss those days quite a bit because every BF after BC2 has been disappointing. I think the reason BF went downhill is because of the people who left after BC. I remember BF2 being massive and every game after they went console just disappointed. I always secretly hoped they would keep the two versions separate kind of like what grin and ubisoft were doing with the ghost recon series. BC2 is the anomaly in that wishing though because it turned out great.
"Let's bring the pain down in Arica While we're at it let's tear them a new one on Port Valdez Too"
I'm somewhat excited if true, Bad company 2 is one of my fav fps games ever.
I'm not 100% exited, because there's a chance that EA will fuck it up like Battlefront 2. Also the main Bad company 1 and 2 game designer is no longer working for DICE, so let's hope current DICE doesn't fuck it up.
I hope they bring back Port Valdez, Isla Inocentes and Arica Harbor. Those maps were really well designed and had really nice color scheme. Not that map art style really matters from a gameplay perspective, but I like when multiplayer maps have other colors than brown and grey.
This looks so comfy, please bring it back.
I'm somewhat excited if true, Bad company 2 is one of my fav fps games ever.
I'm not 100% exited, because there's a chance that EA will fuck it up like Battlefront 2. Also the main Bad company 1 and 2 game designer is no longer working for DICE, so let's hope current DICE doesn't fuck it up.
I hope they bring back Port Valdez, Isla Inocentes and Arica Harbor. Those maps were really well designed and had really nice color scheme. Not that map art style really matters from a gameplay perspective, but I like when multiplayer maps have other colors than brown and grey.
This looks so comfy, please bring it back.
Whats the point of Bad Company now? You've done 64 players on console. You've made the console version comparable to the PC version. Don't really get the point.
Because Bad Company 2 was far better than Battlefield 3 and 4.
I'm..... Okay with this if true. I like both the smaller player counts and tighter infantry combat, and the larger maps focused on all-out warfare.
I bet xfactor is just filled with info but he's under NDA, lol.
I bet xfactor is just filled with info but he's under NDA, lol.
I never played either of the first Bad Company games, but I'm glad those folks who did are getting another iteration of the series after asking for it for a while.
Personally, I'm a big fan of visiting the Cold War era (one reason I've been clamoring for a Black Ops 1 remaster) and feel it can result in some fun gameplay and interesting settings. I played 1942 and Vietnam when I was in my early teens, about 50+ hours of BF4 multiplayer when I got a PS4, and have been immersed in BF1 with a few breaks in between basically since launch.
Pending any major micro-transaction chicanery, I'll be getting this.
Personally, I'm a big fan of visiting the Cold War era (one reason I've been clamoring for a Black Ops 1 remaster) and feel it can result in some fun gameplay and interesting settings. I played 1942 and Vietnam when I was in my early teens, about 50+ hours of BF4 multiplayer when I got a PS4, and have been immersed in BF1 with a few breaks in between basically since launch.
Pending any major micro-transaction chicanery, I'll be getting this.
Legendary map, and incredible art design as well. Arica Harbor, Oasis, Isla, Harvest Day, Port Valdez... the list goes on."Let's bring the pain down in Arica While we're at it let's tear them a new one on Port Valdez Too"
I'm somewhat excited if true, Bad company 2 is one of my fav fps games ever.
I'm not 100% exited, because there's a chance that EA will fuck it up like Battlefront 2. Also the main Bad company 1 and 2 game designer is no longer working for DICE, so let's hope current DICE doesn't fuck it up.
I hope they bring back Port Valdez, Isla Inocentes and Arica Harbor. Those maps were really well designed and had really nice color scheme. Not that map art style really matters from a gameplay perspective, but I like when multiplayer maps have other colors than brown and grey.
This looks so comfy, please bring it back.
All the so called "gamechangers" know about the game by now, probably played it already multiple times
Not really. Maybe if you like Rush maybe? It improved the gunplay for sure, but outside of that it was pretty terrible. BF3 and 4 are much improved.
I don't know why they would take this direction with the franchisee. I just want BF5 already, Hell I'd take a new map pack for BF4 at this point if you're not going to make a sequel to that. Anything but a small scale BF. Why the hell make it a BF then?
I don't doubt that lol. They probably want to talk about it, publicly, so bad but they can't.
I think I need to expand on my other post:
What made BC2 great for me was the simplicity and the way everything fit in. Sniper, Assault etc all had a purpose and each had some kind of OP broken thing which made them all balanced. Playing as a squad meant a lot and the destruction was very good. Can't go inside the building to blow the objective? Blow the whole building up. See an enemy Tank driving towards you? Run like a son of a bitch. Vehicles had a meaning and weren't that easy to take down, they were scary as hell. The maps were also very awesome and had tons of variety, you had snow, desert, jungles. I also liked that they didn't take place in a city like BF3 and afterward which made the maps much cooler looking when it becomes a wasteland. I also liked that there was no prone.
