Poll: Battlefield Poll: Bad Company 2 vs Battlefield 3

[Mojo]

Watch this from minute 1: Then tell me thats not epic.
BF3 just felt like a step backwards in that aspect. Sure the walls will crumble a bit and stuff, but its just not the same. (Didn't play Armored kill yet, so I cant judge that.)

That's not epic. The houses are build from legos and when certain lego blocks go magically *poof* a pre-determined animation will kick in and kill everyone near the building. There's nothing dynamic about that destruction and the fact that it's so completely static makes it boring pretty fast. It still boggles my mind that Battlefield 3 managed to have even more limited destruction.

I never said it was fully dynamic. I know very well how it works, all I'm saying is that collapsing entire houses on a group of enemies while hearing the metal squeak and the concrete crumble is way more epic then anything BF3 has got. BF3 has got the capabilities to be just as epic its just that from a level design standpoint I find BF3 is wasting its capabilities.

 

[Cowabungaa]

Bad Company 2 has my preference including the excellent Vietnam expansion pack.

I really wanted to adore Battlefield 3 but I found it very frustrating to play. It's visuals especially are one big clusterfuck. Levels filled with debris, that blue hue everywhere and enemies that are so much more difficult to both distinguish from your own team and to make out in the extremely cluttered levels.

Yeah, in Battlefield 3 there's more room for trolling:

But for me as an average player, give me Bad Company 2.

 

[natster43]

I think I liked Bad Company 2 more. Mostly because I play on consoles so many of the maps in 3 just feel empty a lot of the time. I also did a lot more hilarious and fun things in Bad Company 2, like headshotting people across the map with the grenade launcher, and I love the Vietnam expansion. Also for what it is worth the singleplayer for Bad Company 2 was more fun than 3's. Both are great games though and I look forward to the next installment in the series, and I love how many guns 3 has.
On a related note, does anyone know if there is a lot of people playing Bad Company 2 on the 360? I want to try it out again but don't know if people still play it.

 

[WanderingFool]

Multiplayer, I would have to go with Bad Company 2, I didnt have much in the way of problems with BF3, but I felt the maps were better in BFBC2.

Though Bad Company 2 was shit in the campiagn, tossing out everything from BC1 for some generic "Russian Attack" story.

 

[Ilikemilkshake]

Apart from the Jets (which have their own problems) BC2 wins every time for me.

Better Maps with better destruction.
I'd argue classes are more balanced. In Bf3 Recon and Support are terrible with Engi pretty much being the optimal way to play -.-

BC2 also had the VIP pass which rewarded people who bought the game new with a craptonne of free maps as opposed to BF3 having an online pass to restrict those who bought it new AND having Premium/map packs to make money.

Also the campaign was way better (still not good but better than BF3 at least) if you even care about that.

 

[GrimGrimoire]

Bad Company 2 in every way. Except for the singleplayer, then Bad Company 1 was best.
Battlefield 3 is in many ways the last FPS I have played, and it killed all interest for another one.
It had a horrible singleplayer, and a uninteresting multiplayer.

Battlefield: Bad Company was my first real multiplayer FPS, and I played the living daylight out of the multiplayer. I also loved the singleplayer. It might not mechanically be the best, or have the best level design, but I actually liked the story.
BC2 and everything CoD tends to be "You're a proud, brave American fighting off waves of ruthless invading Russians.".
BC1 was more like "Screw the war, screw the army, screw invading Russia. Let's get ourselves a chopper, invade Sedaristan, kidnap a dictator, fight on a golf course and defeat a mercenary army. All for that sweet, sweet gold."
(On a sidenote, is BC1 and BC2 even supposed to be about the same characters?)

