So what exactly made Battlefield Bad Company 2 better over the games that followed since?

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Because people still puts this one game on such a massive pedestal even though one could make criticism of it in this day and age. Like the lack of Jets and the maps feel smaller.

And following games have already implemented its destruction system. I mean BF4 had a whole Skyscraper fall down.

 

[Lufia Erim]

I can't speak for anyone else since i have never interacted with the community. But i played and really liked Bad company 2, the beta for 3, the beta for hardline and battlefield 1. So take my opinion with a two scoops of salt, but the games from Battlefield 3 and on felt closer to Call of duty than i would have liked.

Also i'm not a fan of Aircrafts. Feels cheap.

But again i have no idea what the community consensus is. That just my personal casual ass opinion.

 

[Squilookle]

To this day I think the only possible way BC2 gained that reputation, is by being the first Battlefield to haul in a significant chunk of the COD kids, by boasting essentially COD's small scale all-powerful-infantry combat, but with the novelty of environment destruction and a handful of vehicles here and there. COD kids loved it for pandering so hard towards what they played already, and it fluked Rush mode which pretty much became the new conquest.

As a result, DICE found a huge new demographic it's been pandering to ever since, even though DICE themselves admitted not even knowing why it was a success in the first place.

It is perhaps, the clearest divide between the old and the new Battlefield games. Technically it's really Bad Company 1, but that being console exclusive and most previous Battlefields being PC/Mac exclusive rules it out.

The older games, comprising Battlefield 1942, Battlefield Vietnam, Battlefield 2, and Battlefield 2142, were all large scale combined-arms warfare games where the infantry were at the mercy of the vehicles. Less so in BF2 with it's abundance of guided weaponry and smaller scale combat showing up already, but in general when infantry saw vehicles on route, they knew when to get out of dodge.

With Bad Company, infantry basically became powerful enough to take on anything. Battle size was massively sacrificed for level destructibility. Ships, fighter planes, submarines etc became a thing of the past. Bots vanished forever. Dedicated servers were gone. Perhaps worst of all, the ability to mod the game was killed off forever as well.

The fact that fans of the series from the start who lamented the destruction of all these things that made the series so unique and great to play were drowned out by the new players that just loved BC2's new crumbly little skirmish simulator, leads me to think that BC2 was carried more than not by this influx of new players. COD players. An infantry focused Call of Duty clone with destruction is all they wanted... and from that point onwards it's pretty much all we've ever received.

 

[Here Comes Tomorrow]

Because people still puts this one game on such a massive pedestal even though one could make criticism of it in this day and age. Like the lack of Jets and the maps feel smaller.

It's funny because those are exactly two of the things I disliked about BF3. Jets were useless 95% of the time because people couldn't control them well enough to attack ground targets and huge maps made it feel like the game was 50% battlefield hiking simulator. There was also no prone in BC2 so the CoD kiddies had a harder time camping or sitting at the edge of a map to snipe with 10% accuracy.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Because people still puts this one game on such a massive pedestal even though one could make criticism of it in this day and age. Like the lack of Jets and the maps feel smaller.

It's funny because those are exactly two of the things I disliked about BF3. Jets were useless 95% of the time because people couldn't control them well enough to attack ground targets and huge maps made it feel like the game was 50% battlefield hiking simulator. There was also no prone in BC2 so the CoD kiddies had a harder time camping or sitting at the edge of a map to snipe with 10% accuracy.

In my experience of COD, there is no Camping and Sniping. Its all assaulting and charging.

 

[I can't enter my old name]

It was a game where you could blow up almost every building. It had deformable terrain. It had bullet drop. It was ahead of its time in visuals and sounds. It was the Crysis of multiplayer games (ignoring the fact that Crysis had multiplayer).

Bad Company 2 played very different from a Battlefield game, but it was a preview on what the future of BF games and AAA fps shooters would look like. Everyone wanted that tech in a proper Battlefield game, and we never got it. At this point, I don't even think DICE can make a proper Battlefield game anymore in this day and age.

Today you can tell the audience wants to play Rush instead of Conquest when they keep playing Metro and Locker. The gameplay was built for closer engagements and full auto, and you can blame consoles, because shooting tiny people is impossible on a dual-stick. BC2 did the best job in this kind of gameplay, so that's why people thought it was better.

 

[TheSapphireKnight]

Nothing, it was hot garbage and people have bad taste. It was patient zero for everything wrong with modern BF. They got lucky with the destruction gimmick and managed to snag enough of an audience desperate for something with just a smidge more to offer than CoD. Everything from then on was just a continuing compromise between newer and older BF fans that never fully satisfied either.

Earlier BF games were good because they were built for that PC market and Bad Company 1 was good precisely because it was built for the console market at the time. Now they are stuck with a situation where they have had two distinct fanbases forced to coexist in one series that doesn't really cater to either of them fully. BFV is the first step they've taken in years to really move back to some of its pre-Bad Company roots and predictably the BC fanbase is upset about a lot of the changes and the older fans are still upset about the compromises.

Can't fix bad taste.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

Obviously it's because it included the song Bad Company by Bad Company off the album Bad Company.

None of the later Battlefield games did that.

 

[Worgen]

Well, it had really good game play with a mix of infantry combat and not overpowered vehicles combined with a pretty cool destruction engine that worked well. Not to mention its got pretty much the only good single player campaign that Dice has ever done. Some people ***** about it not being serious enough but thats stupid.

 

[Squilookle]

its got pretty much the only good single player campaign that Dice has ever done. Some people ***** about it not being serious enough but thats stupid.

That's Bad Company 1 you're thinking of. BC2's was fucking awful.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

I had a love/hate relationship with BC2. To me that was because down-scaling meant good individual play could heavily influence match outcomes, but squad and objective play were still king. For better or worse, shit players were bigger liabilities than ever, but good players could carry harder than ever.

 

[Worgen]

its got pretty much the only good single player campaign that Dice has ever done. Some people ***** about it not being serious enough but thats stupid.

That's Bad Company 1 you're thinking of. BC2's was fucking awful.

No, BC1 was crap and only launched on console, BC2 was superior since it launched on pc and was pretty awesome.

 

[laggyteabag]

Im really surprised over the amount of Bad Company 2 hate above - I thought the game was a masterpiece.

I think what made Bad Company 2 special over the games since, was just how streamlined and laser focused the game was.

Bad Company 2's main game mode was Rush, instead of Conquest. This was a more linear mode, and all of the maps were made specifically for it. Each checkpoint being a well-crafted arena, full of (consistent) destruction, and intimate battles. The scale of something like Conquest is fine, but I always found modes like Rush to be more active and engaging, as opposed to something that is larger, but ironically, emptier.

Jets were removed because they were pointless. Classes had a clear identity - ie, a medic ALWAYS had a med kit and a defibrillator. Customisation was limited, but more meaningful - want a red dot sight? Well you will have to give up the ability to heal faster or have 2x ammo reserves; You can't just slap a sight, grip and attachment on every weapon like in BF4 with no consequences. Maps were specifically designed for one mode, instead of trying to cram in every possibility. There was no feature bloat - no pointless modes that split the playerbase, no pointless gadgets or weapons, everything had a purpose.

Not to mention that the game was stunning for 2010.

Sure, the campaign wasn't much to write home about, but at least it had character - which instantly makes it leaps and bounds better than anything DICE has done since. Honestly, im not even sure why DICE keep on going with campaigns in Battlefield games. Their production values are great, but my god, they are dull. A tacked on campaign is just as harmful as a tacked on multiplayer mode, and they should just ditch it in favour of more multiplayer content IMO - ramble over.

Even the DLC was good - it was free for the most part, and when they did eventually charge for maps, it was a whole other Vietnam-themed mode. It was great.

I dunno, I just loved this game. I have so many fond memories of it, and I just don't think that they have come close to topping it since.

 

[Squilookle]

its got pretty much the only good single player campaign that Dice has ever done. Some people ***** about it not being serious enough but thats stupid.

That's Bad Company 1 you're thinking of. BC2's was fucking awful.

No, BC1 was crap and only launched on console, BC2 was superior since it launched on pc and was pretty awesome.

You didn't even play it, did you.

 

[Worgen]

its got pretty much the only good single player campaign that Dice has ever done. Some people ***** about it not being serious enough but thats stupid.

That's Bad Company 1 you're thinking of. BC2's was fucking awful.

No, BC1 was crap and only launched on console, BC2 was superior since it launched on pc and was pretty awesome.

You didn't even play it, did you.

I played the demo.

 

[Squilookle]

its got pretty much the only good single player campaign that Dice has ever done. Some people ***** about it not being serious enough but thats stupid.

That's Bad Company 1 you're thinking of. BC2's was fucking awful.

No, BC1 was crap and only launched on console, BC2 was superior since it launched on pc and was pretty awesome.

You didn't even play it, did you.

I played the demo.

OK cool- you didn't play it.

 

[Worgen]

its got pretty much the only good single player campaign that Dice has ever done. Some people ***** about it not being serious enough but thats stupid.

That's Bad Company 1 you're thinking of. BC2's was fucking awful.

No, BC1 was crap and only launched on console, BC2 was superior since it launched on pc and was pretty awesome.

You didn't even play it, did you.

I played the demo.

OK cool- you didn't play it.

Didn't need to play more than that since it was stuck with meh controller controls.

 

[Mcgeezaks]

its got pretty much the only good single player campaign that Dice has ever done. Some people ***** about it not being serious enough but thats stupid.

That's Bad Company 1 you're thinking of. BC2's was fucking awful.

No, BC1 was crap and only launched on console, BC2 was superior since it launched on pc and was pretty awesome.

You didn't even play it, did you.

I played it and BC2 was easily superior in every way. BC1 wasn't crap tho.

 

[Squilookle]

its got pretty much the only good single player campaign that Dice has ever done. Some people ***** about it not being serious enough but thats stupid.

That's Bad Company 1 you're thinking of. BC2's was fucking awful.

No, BC1 was crap and only launched on console, BC2 was superior since it launched on pc and was pretty awesome.

You didn't even play it, did you.

I played the demo.

OK cool- you didn't play it.

Didn't need to play more than that since it was stuck with meh controller controls.

Ah so not only did you not play the game, you were somehow surprised that a controller felt like a controller. Solid critiquing right there, good job.

 

[Worgen]

its got pretty much the only good single player campaign that Dice has ever done. Some people ***** about it not being serious enough but thats stupid.

That's Bad Company 1 you're thinking of. BC2's was fucking awful.

No, BC1 was crap and only launched on console, BC2 was superior since it launched on pc and was pretty awesome.

You didn't even play it, did you.

I played the demo.

OK cool- you didn't play it.

Didn't need to play more than that since it was stuck with meh controller controls.

Ah so not only did you not play the game, you were somehow surprised that a controller felt like a controller. Solid critiquing right there, good job.

Considering how much you'er bitching about BC2 being the worst thing ever, forgive me if I don't exactly trust your opinion.