What made BC2 great for me was the simplicity and the way everything fit in. Sniper, Assault etc all had a purpose and each had some kind of OP broken thing which made them all balanced. Playing as a squad meant a lot and the destruction was very good. Can't go inside the building to blow the objective? Blow the whole building up. See an enemy Tank driving towards you? Run like a son of a bitch. Vehicles had a meaning and weren't that easy to take down, they were scary as hell. The maps were also very awesome and had tons of variety, you had snow, desert, jungles. I also liked that they didn't take place in a city like BF3 and afterward which made the maps much cooler looking when it becomes a wasteland. I also liked that there was no prone.
Wait what? Vietnam? So basically this isn't a direct sequel to BC2 and is being sold on the name alone..?
Man that sounds incredible but idk with current dice. BC2 is my shooter of last gen. Bf3 and 4 aren't even close for me.
Sounds like it partly takes place in Vietnam, a fictional setting. So think Vietnam War 2.
All I'm waiting for is the new Operation Metro/Lockers/Argonne Forest. If they have one or two maps similar to those meat grinder maps, I'll be happy :P
Seems like a tradition now to include one map focused entirely on infantry combat with massive chokepoints.
Seems like a tradition now to include one map focused entirely on infantry combat with massive chokepoints.
It didn't though? Was so much that could not destroy. BC1 and BC2 were much more destructible.
Anyway, unless it has aow TTK like BC1/2 and not the CoD nonsense of BF 3/4 I personally gonna skip it.
Best fucking news if true.
I'm not a hardcore BF fan, my fav in series are BC2 and BF1.BC2 because of tight gameplay and BF1 for simplicity i don't enjoy too much of BF3 and 4 because to me they're too overwhelming.
Proper destruction like we've not seen in this gen, good humorous story and fast gameplay like BC2 sold if true.
I'm not a hardcore BF fan, my fav in series are BC2 and BF1.BC2 because of tight gameplay and BF1 for simplicity i don't enjoy too much of BF3 and 4 because to me they're too overwhelming.
Proper destruction like we've not seen in this gen, good humorous story and fast gameplay like BC2 sold if true.
Hmm... wasn't the ending of the first game the gang going to Texas? Would be interesting to see if they just retcon the ending or something.
The gunplay was great, it had amazing maps from top to bottom unlike BF3 and 4 that had some good maps and some utter shite like Metro that were good for nothing but grinding.
The art style meant important information was clear and easily identifiable, you could identify opposing classes in a split second from miles away, the subsequent games have become a boring mess in their attempt to make the game look more realistic.
It didn't have eleventy billion guns, most of which weren't worth a damn with a stupid amount of accessories.
Attack choppers were actually threatening.
The destruction was unquestionably superior, you could blow up pretty much every wall and bring down almost every building. There was no guessing game like BF 3 and 4 as to whether you could destroy something or not.
The campaign was actually fun, with characters that had personality and no infinitely respawning enemy bullshit.
Bad Company 2 was the last great Battlefield title.
BC1/2 are modern day so it not gonna star Bad Company if it's Vietnam era
I have a serious question that I've never really gotten a clear response to over the years.
Why does everyone seem to love Bad Company (specifically 2)?
I mean I enjoy most iterations of the franchise if I'm being honest, I loved 1, 3 and 4, and others that I've played that I've honestly forgotten. But I'm not sure why those stand out for so many people. I found them to be really good, but not that much different than the other games as a whole, but it's also been forever.
Why does everyone seem to love Bad Company (specifically 2)?
I mean I enjoy most iterations of the franchise if I'm being honest, I loved 1, 3 and 4, and others that I've played that I've honestly forgotten. But I'm not sure why those stand out for so many people. I found them to be really good, but not that much different than the other games as a whole, but it's also been forever.
Well in BC2 it ends with a cliffhanger about the Russians invading Alaska so this could be a Cold War 2/WW3 style game around the world.
BC2 is my favorite MP shooter ever. But not sure current DICE can match that greatness.
Since they don't even know what made it great:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...ple-really-like-about-battlefield-bad-company
Since they don't even know what made it great:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...ple-really-like-about-battlefield-bad-company
Despite my usual disinterest in multiplayer, I adore BC2. My favorite multiplayer game of all time. I put hundreds of hours into it, and hundreds more when the Vietnam expansion released. Liked the campaign, loved Onslaught. If this is real, PLEASE DONT FUCK IT UP
theyre going to fuck it up
I'll believe it when I see it.
