Zero Punctuation: Battlefield: Bad Company 2

[F8L Fool]

"depth"? A very few multiplayer modes have a story, and with out a story, a game doesn't add depth to the game for me. For me multiplayer is just a little bonus that i can use if i get bored.

See for me I don't purchase a game unless it has stellar multiplayer. The reason being that a game without it just lacks the replayability that I am looking for. The gameplay is what matters most to me in a shooter, sports, and fighter. I play RPG's and Adventure games for story first, and gameplay mechanics second. I play MMO's for gameplay and social aspects, and not the story in any way. I could give a damn what the lore behind a dungeon I'm exploring has, or a boss I'm killing.

If a game doesn't have multiplayer it must have at least 80-100 hours of single player content for me to even think of purchasing it. Because frankly 80-100 hours is nothing compared to the 500+ hours I could easily invest in an amazing shooter.

The reason that shooters sell so well is because of the multiplayer experience, and not the story. It's not a coincidence that MW2 sold so damn well. It's not because it had some unbelievable single player campaign. It's because dozens of millions of people are addicts for the MP, just like they are for Halo, Gears of War, Counter Strike, Unreal, Quake, and all those other shooters that are MULTIPLAYER DRIVEN GAMES.

If the aforementioned games didn't have MP, guaranteed they wouldn't have sold even half as well. Maybe not even a quarter as well.

 

[webchameleon]

"OK with Russian Rule"? Well, I guess it is all either pink or red to you foreigners anyway.

(yes, I'm aware your hero was joking)

 

[Abedeus]

Pretty good job and I thought it seemed very Modern Warfare 2 ish. I haven't played the game but I doubt I'll get it (I still enjoy my MW2).

So... why did you think it was like MW2? From his "review"? Single-player, they look similar, but again are different. Multiplayer? No, totally different.

Not from his review but just the general feel. I do mean Single-Player since I haven't really seen much from the Multi-player at all to be honest. And that would be why I said I thought it seemed rather then just it seemed. Plus I do agree that I shouldn't really be making statements on a game I haven't played I just thought I'd throw in my two cents. Is the multi-player better in MW2 or Bad Company dya think?

Honestly? BC is better. Maybe because it's not an arcade shooter like MW2, where people throw frags left and right and impersonate Rambo and his tactics.

Also because vehicle combat is freaking awesome, I love it even when a tank blows up the building I was trying to hide in.

 

[Koganesaga]

Oh Yatzhee, if you'd hated these games from the start instead of enjoying MW (like, FOOLS), your words would sting the public more.

 

[Bek359]

My response to "realistic" (non-stealth) shooters:

1. Games aren't really supposed to be realistic. IT'S WHY YOU'RE PLAYING A GAME.

2. Having incredibly low health in a non-stealth game that is supposedly all about multiplayer just encourages too much cheap tactics and people working their level best to find game breakers, of which there are usually many, becausethedevelopersdon'tcareaboutbalanceImeandoubleshotguns,really-(long, increasingly unhinged tirade)

3. All the brown, utterly soulless levels/maps, I have no interest in. Let's see a shooter where you fight in the jungle or on the coastline (AND NOT D-DAY! THERE ARE ENOUGH WWII SHOOTERS ALREADY!) or somewhere colorful and different, for a change.

 

[WickedSkin]

Just adding that COD: MW/MW2 are the bastard childes of BF2 (The multiplayer part of them CODs). This means that BC/BC2 is the "at least I have the mother daddy married-brother" of COD: MW/MW2. Which makes it a lot better.

My response to "realistic" (non-stealth) shooters:

1. Games aren't really supposed to be realistic. IT'S WHY YOU'RE PLAYING A GAME.

3. All the brown, utterly soulless levels/maps, I have no interest in. Let's see a shooter where you fight in the jungle or on the coastline (AND NOT D-DAY! THERE ARE ENOUGH WWII SHOOTERS ALREADY!) or somewhere colorful and different, for a change.

You should try Vietcong, Crysis, Far Cry, Half Life 2, Battlefield: Bad Company 1 and 2, BF2, TF Classic, TF2 and something like those.

 

[A3sir]

I generally enjoy Zero Punctuation, but there is just something about reviewing the single player of a multiplayer game and accusing it of being similar to MW2 when it blatantly admits that the single player campaign is meant to be mocking MW2... I just felt like "wow, yahtzee is an observant one, isn't he... *rolls eyes*".

 

[silversun101]

Not very funny although I did hate the mortar scene. Staying on the guys ass and still dying was pretty damn frustrating.

Am I the only person who made it through the mortar scene in one go? When it ended I actually figured the explosions were there more for effect then to outright kill you and didn't even pay them any real mind. Am I amazing or just lucky?

Also, just about everything this game does/doesn't do is because MW2 did/didn't do it. Think about it, what has the game done that either is straight off a rip off to Modern Warfare 2 or highly hyped because it isn't doing it? They stuffed the fact that PC's have dedicated servers and that the game is "single play focused" (which it isn't really) while forgetting to mention the story, pacing and even a good deal of the locations are in the realm of "Painting a stolen car to sell it back to the owner."

Is this person aware that Battlefield came first, and most of the things he likes about MW2 were taken and then refined from the Battlefield formula?

 

[duchaked]

okay wow I am having so much fun with this game's campaign (eh, had some fun times sniping in the multiplayer but it's a rental so I won't have much time to invest in it)
maybe the friendly mortar part will cause me a lotta pain but we'll see lol
I will say tho, the enemies are rather quick at spotting you and able to hit you with iron sighted machine guns from sniper rifle (or DRM whatever) distance...and ya lotsa dust

 

[silversun101]

3. All the brown, utterly soulless levels/maps, I have no interest in. Let's see a shooter where you fight in the jungle or on the coastline (AND NOT D-DAY! THERE ARE ENOUGH WWII SHOOTERS ALREADY!) or somewhere colorful and different, for a change.

I guess you should try out Bad Company 2 then. As like, half the game takes place in jungle and/or coastline.

 

[TheECP]

He should just really stop reviewing games that the strong point is multiplayer, and when everyone asks him why he didn't review a game, he can just say "It's a multiplayer game and I can't be bothered to play it" since he really doesn't like it.

Because honestly IMO the multiplayer (especially Rush mode) in this game pretty much destroys Modern Warfare 2 but you wouldn't know that from this review.

 

[Keepitclean]

I have been saying it a lot in recent comments; ZP isn't as good as it used to be.
But this week it was pretty good. Still not as good as the old days. *daydreams of nostalgia*

 

[Do4600]

I agree; the single player game was shit, besides being absolutely gorgeous in a few parts. The single player campaign, however, was literally just a prologue for the multi-player.

Seriously...no, seriously it's just a long tutorial and exposition for the multi-player.


At the end of the single player campaign your boss says, "Good job, and by the way the Russians are invading Alaska!"

It's no coincidence that three of the multi-player maps are set in Alaska.

 

[matthijsfix]

Good thing the multiplayer is great... the singpleplayer was purely intented to get trough the boredom when the servers are down... :-(

 

[Rowen12]

I actually enjoyed the game. The campaign was too linear, helicopter combat was unsatisfying. I actually enjoyed the dust thing. Squinting your eyes and firing randomly at bad guys while dragging your ass from cover to cover was quite entertaining for me. It gave more of a challenge and dimension.
The sound effects were great, and the gfx engine ran smooth throughout the game. Also, your allies aren't totally useless like in CoD, even if that breaks the immersion by turning them into bulletproof mutated supersoldiers.
Hated the helicopter scenes.. don't understand why Stinger missiles aren't hanging around. Building models were limited, and a Siberian hut would end up looking like Tarzan's mansion in the middle of the jungle.
The first mission was okay, sending you back to ww2 for plot insulation duty.
Hated the frequent, uncontrollable cutscenes. Maybe the devs were too afraid you'd look in the wrong direction and miss the action. Maybe they should try to learn a thing or two from HL2's dev commentaries. Yes i was boring enough to play through the games for the fifth time, while also listening to them.

 

[L-J-F]

Sorry but I did a double take at "realistic shooter". BC2 is not exactly realistic, ArmA2 with ACE mod or [for a much better example] DCS Black Shark is realistic, BC2 is just particle effects, shiny graphics and more explosions than probably ever occured in the last 10 years, having said that I wish my copy would hurry up, ETA the 24th, humph!

- Just a correction there, hospitals, crawling to safety, border patrol and pushups would be "authenticity" more than "realism". In terms of realism it's pretty far off (everyone carries parachutes, regenerating health, no armor simulation etc, I think "Military Action Shooty Shooty Fun Game" is a more accurate description =P

Edit: "Game" doesn't mean it can't be realistic, some people like realistic games, just like some people like games with bright colours and shiny things.

 

[whycantibelinus]

Perhaps it's that I'm drunk but this was one of the funniest episodes in a fucking long while.

I do agree with the excess of "realistic" shooters being ridiculous, and I always point out to my friends that "realistic" is not fucking realistic it's just a different type of shittier shit.

 

[Yahtzee Croshaw]

Not a mention to the multiplayer... But it's understandable why Yahtzee doesn't have any friends, I would hate to play something with him