On the Ball: Two Shooters Enter ?
Think Bad Company 2 goes toe to toe with Modern Warfare 2? Think again.
Read Full Article
Think Bad Company 2 goes toe to toe with Modern Warfare 2? Think again.
Read Full Article
On the Ball: Two Shooters Enter ?
- Thread starter Jordan Deam
- Start date
Pardon me for my ignorance, but I really can't tell what you're trying to say with this piece. No disrespect intended, Mr. Deam, but I'm genuinely confused; is there something I'm missing? I can;t decide if this was a simple statement of facts, or something...larger.
[sub]For the record, I wholeheartedly endorse Bad company 2 over MW2.[/sub]
[sub]For the record, I wholeheartedly endorse Bad company 2 over MW2.[/sub]
Honestly? Are you even trying to attempt attach "realism" to MW2? It's an arcade shooter dressed up in some HIGH SPEED LOW DRAG GO LOUD DROP TANGO SUPPORT. While some of the weapons resemble their real-life counter parts, the weapon stats are just goddamned confusing. For instance, despite the fact that TAR-21 and M4A1, FAMAS, L86, and MG4, M16, ACR, and F2000 all fire the same 5.56x45mm NATO cartridge, their damage is completely inconsistent. The TAR-21, FAmAS, M16, and L86(40) all deal more damage (40-30) than the M4A1, MG4(30), ACR, and F2000 (30-20). The first set also deal more damage than the M240B (30), which fires the much more badass 7.62x51mm NATO. The SCAR-H fires this and does 40-30, and the FAL fires it and does 55-35. I won't go into detail, but also consider the UMP-45 and the Vector. Both fire .45 ACP, yet the UMP does 40-35, and the Vector does 25-20. Where's the sense and realism in that?
(By the way, the guy with one arm is dead since COD4.
Anyway, the more important factor, which, this article more or less addresses, is that they are two completely styles of FPS. Comparing MW2 and BC2 is like comparing apples and carrots. It's just goddamned illogical and stupid.
(By the way, the guy with one arm is dead since COD4.
Anyway, the more important factor, which, this article more or less addresses, is that they are two completely styles of FPS. Comparing MW2 and BC2 is like comparing apples and carrots. It's just goddamned illogical and stupid.
I mean this in the highest possible respect, because I do see and appreciate an honest analysis like this, but, theoretically, MW2 is far more like pop ? or if you don't like the sense of pejorative that's endemic to the word, it's specifically like Wagnerian Program music. It's highly focused and "melodic". It follows a line and affects the audiences through extreme emotional peaks and variances.
Yeah, that's super pedantic, but when you just say "classical" that's not what comes to peoples minds.
Edit:
Oh yes, that was a fantastic article. I was honestly expecting some bias but it was very analytical and straightforward.
Really good read. I still need to play through more of BF:BC2 before I can truly which one I like more out of the two myself. I was already hesitant to get it in the first place because I already have MW2 and Halo 3 that take up most of my multiplayer time and wasn't sure if I would get a lot out of another shooter.
I love the destructo-environments and being given lots of options to engage an enemy but the scripted scenes from CoD were pretty awesome to watch. When it comes to the multiplayer they are definetly complete opposites. BC2 has a big battle-wide scale with vehicular warfare and MW2 has a much smaller person-person sized scale. As a result MW2 puts a lot more detail into that part of it's multiplayer so while there will be no tanks to drive or helicopters to drop in buddies at an objective. So for me fighting online, infantryman to infantryman, is more enjoyable for me in MW2. BC2 makes up for that though with all the vehicles and larger scale.
I can't decide yet which one I like better but I've always loved Halo more out of any other shooter. Halo takes realism and uses it as a coaster for its lazer/plasma/jetpack coffee mugs.
I love the destructo-environments and being given lots of options to engage an enemy but the scripted scenes from CoD were pretty awesome to watch. When it comes to the multiplayer they are definetly complete opposites. BC2 has a big battle-wide scale with vehicular warfare and MW2 has a much smaller person-person sized scale. As a result MW2 puts a lot more detail into that part of it's multiplayer so while there will be no tanks to drive or helicopters to drop in buddies at an objective. So for me fighting online, infantryman to infantryman, is more enjoyable for me in MW2. BC2 makes up for that though with all the vehicles and larger scale.
I can't decide yet which one I like better but I've always loved Halo more out of any other shooter. Halo takes realism and uses it as a coaster for its lazer/plasma/jetpack coffee mugs.
I would also - if the server browser worked - or at least displayed pings, if I could get into a game in under 10 mins, if I could get into a server with less than 300 ping, or if the 'play now' function would pick a) a populated server and/or b) a sever with playable ping.HT_Black said:
Until it can offer me ANY of those things, I can't endorse BC2 :'(
It is like a battle of the titans. Both in same genre, both with huge budgets and a successful history...its a case of really who has more fans than anything else.
For me, its just a case of, I enjoy both games, and I think they both do very good jobs in there own rights in the genre they are set in
For me, its just a case of, I enjoy both games, and I think they both do very good jobs in there own rights in the genre they are set in
The trouble with such a tightly scripted sequence of events is that it delivers that tension and pacing extremely well, once. After that you know what happens next.
I'll gladly lose the set pieces if it means I can play games with an air of unpredictability to them, it's much more satisfying to react to and overcome the things you didn't see coming.
