-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
DICE Reveals Why There's No Battlefield: Bad Company 3
- Thread starter Sn4ke_911
- Start date
pokeystaples
Banned
The awesome and cohesive single player story, the complete and utter destruction, the humor, the neostead 2000...those are all in Battlefield 3 and 4?
Bad Company was my first introduction to Battlefield and DICE, judge me later, and Bad Company 2 took what was great about 1 and expanded on that. Battlefield 3 and 4 seem to be steps back.
Uiki
Member
Summer Haze
Banned
Weighty controls, guns that felt heavy and impactful, slower gameplay and a humorous campaign with great characters is why i loved Bad Company 1&2.
While i love BF4, it doesn't have the same feel to it, it feels way lighter and dare i say CoD-like compared to the BC games.
Stupid DICE. "HURRR DURR we don't understand why you loved a game we made HURRR DURRR"
So much this.The GOL and the SV98 were GODLY! Fuck....i really would love a proper BC3 (with an Arica Harbour remake). Sigh.
While i love BF4, it doesn't have the same feel to it, it feels way lighter and dare i say CoD-like compared to the BC games.
Stupid DICE. "HURRR DURR we don't understand why you loved a game we made HURRR DURRR"
So much this.The GOL and the SV98 were GODLY! Fuck....i really would love a proper BC3 (with an Arica Harbour remake). Sigh.
CrunchyFrog
Member
lolwat, the flimsiest PR-faced business answer I've ever heard.
Red Dolphin
Member
For BC3 they need to take the best elements from the first two games. Basically the single player and humour of BC1 and the multiplayer from BC2.
More detail:
BC1:
- The Humour - The
- Single Player campaign - the open sandbox design that let you approach missions and levels in your own way. Not these boring linear corridor scripted COD clone single player levels.
BC2:
- The Multiplayer - mostly the improvements in FOV, controls etc. Both games actually had great maps.
From both:
- The unlock system where all add-ons could be unlocked for all guns instead of having to grind every gun in the game to get all unlocks.
- The Destruction - These "Levelution" scripted events in BF4 do nothing for me. I like maps comprised of mostly fully destructible buildings.
The best thing they added in BF4 was the verticality of many of the levels which was an idea that spawned from that "base jump" map in BF3.
Rush mode is just garbage in BF4 when it was by far my favourite mode in BC2. The ticket count seems way too low in BF4 and the M-Comms are all in ridiculous choke points.
Luckily 64 conquest is so good.
More detail:
BC1:
- The Humour - The
- Single Player campaign - the open sandbox design that let you approach missions and levels in your own way. Not these boring linear corridor scripted COD clone single player levels.
BC2:
- The Multiplayer - mostly the improvements in FOV, controls etc. Both games actually had great maps.
From both:
- The unlock system where all add-ons could be unlocked for all guns instead of having to grind every gun in the game to get all unlocks.
- The Destruction - These "Levelution" scripted events in BF4 do nothing for me. I like maps comprised of mostly fully destructible buildings.
The best thing they added in BF4 was the verticality of many of the levels which was an idea that spawned from that "base jump" map in BF3.
Rush mode is just garbage in BF4 when it was by far my favourite mode in BC2. The ticket count seems way too low in BF4 and the M-Comms are all in ridiculous choke points.
Luckily 64 conquest is so good.
Yup.
FlyingSaucer
Banned
Bad Company 1 story was gold, still the best I've ever experienced in a Battlefield game.
BC2 was already beginning to get bad, with plenty of pretentious patriotic crap.
fluffydelusions
Member
I really just loved the maps in BC2
Bad Company 1: Not taking itself seriously. BC2 was just back to the boring "LETS SAVE THE WORLD" type story, which ruined the charm of the first one. It also felt like it had more 'destructability' than BF4. I'd take destroying specific spots in walls over a pre-defined falling skyscraper any day.
It's amazing that they can't locate why people like it. I guess they're going to get all their answers here though. Should've just asked us, DICE.
It's amazing that they can't locate why people like it. I guess they're going to get all their answers here though. Should've just asked us, DICE.
The Elite
BOSS
Yeah, BC2 was starting to let the average American military shooter tropes leak in. BC1 was fantastic though.
BC2 also lost lots of it's humor.
SirMossyBloke
Member
You messed up Rush DICE, that's why BF3 and 4 aren't as good.
Son of Zardoz
Neo Member
As others have said, take the openness of the SP of Bad Company 1 along with the MP of Bad Company 2, the destruction, the humor (granted 2 was more serious than 1) and the different style of gunplay and you have a winner.
To me it always felt as if the Bad Company series moved slower, at least aiming down the sights took longer but you were rewarded for taking aimed shots instead of firing from the hip. I'm sure there were people who could no scope/quick scope but it seemed to be far less prevalent than in BF3 & BF4.
I hope DICE gets their ish together and figures it out because BC2 is still my favorite multiplayer shooter of all time and would love to see it come back as long as it's not just a reskinned BF4.
THIS! To me it really showed how far DICE had come. In BC1 I would rarely play the infantry only maps because they just weren't as good/fun as the others then in BC2 Arica Harbor was infantry only and fantastic. Soooo much fun all around, but especially holding A in that garage with all sorts of craziness going on.
To me it always felt as if the Bad Company series moved slower, at least aiming down the sights took longer but you were rewarded for taking aimed shots instead of firing from the hip. I'm sure there were people who could no scope/quick scope but it seemed to be far less prevalent than in BF3 & BF4.
I hope DICE gets their ish together and figures it out because BC2 is still my favorite multiplayer shooter of all time and would love to see it come back as long as it's not just a reskinned BF4.
THIS! To me it really showed how far DICE had come. In BC1 I would rarely play the infantry only maps because they just weren't as good/fun as the others then in BC2 Arica Harbor was infantry only and fantastic. Soooo much fun all around, but especially holding A in that garage with all sorts of craziness going on.
Turin Turambar
Member
Focused on Rush instead of Conquest.
Weapons with longer ttk.
Balanced around less number of players 24-32, instead of 48-64.
Vehicles as support of infantry.
No planes.
Cozmogramma
Member
Balanced maps, classes and weapons, great destruction, great sound, good controls and feel in weapons. No jets, no overpowered tanks or vehicles, appealing graphics and UI. All modes were great on all maps. But most of all: fun to play.
And Vietnam.
And Vietnam.
Don't forget Atacama Desert!!
DICE if you just remade the maps into BF4 and sell it as DLC, fans would eat that shit up. I know I will.
The_Darkest_Red
Member
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULbZUoPN5BU
Gonna take more than Black Ops to drive me away from you
Ain't nothing that a million C4 Whores could ever do
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 thought Bad Company 1's campaign was just decent - great characters, but the mission/encounter design was fairly rote outside of the destruction. I couldn't even bring myself to finish Bad Company 2.
I guess don't care for DICE's single player FPS sensibilities at all. Bad Company 1 is the one that's always touted as having a great campaign, but I didn't love it.
I guess don't care for DICE's single player FPS sensibilities at all. Bad Company 1 is the one that's always touted as having a great campaign, but I didn't love it.
Messofanego
Banned
Bad Company 2 already had the bad singleplayer in design and lost the humorous tone towards a more generic one (but made up with the multiplayer), so yeah I don't think they even know what made the Bad Company 1 campaign so good.
pokeystaples
Banned
I see what you did there.
I actually enjoyed 2 quite a bit, but I might be mingling the full package into that. I should prolly go back and replay it.
spindoctor
Member
Well, for starters, it wasn't broken as all fuck half a year after release.
either Bad Company fans are idiots or DICE is lying.
A Halo fan could easily tell you why they feel CE/2/3 are superior to the others. A SOCOM fan could tell you why 1 or 2 are the best. A Gears fan can tell you why 1 or 3 is the best.
Most people tend to know why their favorite game is their favorite game.
Are you drunk?
BeamImpact
Member
oh come on DICE, its not that hard
this took me 5 minutes of brainstorming
singleplayer:
- awesome humour
- somewhat hyperbole story that worked as some kind of satire on other moderm story shooters
- very diversified in both locations and vehicle useage
- well picked Squadmates with great dialoges
multiplayer:
- great rush-mode
- no jets
- barely any attack-helis
- low amount of destructive vehicles on most maps
- destruction that was years ahead of the competition
- well balanced guns, eg refering to the PDW damage system
- well balanced classes, Assault carries the ammo and no health kit
- mostly midrange combats, barely any "closed quaters throw the dice" battles
this took me 5 minutes of brainstorming
singleplayer:
- awesome humour
- somewhat hyperbole story that worked as some kind of satire on other moderm story shooters
- very diversified in both locations and vehicle useage
- well picked Squadmates with great dialoges
multiplayer:
- great rush-mode
- no jets
- barely any attack-helis
- low amount of destructive vehicles on most maps
- destruction that was years ahead of the competition
- well balanced guns, eg refering to the PDW damage system
- well balanced classes, Assault carries the ammo and no health kit
- mostly midrange combats, barely any "closed quaters throw the dice" battles
FlyingSaucer
Banned
According to Moby Games :
BC 1
Story by : Fredrik Agetoft, Patrick Bach, David Göthberg, Manuel Saua Llanes
Written by : Fredrik Agetoft
BC 2
Written by : David Goldfarb
Here, EA. Get the original writers team, and just add good MP maps, make everything destructible (not that horrible 'Levelution' thing, which was more about creating impressing visual set-pieces for PR and youtube than interesting gameplay tactics), and you have the perfect BC3 game.
I would love an original Bad Company 3 game set in Vietnam
True but after some years of playing it, you begin to eventually get sick of 'Arica only' MP servers
BC 1
Story by : Fredrik Agetoft, Patrick Bach, David Göthberg, Manuel Saua Llanes
Written by : Fredrik Agetoft
BC 2
Written by : David Goldfarb
Here, EA. Get the original writers team, and just add good MP maps, make everything destructible (not that horrible 'Levelution' thing, which was more about creating impressing visual set-pieces for PR and youtube than interesting gameplay tactics), and you have the perfect BC3 game.
I would love an original Bad Company 3 game set in Vietnam
True but after some years of playing it, you begin to eventually get sick of 'Arica only' MP servers
I see what you did there.
TheMaidenInBlack
Banned
Lots and lots of destruction.
The destruction in BF3/4 is pathetic.
The destruction in BF3/4 is pathetic.
Unknown One
Member
+ No lock on unless tracered
+ Destruction on a lot of things
+ Rush was better designed
+ Higher Time to Kill
+ Less unlocking B.S
+ No prone
+ AN-94
+ No sniper sway
+ Arica Harbor
+ Hip fire was viable
+ Universal attachments
+ Less of a hassle unlock system
+ more unique weapon characteristics
+ More unique weapon stats
+ more recoil
+ Destruction on a lot of things
+ Rush was better designed
+ Higher Time to Kill
+ Less unlocking B.S
+ No prone
+ AN-94
+ No sniper sway
+ Arica Harbor
+ Hip fire was viable
+ Universal attachments
+ Less of a hassle unlock system
+ more unique weapon characteristics
+ More unique weapon stats
+ more recoil
Razgriz-Specter
Member
psn
Member
It would be very hard for them to come up to the expectations because the time of the release matters so much. We had BF2, which was getting kinda "old". And the amount of destruction was something new. We had great weapons, great maps, one of the best addons ever (vietnam) and they released free maps. The multiplayer focussed on what really matters, compared to battlefield 3 or 4 it had less options and was less bulky. But somehow it worked. The multiplayer was easy to learn, and I had a lot of fun. Instead of focussing on 10 different modes or 50 different gun sights we got an experience similar to other (of course much different) shooters like counter strike, which never get old.
also this:
The AN-94 was so awesome. I cant believe that it's not in BF4...Instead they implement weapons like "bulldog"... lame.
also this:
The AN-94 was so awesome. I cant believe that it's not in BF4...Instead they implement weapons like "bulldog"... lame.
Mass Effect
Member
Nah, BC1 was better for Rush (but sucked for conquest). BC2 was a good balance of Rush and Conquest
Neuromancer
Member
You know what DICE, don't even bother. I don't think you're capable of making a quality single player experience like Bad Company 1 any more. Aside from the excellent writing and funny characters and dialogue you also gave players huge levels to explore and accomplish objectives in different ways.
pokeystaples
Banned
I <3 you. Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one who loved the neostead. It made me fall in love with shotguns.
Agreee. I would take a next-gen version with Vietnam included.
u wot
The_Darkest_Red
Member
Rush is unbeatable when it's done right, in my opinion. I have played and enjoyed a ton of FPS over the years but I can't think of anything I've enjoyed more than a quality game of Rush in BC2.
The funny thing is I don't even touch it anymore in BF4 because it's so awful. Conquest only for me at this point.