2012-06-21 14:51 , edited 2012-06-21 14:54 by vanillafl0wer
Let's face it. Battlefield 3 was, down to the core, set back due to EAs greed, forcing DICE to compete with Activision and their major title: Call of Duty.
Back in the days, Battlefield and Call of Duty were two very different games. They had very different playstyles, and they were not even compared to each other due to their distinctive gameplay. But now, they are competiting and compared constantly (ie BF3 vs MW3 flame war).
Most of us that have played Battlefield since Battlefield 1942, may be disapointed of what the franchise has become. Most of us had big hopes for what Battlefield 3 may bring. But upon release, I know many became very disapointed to only find 3 true battlefield maps (Caspian Borders, Kharg Island and Operation: Firestorm), the rest were just close quarters combat aimed for the Call of Duty-audience.
I am not sure about how many of you that know about Planetside 2, but below is a very small summary.
Planetside 2 is essentially Battlefield 2143, except not bound to EAs greed. Actually, cross what I just said. Planetside 2 seems to be much better than any Battlefield game, ever. Now, don't hate on me yet. Let us not forget that Planetside 2 will be completely free to play, with constant and regular updates. It will be funded with minor transactions, but not a Pay 2 Win game. Anything that affects gameplay can be bought with in-game money, earned from playing.
Below is a text copied from Reddit:
"Why pay $50 for vanilla BF3 + $50 for the premium DLC when you can spend far less (and potentially $0) for:
+ A better metagame (resources, factions, outfits, persistence, commanders)
+ Better teamwork (in-game VOIP, outfits, better squads)
+ More vehicles (a gunship you can actually fly, transports, solo vehicles, unique aircraft and tanks with actual variations)
+ Better combat (rock-paper-scissors balance and not "1 man army". more defined front lines, flanking, tactical squads - all with up to ~30 times more players)
+ Better maps (size, variation, day/night cycles, unique bases)
+ More customization (implants, weapons, cosmetics)
+ Server limit of 2000 players per continent. Imagine battles with hundreds of soldiers, with unlimited aircrafts, tanks and whatnot. True warfare.
All kinds of misc stuff like: more options for lower-end systems, app/website integration to the game, stealth with counters)
I'm sure I'm missing some stuff."
So I am curious. How many of you TRUE battlefield veterans that have played the franchise before Bad Company will leave this now corrupted franchise from EA's greed and join the real persistant battle of the decade?
Basically PS2 is looking to be what everyone hoped BF3 would be.
Back in the days, Battlefield and Call of Duty were two very different games. They had very different playstyles, and they were not even compared to each other due to their distinctive gameplay. But now, they are competiting and compared constantly (ie BF3 vs MW3 flame war).
Most of us that have played Battlefield since Battlefield 1942, may be disapointed of what the franchise has become. Most of us had big hopes for what Battlefield 3 may bring. But upon release, I know many became very disapointed to only find 3 true battlefield maps (Caspian Borders, Kharg Island and Operation: Firestorm), the rest were just close quarters combat aimed for the Call of Duty-audience.
I am not sure about how many of you that know about Planetside 2, but below is a very small summary.
Planetside 2 is essentially Battlefield 2143, except not bound to EAs greed. Actually, cross what I just said. Planetside 2 seems to be much better than any Battlefield game, ever. Now, don't hate on me yet. Let us not forget that Planetside 2 will be completely free to play, with constant and regular updates. It will be funded with minor transactions, but not a Pay 2 Win game. Anything that affects gameplay can be bought with in-game money, earned from playing.
Below is a text copied from Reddit:
"Why pay $50 for vanilla BF3 + $50 for the premium DLC when you can spend far less (and potentially $0) for:
+ A better metagame (resources, factions, outfits, persistence, commanders)
+ Better teamwork (in-game VOIP, outfits, better squads)
+ More vehicles (a gunship you can actually fly, transports, solo vehicles, unique aircraft and tanks with actual variations)
+ Better combat (rock-paper-scissors balance and not "1 man army". more defined front lines, flanking, tactical squads - all with up to ~30 times more players)
+ Better maps (size, variation, day/night cycles, unique bases)
+ More customization (implants, weapons, cosmetics)
+ Server limit of 2000 players per continent. Imagine battles with hundreds of soldiers, with unlimited aircrafts, tanks and whatnot. True warfare.
All kinds of misc stuff like: more options for lower-end systems, app/website integration to the game, stealth with counters)
I'm sure I'm missing some stuff."
So I am curious. How many of you TRUE battlefield veterans that have played the franchise before Bad Company will leave this now corrupted franchise from EA's greed and join the real persistant battle of the decade?
Basically PS2 is looking to be what everyone hoped BF3 would be.
Enlisted: 2011-10-26
Enlisted: 2011-11-02
Enlisted: 2011-10-24
Enlisted: 2011-10-24
Enlisted: 2011-10-26
Enlisted: 2011-10-25
Enlisted: 2011-10-25