I'll gladly lose the set pieces if it means I can play games with an air of unpredictability to them, it's much more satisfying to react to and overcome the things you didn't see coming.
I didn't really enjoy the first Modern Warfare much. The second was even worse. Though in all fairness I borrowed the first for a few weeks and only played the second when I stayed at a friends house for a bit the multiplayer was little more than "Run. Stop. Shoot/Get shot." And I suck at the games.
Granted I bought both. I like the tactical game play, the environments are bigger and just more. The guns feel better (in 2) and basically I just like it more. Oh, and fewer douche bags play it.
Granted I bought both. I like the tactical game play, the environments are bigger and just more. The guns feel better (in 2) and basically I just like it more. Oh, and fewer douche bags play it.
Huh, I wouldn't say that they are "two completely styles of FPS", if by that you mean completely different styles. Sure the shooting mechanics in COD are simpler and, like jordan said, the level progression is far more structured and linear. But that doesn't make them inherit "completely different styles", nor does it make comparing them illogical or stupid. Certainly campaign wise they are pretty similar, at least outwardly.DirkGently said:
I mean, they're both FPSs. They are almost identical in A LOT of aspects. And its not like we're talking about STALKER or Bioshock here (which arguably have some pretty significant differences in the structure of their campaigns). They're linear level based shooters based in "modern" times, with plenty of so-called "cinematic" sections, on rails vehicle missions to break up the regular shooting, etc. They aren't that different dude... More like a lime to a grapfruit. You definitely won't mistake them (unlike the tangerine-clementine-oranges if the doom clones), but they PRETTY DARN SIMILAR.
I don't think activision can really loose this fight.
Even if noone purchased MW2 from this moment on, it's still the best selling game ever.
It has made shitloads of money beyond belief, and will still have been a huge succes even if people stopplaying it and starts playing BF:BC2.
People bitched about lack of dedicated even servers before it came out, but the game still sold more than anything before it.
So even if people move to BCBF2 for now, MW2 has made it's money already, and for the reason of the paragraph above, they're prolly still gonan get MW3 when it comes out.
The only possible way someone could loose here would be EA if people didn't buy BFBC2, cause they just as well might stick with MW2, which i doubt will happen, cause even though MW2's only 4 months old, it has still lost it's novelty, and lots and lots of peopel will get BFBC2, and it will be a success.
Ofc this could be trouble for either company, if they release their next games sequels (MW3 and BFBC3) more closely when they come around some day.
But i doubt they'll be doing this, cause it would be a bad move for both companies, seeing how they're prolly not gonna be competing over costumers if they just release with something liek 4 months between them like now.
Even if noone purchased MW2 from this moment on, it's still the best selling game ever.
It has made shitloads of money beyond belief, and will still have been a huge succes even if people stopplaying it and starts playing BF:BC2.
People bitched about lack of dedicated even servers before it came out, but the game still sold more than anything before it.
So even if people move to BCBF2 for now, MW2 has made it's money already, and for the reason of the paragraph above, they're prolly still gonan get MW3 when it comes out.
The only possible way someone could loose here would be EA if people didn't buy BFBC2, cause they just as well might stick with MW2, which i doubt will happen, cause even though MW2's only 4 months old, it has still lost it's novelty, and lots and lots of peopel will get BFBC2, and it will be a success.
Ofc this could be trouble for either company, if they release their next games sequels (MW3 and BFBC3) more closely when they come around some day.
But i doubt they'll be doing this, cause it would be a bad move for both companies, seeing how they're prolly not gonna be competing over costumers if they just release with something liek 4 months between them like now.
To me, BC 2 has had a much more enjoyable multiplayer experience. I played more than my far share of MW2 multiplayer, but the level design is so constricting that it takes a lot of the advanced strategies out of it.
Also, with the inclusion of more party-friendly functions in BC2, like being able to spawn with party members and mark enemies, I feel that BC2 is much more fun to play with friends.
Also, with the inclusion of more party-friendly functions in BC2, like being able to spawn with party members and mark enemies, I feel that BC2 is much more fun to play with friends.
The fact that you can even make those comparisons to real-life guns and ammo means that the game is approaching realism. Not perfecting it, but certainly aiming for it. Consider COD vs. Borderlands. Which is more realistic? Which is trying to be more realistic? And for the love of god, please think about my point before you info-dump a bunch of weapon stats for a second time because the raw numbers are completely beside the point.DirkGently said:
Anyway, this article points toward what has always put me off about the CoD series, although I've never personally met anyone who agreed with me on the "rail-shooter" assertion. Reading this article makes me think that I'd enjoy BC2 much more, just for the sake of how open the gameplay appears to be.
Wait a second, you're like Lady Gaga? So, then you're a hermaphrodite? Just saying, that's being like Lady Gaga.Jordan Deam said:
To the topic, I DO think these are competing games and I DO think that BC2 does it's gameplay better than MW2 because it gives the players choice on how to play, even if haphazardly done. See, look at Mass Effect 2, it's got a lot of player choice and for that the players love it. We, the gamers, do not like being directed were to go, who to shoot, how to kill them like some 1960's arcade game shooter; we love the choice because it allows us to enact our personalities within the game.
Oh cool, so it has all of the exact same problems I always had with Battlefield 2? Groovy.Wicky_42 said:
I'll make sure to play it on XBox, sigh.
I believe you meant Modern Company 4. You know, that game where you assault your own company headquarters with a SWAT team.Onyx Oblivion said: