Battlefield PSA Mocks Modern Warfare 2 "F.A.G.S." Gaffe

[The_Emperor]

I personally dont think battlefield was copying mw2. i mean battlefield MODERN COMBAT came out a pretty long time ago.

to be honest i think both games feed from each other taking each others finer points while leaving the ones they disagree with or that become redundant. part of the coders cree is not to reinvent the wheel. i mean blatant copying is pretty lame but inspiration from other peoples ideas is normal. next mw may have vehicles and bigger maps AND I WOULDNT BLAME THEM OF FLAME THEM FOR COPYING.

funnily enough this is called science and its what gamee devs do

you could argue that mw took all its inspiration from medal of honour, even got the same 3 barrel name, then went modern style because ww2 was overdone.

dice did them all waaaay before iw was even a company. still doesnt make them any better, iw made a waaay more involving story and game with mw and revolutionised fps mp with rpg style progression though the mw2 version of perks etc is a bit overdone and unbalanced.

ot: vid was pretty funny, better than mw2 one but that was also funny.

so erm about the nerdrage. bfbc2 has better mp, sp is about the same. mw2 has awesome coop shame they didnt really update the engine etc enough, felt old to play if you know what i mean. the physics on bfbc2 seem more solid. so yeah both games had their ups and downs. i loved spec ops to pieces, would of got mw2 just for that.


BREAKING NEWS
BOTH GAMES HAVE GOOD POINTS AND BAD POINTS OMG THEY R CALLED OPINIONZ GUIZ!!1

tho bfbc2 is totally better overall hehe.

IRONIC LULZ
while becoming disparaged and the innane redundant points being made by each side im a fanboy at heart. we all are.

 

[breadlord]

I thought they were working together, to think for themselves, as not randomly throwing grenades, hoping to get a kill.

Much more or less a tactic to say that Dice and IW mean it. Stop being grenade spammers.

 

[Turtleboy1017]

Another reason I don't like DICE their games aren't that good and they take cheap shots, but what can you except when they are going up against MW2, doomed to fail, miserablily.

Except that MW2 does have servers, 'listen' ones. The point is BFBC2 is a major competitor for MW2, everyone knows this, but BFBC2 just ripped everything from MW2 and made it look like it was theirs all along. The 'noob tubes' weren't compulsory at all, DICE obviously felt they had to appeal to people who liked them in MW2.

I honestly can't tell if your what I would classify on the internet as fanboy stupid, or biased but reasonable.

I mean seriously? How did Bad Company 2 rip off MW2 any more then any other one of the trillions of FPS's of this kind out there? The "Noob tubes" have always been a staple of the Bad Company series... Much better made then those crappy things in CoD, and they have ALWAYS existed. It's not something they just threw in because Modern Warfare did it.

Also, a "listen" server is crap for anything more then 6 v 6 generally, unless the host has T1 connection or something.

Your arguments are just misinformed. FYI, Bad Company 2's weapon selections are VERY different from CoD. Off the top of my head the only guns I can easily say are in both of the games is the M16A2, and the M9 pistol. THAT'S IT. If I'm missing any, please point it out but I doubt that its anything too noticeable.

 

[HappyDD]

It's funny cause it's awesome! "Stay safe, the C.C. way"? That's funny on its own, without the FRAGS acronym.

 

[Usurpurus]

Another reason I don't like DICE their games aren't that good and they take cheap shots, but what can you except when they are going up against MW2, doomed to fail, miserablily.

Except that MW2 does have servers, 'listen' ones. The point is BFBC2 is a major competitor for MW2, everyone knows this, but BFBC2 just ripped everything from MW2 and made it look like it was theirs all along. The 'noob tubes' weren't compulsory at all, DICE obviously felt they had to appeal to people who liked them in MW2.

I honestly can't tell if your what I would classify on the internet as fanboy stupid, or biased but reasonable.

I mean seriously? How did Bad Company 2 rip off MW2 any more then any other one of the trillions of FPS's of this kind out there? The "Noob tubes" have always been a staple of the Bad Company series... Much better made then those crappy things in CoD, and they have ALWAYS existed. It's not something they just threw in because Modern Warfare did it.

Also, a "listen" server is crap for anything more then 6 v 6 generally, unless the host has T1 connection or something.

Your arguments are just misinformed. FYI, Bad Company 2's weapon selections are VERY different from CoD. Off the top of my head the only guns I can easily say are in both of the games is the M16A2, and the M9 pistol. THAT'S IT. If I'm missing any, please point it out but I doubt that its anything too noticeable.

I'm sorry to everyone who says I haven't played the first BFBC..because I haven't due to the fact it wasn't on PC. BUT, copied weapons include; F2000, AUG, PP2000, Uzi (it's in every fps practically), Scar (L is almost the same as H), M24 is almost the same as the Intervention (both bolt action and both are starter snipers), SPAS (yes, another common shotgun). And those are the ones which have similar/same names, not amind looking the same but having a different name.

 

[soren7550]

Haha, this, along with Sweetwater's "Fuck those special ops douchebags, they'll just come in here with their pussy heartbeat scanners" is sending every Modern Warfare 2 fanboy I know into a rage.

When does he say that? (love this one by the way.)