On the multiplayer side, I prefer BC2 over the rest of the series, but I can't really put a finger on any specific reason for it to be this way.
I guess the maps are a big issue. Grand Bazaar and Metro are the only Battlefield 3 maps I can stand.
A good portion of the maps feel too small, and cramped, while I liked a few (Metro, Grand Bazaar), linear corridorfighting is limiting. Some of the other maps are just gigantic.
I liked that BC2 had decently sized maps, and they almost always allowed you to play however you wanted.
Want to drive a tank? Sure, you can do that.
Want to be a sniper? ou can do that as well.
Want to spam explosives like there's no tomorrow? Step right up!

As I said, I can't really pinpoint a specific thing/things that made BC2 the better game IMHO, but the general "flow" (if that makes any sense) of the BC2 multiplayer is something I have yet to see in any other multiplayer FPS. Not that I play them a lot any more, and I haven't got a lot of experience with the genre, so I might not be the most qualified judge.

 

[jebara]

I loved Bad Company 2, one of my most played games to date.
As for BF3,I gave that away after less than a week from buying it.
Awful,just awful...the maps are some of the worst I've ever played, they completely ruined the game for me,most of them felt more like COD maps...bad ones, and the ones that didn't were just plain boring.
To me, the maps are the reason I fell in love with Bad Company 1 and 2, with crappy maps I just felt nothing.
They were other reasons I hated it like the more realistic look instead of the stylized one from BC2, weapons felt a lot worse and bugs, but shitty maps did the most damage to the game.

 

[The White Hunter]

Bad Company 2.

It actually made use of it's destruction phsyics and was just plain fun and balanced in general.

This.

I adore BC2 and had some fun with BF3, but at the end of the day BC2 was just more fun to play and the experience was much more seemless and simple. Beyond just blowing shit up (which was great in BC2, I love dropping buildings on people.) BC2's UI was much less uncluttered and bullshitty than BF3's, it also didn't have horrible plaguing voip issues on the consoles and the aesthetics were a lot more satisfying.

[small]Also I hate the flashlights. Seriously I do.[/small]

BUt I've been through this before, many a time, I still play BC2 and BF3 is rotting on the shelf. BC2 had a lot of unique things going for it, BF3 just lacked any real soul or spark to it. But it has Jets! Jets that suck until you rank them up a few times! Then they kinda suck anyway because of crap spawn areas and team switching and so on and so forth.

Also the helicopter controls on the PS3 were abysmal in BF3, why are the damn things so unstable and shakey? Realism is fine but it's a pain in the ass to fly them, especially if jets are about at which point the helicopter is nothing more than cannon fodder.

 

[TheRussian]

-snip-
Then tell me thats not epic.

It certainly is epic the first time you see it. Unfortunately the epicness is diminished somewhat when that exact same animation plays every time a building collapses.
Overall I agree with your points about BFBC2's superiority over BF3. I especially love the snow levels in MP, they're so well made.

 

[The White Hunter]

I loved Bad Company 2, one of my most played games to date.
As for BF3,I gave that away after less than a week from buying it.
Awful,just awful...the maps are some of the worst I've ever played, they completely ruined the game for me,most of them felt more like COD maps...bad ones, and the ones that didn't were just plain boring.
To me, the maps are the reason I fell in love with Bad Company 1 and 2, with crappy maps I just felt nothing.
They were other reasons I hated it like the more realistic look instead of the stylized one from BC2, weapons felt a lot worse and bugs, but shitty maps did the most damage to the game.

Cold War is also a reason I missed out in my previous post. Atacam Desert and Arica Harbour too. Damn BC2 had amazing maps!

Oooh and Laguna Presa, I loved sniping on that map with my trusty SV98.

 

[jebara]

I loved Bad Company 2, one of my most played games to date.
As for BF3,I gave that away after less than a week from buying it.
Awful,just awful...the maps are some of the worst I've ever played, they completely ruined the game for me,most of them felt more like COD maps...bad ones, and the ones that didn't were just plain boring.
To me, the maps are the reason I fell in love with Bad Company 1 and 2, with crappy maps I just felt nothing.
They were other reasons I hated it like the more realistic look instead of the stylized one from BC2, weapons felt a lot worse and bugs, but shitty maps did the most damage to the game.

Cold War is also a reason I missed out in my previous post. Atacam Desert and Arica Harbour too. Damn BC2 had amazing maps!

Oooh and Laguna Presa, I loved sniping on that map with my trusty SV98.

Arica Harbour...because of that I spent more time playing the beta than most full games!
BC2 had some of the best maps I have ever played ,however the best of the best is Oasis and Harvest Day from BC1, you can't imagine what those two maps did to me.

Battlefield 3 is in many ways the last FPS I have played, and it killed all interest for another one.

I felt the exact same way.
I already had shooter fatigue but gave BF3 a chance to redeem the genre,since it BC2 was the only shooter I could still enjoy.(BC1 too but you get the point)
It failed, and I haven't touched shooters since then.

 

[fix-the-spade]

the bolt actions were fixed at least(semis are still ruined)

Funny, I think bolt rifles are dire in BF3, whilst I adore my modded up 417. I agree that recon has taken a huge nerf relative to 2 and Bad Company 2. But then in Bf2 the recon/sniper was massively overpowered...

 

[The White Hunter]

I loved Bad Company 2, one of my most played games to date.
As for BF3,I gave that away after less than a week from buying it.
Awful,just awful...the maps are some of the worst I've ever played, they completely ruined the game for me,most of them felt more like COD maps...bad ones, and the ones that didn't were just plain boring.
To me, the maps are the reason I fell in love with Bad Company 1 and 2, with crappy maps I just felt nothing.
They were other reasons I hated it like the more realistic look instead of the stylized one from BC2, weapons felt a lot worse and bugs, but shitty maps did the most damage to the game.

Cold War is also a reason I missed out in my previous post. Atacam Desert and Arica Harbour too. Damn BC2 had amazing maps!

Oooh and Laguna Presa, I loved sniping on that map with my trusty SV98.

Arica Harbour...because of that I spent more time playing the beta than most full games!
BC2 had some of the best maps I have ever played ,however the best of the best is Oasis and Harvest Day from BC1, you can't imagine what those two maps did to me.

Battlefield 3 is in many ways the last FPS I have played, and it killed all interest for another one.

I felt the exact same way.
I already had shooter fatigue but gave BF3 a chance to redeem the genre,since it BC2 was the only shooter I could still enjoy.(BC1 too but you get the point)
It failed, and I haven't touched shooters since then.

Harvest Day is okay, it's definately an amazingly satisfying map to win on the last defend point as a defender in Rush. It's also a joyous thing, to run back along the length from that last defend point, to the very first UAV position, and stab the fucker who's been spamming it from afar for the whole match in the back of the neck. Most vengeful revenge kill in gaming that there.

Oasis is amazing, apart from the helicopter camping and easy-to-snipe AA guns. I do remember once asctually getting in the helicopter with a friend of mine, we took to the skies, rained a bit of death, then we noticed something... something.. odd...

The air space was quiet, and we weren't being contested for it, we made a loop round and sure enough, there it was, the enemy Havoc just sat there being ignored. We debated on the next pass to make an attempt at acquiring the asset or just to destroy it. We opted that I, the pilot, would bail, leaving my friend to hurridely change seats and retreat so that if it went pear shaped, he could swiftly destroy the target and avenge me. The Havoc was ours and by god we kicked arse that round. We both came out with k/d ratios well over 50, but to the enemies credit none of them quite the match.

Damn I wanna play me some BC2 now.

 

[Rakun Man]

Bad Company 1 still has one of my favorite campaigns of all time. And I thought the multiplayer was fun, but I didn't play it that much.

Bad Company 2's campaign still had some funny moments, but I disliked it going for a more serious tone overall. Its multiplayer for me was one of my favorites, for its teamwork focus, its balance (compared to the brokeness of MW2), and just general fun.