But HELL YEA! GIVE ME BFBC3!
I fucking miss rush mode and good rush maps.
But HELL YEA! GIVE ME BFBC3!
I fucking miss rush mode and good rush maps.
I fucking loved Bad Company 2 (except for the circle-strafing chopper/UAV bombing your anti-air combo in Rush) so it feels as if I should be excited here, yet in terms of map design and overall tuning they've been getting further and further away from many of the aspects that made the game amazing, so I'm unsure as to whether they're capable of creating something similar. But I certainly wish them luck. Could be fun!
I really digged the tightness and focused scale of Bad Company while 1, 3 and 4 were more about chaos.
That really was helpful, thanks. I guess I do remember some of those things, but I forgot a lot about the design and such and now that it's pointed out yeah I guess there is quite a bit a difference. I do wish that would've translated in the most recent entry, because I'm not sure if we're going to get something set in that time again. As much as I do love it, it does feel fairly restricted compared to the games in the past.
It's also weird that the video implied that even dice may be unclear on what made those games work, which I guess would explain quite a bit.
They did say it themselves. Hopefully, they do play BC2 and replicate what made it great.
Can't really agree with any of this.
Gunplay was better on console then previous entries yes, but 3 and 4 have continued to build upon that and surpassed it.
But in general the level design of BC2 for Conquest was awful. Small maps with almost always three control points and almost always near each other. Meaning most of the map space was pointless empty and the game encouraged more meat grindy gameplay, not spread out battles like BF1-2. The conquest points were always close to each other, almost hilariously as if DICE was afraid players would not find the battle. Which is actually most likely true. The BC games also took out the flow of combat and how important conquest points where. Since you could no longer lose your home spawn and therefore lose the game, conquest points weren't as important and teams had less focus to actually think about control points. It was simply go to whichever one wasn't yours, often in a straight "rush" like way. Also in general the maps lacked interesting environments or unique control points. There wasn't a battle over a TV station with several ways to get to control point often leading to really intense stand offs on the roof and in the stairway almost at the same time. Most of the control points were simple plots on the map. Boring and unexciting. Even the big map with the most control points is rush like with all it's control points lined in a linear fashion.
Destruction was better, but it's lessened focus in BF3-4 doesn't take away from those games better maps and better conquest gameplay.
As an assault player in 3-4 I don't agree guns don't feel unique. I often switch between the M-16 and the AUG, and the bulldog and so on. Plenty of guns I wouldn't use sure, but plenty feel different and I switch often. Same for the DRMs in 4.
I hate Metro and it's like in 3-4, but I dislike every conquest map in BC2 so it doesn't matter. The DLC for 3 was better than the base. 4's maps were all fantastic.
I doubt modern games will ever get to the dense and verticalality of BF2 maps. Thats not how games or done, but BC2's maps felt so lackluster. And the rumor here spells of a similar focus and as someone who likes big conquest and big maps, this sucks.
Also I don't care about single player in a BF game.
I put like 300 hours into BFBC2.
Until EA changes their ways, I'd rather the Bad Company series stay dead.
Until EA changes their ways, I'd rather the Bad Company series stay dead.
Big maps are ok...if you all players are set to play as a team, if not...is just not fun, just chaos.
Tighter map design in BC2 which were designed with rush mode in mind forced players to work together, There was only one way to the objective and they had no other way that work together, if you saw a friendly tank, you know you had either support it or you will likely die, it offered a way to open the enemy lines. It gave the game a sense of being in an actual battlefield rather than the small scale firefights that happens in 3 and 4, yeah some maps were too tight, other allowed more ways to reach the objective but players were still funneled into the action and the objective.
Is true that the excesive destruction brought some unbalance but overall it was just great and allowed for much more dynamic situations.
Yeah, forget about BC3, just remake BC2. Fuck the overexcesive progression and the 2 million guns that barely feels different. Just give us BC2, same progression, same tools, same weapons, same maps, same gameplay.
Tighter map design in BC2 which were designed with rush mode in mind forced players to work together, There was only one way to the objective and they had no other way that work together, if you saw a friendly tank, you know you had either support it or you will likely die, it offered a way to open the enemy lines. It gave the game a sense of being in an actual battlefield rather than the small scale firefights that happens in 3 and 4, yeah some maps were too tight, other allowed more ways to reach the objective but players were still funneled into the action and the objective.
Is true that the excesive destruction brought some unbalance but overall it was just great and allowed for much more dynamic situations.
Yeah, forget about BC3, just remake BC2. Fuck the overexcesive progression and the 2 million guns that barely feels different. Just give us BC2, same progression, same tools, same weapons, same maps, same gameplay.