 

[ahiddenfigure]

I'm sorry to everyone who says I haven't played the first BFBC..because I haven't due to the fact it wasn't on PC. BUT, copied weapons include; F2000, AUG, PP2000, Uzi (it's in every fps practically), Scar (L is almost the same as H), M24 is almost the same as the Intervention (both bolt action and both are starter snipers), SPAS (yes, another common shotgun). And those are the ones which have similar/same names, not amind looking the same but having a different name.

Look at the fanboy desperately try to defend his shallow, groundless argument. You've voided your own points with your bracketed statements. Both franchises from as far back as CoD4:MW (skipping W@W) and BF2 have the same premise: modern warfare. They'll inherently have an overlapping weapon set because to fulfil the premise they need to use weapons used today by real-life armed forces. But to say one is a copy of the other just because it was released later is pure ignorance. You yourself claimed that the IMI Uzi is "in every fps practically", I can tell you that Battlefield 2 (which pre-dates CoD4 by over 2 years) featured both FN-SCAR variants, and that the M24 Sniper rifle has been the US military standard rifle since 1988. Therefore to claim a "copy" and imply that it was "MW2's first" is null and void.

On the main thread topic though, +1 to DICE. I love companies that have a tongue-in-cheek approach to marketing.

 

[Bat Vader]

When Bad Company 2 came out, I was thinking "Man, where are the funny promo-videos the first Bad Company had?"

Well, my question has been answered. Laughed pretty good at that one.

Yeah, Bad Company doesn't need some Scottish guy named Soap and some British guy named Price.

Keith David would have been an awesome addition to Bad Company's voice actor list though.

Spoiler

It does seem like Bad Company does need another un-realistic Russia invades America plot. I hate those.

Also, I am not a fanboy to either series.

 

[legion431]

I have both of these games and have played them both extensively.
I think BBC2 is better, both single player and multiplayer.
And BBC2 is the first in the Battlefield series that I've actually played.

 

[Agent_PoRK]

why the fuck did the stupid fuckign Indians trade cc, so fucking stupid fuckin hate em.

 

[AvsJoe]

This is the first I've seen of both videos and I gotta say they're both great! The BBC2 was better but I laughed at both.

 

[Usurpurus]

I'm sorry to everyone who says I haven't played the first BFBC..because I haven't due to the fact it wasn't on PC. BUT, copied weapons include; F2000, AUG, PP2000, Uzi (it's in every fps practically), Scar (L is almost the same as H), M24 is almost the same as the Intervention (both bolt action and both are starter snipers), SPAS (yes, another common shotgun). And those are the ones which have similar/same names, not amind looking the same but having a different name.

Look at the fanboy desperately try to defend his shallow, groundless argument. You've voided your own points with your bracketed statements. Both franchises from as far back as CoD4:MW (skipping W@W) and BF2 have the same premise: modern warfare. They'll inherently have an overlapping weapon set because to fulfil the premise they need to use weapons used today by real-life armed forces. But to say one is a copy of the other just because it was released later is pure ignorance. You yourself claimed that the IMI Uzi is "in every fps practically", I can tell you that Battlefield 2 (which pre-dates CoD4 by over 2 years) featured both FN-SCAR variants, and that the M24 Sniper rifle has been the US military standard rifle since 1988. Therefore to claim a "copy" and imply that it was "MW2's first" is null and void.

On the main thread topic though, +1 to DICE. I love companies that have a tongue-in-cheek approach to marketing.

I know my arguements are really weak, I'm not actually sure why I stated them but the thing is I paid £35 for BFBC2 on pc and it barely worked on release. I'm not a die hard CoD fan but I really enjoyed MW2 and I'm slightly irritated by these cheap shots at IW.

 

[theultimateend]

I feel like such a wanker. I read the news post and all I could think was "For christ sake stop calling it Mewtwo."

 

[Brockyman]

The only reason there was even a controversy about the IW PSA was b/c of people not having a back bone or sense of humor.

Also, if you were one of those people offended by F.A.G.S, yet have EVER said a word against Michael Addkinson or any other "violent game hater", then your a major hypocrite.

They are offended by violence and thinks it's bad for anyone (especially children) to see such content and want to ban/censor it of the good of millions (A POINT I DISAGREE WITH PERSONALLY, BUT JUST MAKING THEIR CASE)

However,you people that are upset about a one word that means "cigarette" or bundle of wood" in some cultures, and has been identified more with "idiot" or "asshole" then "homosexual" in the last decade (see South Park), then you need some serious help..

EDIT: THE B:BC PSA was quite funny though....

 

[ShinningDesertEagle]

Personally, I really do not get why people are offended by the word "fag" (and in case there is a forum rule against using this word; keep in mind I am using it out of context in a discussion about the word itself). Yes it is often used as a slur against homosexuals but more generally it is a three-letter insult calling someone weak. And for those who disagree in order to be consistent about this the word "pussy" has to go as well since it is used in the same way and can sometimes be used as a slur against women. Just saying.

 

[Autofaux]

Personally, I really do not get why people are offended by the word "fag" (and in case there is a forum rule against using this word; keep in mind I am using it out of context in a discussion about the word itself). Yes it is often used as a slur against homosexuals but more generally it is a three-letter insult calling someone weak. And for those who disagree in order to be consistent about this the word "pussy" has to go as well since it is used in the same way and can sometimes be used as a slur against women. Just saying.

By tolerating its use, no matter how slight, you make it acceptable. ****** and all of its variants are slurs against homosexuals. Pussy isn't nearly as vilified but it's still a baseless insult. Doesn't matter how generally accepted you claim they are, they are still offensive and degrading terms.