I couldn't even play BF3's campaign, that's how atrocious it was. Its multiplayer quickly lost its fun. Not the best level design, practically nothing was destructible, and vehicles had a huge learning curve, with absolutely no instruction. Overall, it just felt uninspired. AND THAT FUCKING GLARE LIGHT FILTER THING. MAKE AN OPTION TO TURN IT OFF!

 

[SecondPrize]

They're two different animals. I hated BC2 for its CoDification with perks and weapon accessories and tiny maps. BF3 is certainly not my favorite in the series, but what I dislike most about it seems to have come from the bad company side of things instead of it's BF roots.

 

[Kathinka]

i like both a lot, in their own right. there is lots of wrong with each, like bf3's wonky ass client side hit detection logic.

all that being said: neither of them are really battlefield. they are consolized compromises. not bad games, but also dumped down too much for console audiences to be what made battlefield truly great.


there was once a time in bf2 when i picked commander without having a clue what i'm doing. i ordered a frontal assault on the enemy points but it got nowhere.
then suddenly i hear a voice in my coms: "bravo squad is ready for orders!"
a single squad of guys had snuck behind the line and was hiding up in some building. so i ordered them to capture an outlying flag. i watched them move towards the flag slowly and covering each other, when they spotted an enemy and, get this: asked me if they should remain hidden or kill him! i ordered them to leave him be and they actually DID. they went on to capture a flag, got under sniper fire, asked for an UAV to spot him, sent out two guys to kill the sniper from behind while the rest covered them. by that time they had run out of ammo, so the squad leader asked for a supply drop that i placed on a square nearby.
they proceeded to singlehandedly turn that game around. later i learned that they were a bunch of friends and former german army that liked to play games together. to this day i fondly remember bravo squad and how they saved the day.

this was on a random public server. just try and imagine that kind of teamplay in bf3 or bad company. it's like that every feature that promoted teamplay and tactics got removed in order to a: make the game playable on consoles or b: promote personal stats whoring and cod-esque kill farming instead.

 

[Marek Karcz]

Battlefield is just more fun to play. I like all of those battles, so much stuff is happening in one time and it is also a good game to watch how is someone else playing.

 

[EquestrianGeneral]

I hated BC2 for its CoDification with perks and weapon accessories and tiny maps. BF3 is certainly not my favorite in the series, but what I dislike most about it seems to have come from the bad company side of things instead of it's BF roots.

Wait. You dislike Bad Company 2 for it's "CoDification" when all it did was diversify your options for weapons and character builds (and have maps that are enormous by CoD standards)... When Battlefield 3 resembled Call of Duty more than any other game in the entire series? Care to explain why? :/

 

[SecondPrize]

I hated BC2 for its CoDification with perks and weapon accessories and tiny maps. BF3 is certainly not my favorite in the series, but what I dislike most about it seems to have come from the bad company side of things instead of it's BF roots.

Wait. You dislike Bad Company 2 for it's "CoDification" when all it did was diversify your options for weapons and character builds (and have maps that are enormous by CoD standards)... When Battlefield 3 resembled Call of Duty more than any other game in the entire series? Care to explain why? :/

I feel the "diversification" offered by the weapon options and builds led to homogenization in that the "best" weapons kits get identified and they're all you see. It messes with balance as well because you can't make a particular gun to X because Y attachment or Z perk will just totally break that. Aside from the hitscan nature of the weapons, I wasn't a giant fan of the samyness I felt with weapons in the cods I played. I far preferred static weapon unlocks you chose which all felt different while playing and which devs could more easily balance around. Also fucking shotguns that kill for miles. BC maps are tiny. They are far far more CoD than BF
I don't see BF3 as more like CoD than bad company at all, but I really only play conquest large so maybe I'm not getting the full experience. I really don't see anything codlike here that didn't start out in the bad company series.